freedom

In response to:Dignity of labour - an American virtue ?

Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:14:13 +0100

You're half right.

There are people in the U.S. who believe in the dignity of labor regardless of its pay but that view is somewhat old-fashioned. People who subscribe to that point of view tend to be older or of lower socioeconomic status.

The example of the cab driver misrepresents, I think, the values in the U.S. I'm not sure the cab driver would be more respected than the professor if he made more money (I'm not even sure you can quantify such things). I do know that the cab driver would earn respect for having earned so much money. This isn't because Americans rank everyone in worth according to their income. It's because it's not easy for a cab driver to earn more than a professor. In order for him to have accomplished that, then he must have been doing something right.

Americans do value money to a great extent. We reward the winners of capitalism and punish our losers severely. What the country hasn't come to terms with yet is that money isn't always the best indicator of value to society. If the cab driver earns more than the professor, is there a problem with the market? Should the incentives be designed so that one can ear a better living driving a cab than teaching college students?

Anyway, just to be clear, we do not respect anyone who has money simply because they have it (anyone heard of Bernie Madoff?) and a person doesn't suddenly attain a higher social status simply because they have the money. Although, with respect to that last thought, what would be so bad if someone did attain a higher status simply because they had honestly earned a lot of money? Wouldn't that, in some way, be fairer than doling out social status according to intelligence? Not everyone can be a genius college professor. Not everyone was born with the right stuff. Why should people get respect and admiration simply for being born smart? Just a thought.

In response to:On Boredom.

Wed, 07 May 2008 20:34:59 +0200

Very true. I love that quote!

In response to:Blackmail is Scotch ?

Wed, 07 May 2008 04:24:53 +0200

Most trusted online uk casino presenting selected uk free online casino gambling games. Play trusted casinos gambling games from leading online casinos z8o4t4mo

In response to:On Boredom.

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:17:04 +0200

You're right, the mind may be very fertile...
I am not special and everyone can realize it if one really wants to come back to his true nature that has ever be and will be... and no need to meditate during 20 years ! but the "straight way"...
Living here and now, yes... but there's a big misunderstanding about "here" as instead of watching "here", we generally watch "there" : what is around us... but here is, when we point our index at our face (this is an interesting true experience to do, and do again and again) and keep in attentiveness, what is ? who is truly making this experience ? is there truly someone here ? or is there Nothing here but a space, a clear space without any boundaries ?
Nothing to do with the mind but realizing during a few minutes, regularly, this space, this Emptyness that is who we truly are is the beginning of the space between the wagons... and just "watch" a thought when it comes and let it go quietly and vanish... no struggle...
Then, we can also watch there, keeping "here"...

In response to:On Boredom.

Sun, 20 Apr 2008 18:14:27 +0200

Trains here also go "tchoutchouuu' (lol). You have said something really profound. What I said was that if the mind is fertile, then there is no scope for boredom to creep in even when one does not seem to be doing anything in particular.But you have gone several steps ahead when you say that one not only does not get bored but can be very happy if the mind is devoid of all thoughts.Such a state is most desirable and you are very special if you ever could experience it.

In response to:On Boredom.

Fri, 18 Apr 2008 22:43:21 +0200

Today I got an email with "tchoutchouuu" (noise of old trains in french lol) so I can compare tonight the mind with a train lol an endless train... our thoughts are the wagons... and we have been "trained" to have this train into our head all day long !... sometimes very noisy, sometimes a bit less, but always running fast... but we like it, and even are afraid to lose it and feel so empty... We never take the time to realize that there's a space, a transparent space between the wagons, and when we start to realize it, the space between them is getting wider and wider... then the train starts to slow down and the wagons go on getting more spaced away... And... one day what a peace, what a joy when we discover that the unstoppable train has completely vanished and the mind is silent, quiet...and we can see, perceive the whole landscape, the whole space around... and never get bored !... and of course, useful trains can still be created and run when we need or wish, from this space, we are then the free driver ... :)

In response to:Vegans Can Save The Planet.

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 08:16:35 +0200

It will make the world monochrome. Very drab for my taste.

It will make the world monochrome. Very drab for my taste.

In response to:Vegans Can Save The Planet.

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:22:46 +0200

You can draw a picture only if there is a wall. Independence of energy or anything for that matter will mean little to a world bereft of everything that makes it worth living in.As for wars , they will always be there as long as humans are covetous of others'weealth.If it is not fossil fuel,it will be something else - quite probably water -in the not so distant future.

In response to:Vegans Can Save The Planet.

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:08:25 +0200

A nice juicy steak ,yes. Its the same way a polar bear feels when it sees a walrus. Have you seen a Komodor Dragon salivating when it comes across a dying/injured deer? Your description of your culinary tastes conjures up such visions!

In response to:Vegans Can Save The Planet.

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:01:30 +0200

Be a carnivore by all means if its a matter of life and death. i am a semi carnivore myself !

In response to:Vegans Can Save The Planet.

Sun, 06 Apr 2008 20:00:49 +0200

energy independence is much more important than global warming. when the US is energy independent there will be no more oil wars and the terrorists will all be too to reach us. This will save lives AND energy. The global warming crowd can't claim this. They can claim that they will damage and perhaps destroy capitalism which is their true aim. I for one am not done using capitalism. So I want to keep it. True believers in global warm are free to starve and freeze to death next winter--their choice. Think of all the energy they will save! By the by, don't ever expect a Greenie to sacrifice anything in his own life to "show the green way." Global warming is about controlling you and emptying your wallet. When it becomes about something else one of the first things you will notice is that you will understand nothing that is said about global warming. That is because it will all be said in Mandarin Chinese. Only the Chinese can stop man made climate change. They are going through an industrial revolution that is sure to dwarf our own. Does this mean we should do nothing? Far from it. Let's study what Denmark, France, Brazil, and Australia have done on energy and do likewise. Let's drill wherever we have oil and put a new nuclear power plant in every state. Let's use all our coal and natural gas. We don't need foreign energy. The only people who say we can't get off foreign oil are greedy conservatives who are getting paid every time a new oil war starts.

In response to:Vegans Can Save The Planet.

Sat, 05 Apr 2008 16:45:04 +0200

I like good food. I would die of boredom if I had to eat that stuff all the time. A nice juicy steak is a lovely thing.

There are plenty of more sensible ways to save the world than eating that flatus-creating vegan food.

In response to:Vegans Can Save The Planet.

Sat, 05 Apr 2008 16:36:36 +0200

Of course, many millions of people (including my mother and a close friend) could not survive on a vegan diet due to health problems...I probably couldn't either; and to be honest if I wasn't allowed to eat animal flesh I'd probably have to eat vegans!

In response to:.The Mistakes The Mighty Make .. .. ..

Tue, 11 Mar 2008 12:24:23 +0100

Ah ... GB

In response to:.The Mistakes The Mighty Make .. .. ..

Tue, 11 Mar 2008 12:22:53 +0100

Given the context, I think this is definitely an error. A man, when he breaks law flouts it. but come to think of it some men may flaunt it too ! There are many men who break the law and strut about flaunting this fact at the law abiding world.

In response to:A Relieved Dad

Tue, 11 Mar 2008 12:15:36 +0100

True, these are instances when child really becomes the father of man !

In response to:.The Mistakes The Mighty Make .. .. ..

Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:37:33 +0100

It is an interesting use of vocabulary I must say. I take the context you describe and am inclined to agree with you, yet when you check the definition of the noun, flaunt, in relation to certain types of behaviour, it can be seen that there is a blurring of certain - please note 'certain' - boundaries. The meaning can become indistinct. Or in the word of our esteemed Anglican leader, there is a certain 'unclarity'. That suggests therefore, a possible use of 'divine' editing.
;)

In response to:A Relieved Dad

Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:28:34 +0100

Ah, many lessons to learn there. Out of the mouths of babes... :)

In response to:.The Mistakes The Mighty Make .. .. ..

Thu, 28 Feb 2008 18:10:50 +0100

Tsk tsk.......

GB

In response to:Is Honesty the best or is it the easiest policy?

Thu, 24 Jan 2008 23:03:56 +0100

When we want to tell the truth to someone, I wonder whether it's really the contents that may be unpalatable, or the way we tell it actually...

In response to:Is Honesty the best or is it the easiest policy?

Sun, 20 Jan 2008 17:45:58 +0100

I fully agree with you.

In response to:Is Honesty the best or is it the easiest policy?

Sun, 20 Jan 2008 16:00:20 +0100

WE can be true with ourselves but being so with ourselves and with the world at the same time is not so simple. If that is possible , then that person is nearer to Truth than he thinks he is .

In response to:Is Honesty the best or is it the easiest policy?

Sun, 20 Jan 2008 15:53:45 +0100

You are absolutely right !

In short ,it is best to say the truth ; say the palatable; but never ever say the truth that is unpalatable or unkind .If telling the truth causes incalculable harm as it sometimes does, then that is when silence becomes truly golden !

In response to:Is Honesty the best or is it the easiest policy?

Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:20:30 +0100

You describe an interesting scenario for being true to oneself and therefore to others. From my own experiences, I think that unreserved truthfulness cannot be given to everyone. Many people cannot handle it, some people will mis-use it.

It is a wise and clever person who knows his audience and just how far he can go with truthfulness. I believe it is a characteristic that, for safety's sake, has to be used diplomatically and appropriately.

I don't advocate lying, I do advocate assessing one's position, and responding accordingly. That is a skill many people never learn to theirs and others detriment.

In response to:Is Honesty the best or is it the easiest policy?

Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:31:04 +0100

I don't make a great difference between being honest and being true... isn't the true honesty being true ?
but I think that everything starts inside, we are the mirror of what is... so maybe if it is more difficult for us to be true with others means that we think we are true with ourselves, but probably we aren't... we are unaware of our subtle conditionings (education, society, fears, desires etc etc) that make us react on a particular way instead of being true and simple as you said...

In response to:Is Honesty the best or is it the easiest policy?

Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:23:44 +0100

hey , com to think of it you are right , man ! Wlking the straight is not always narrow. Most of the time it is broad . We dotb see it that way , thats what is wrong.

In response to:Dignity of labour - an American virtue ?

Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:22:10 +0200

I believe I understood your point. The trouble is, the same values are being disseminated elsewhere. Yet the Americans also create a value in 'cutbacks' amonst the few people whose skills and abilities have been valued. The people who are able to operate with zeal, the management of those contracting environments are the new valued people. They are busy creating an additonal financial underclass through the measures they live by.

It is sad that change has to incorporate devaluation of people and their abilities. It leaves just one thing, the very point you perceptively make, only money -lots of it - counts.

In response to:Dignity of labour - an American virtue ?

Tue, 03 Jul 2007 09:18:50 +0200

The point I was trying to make was that the American 'virtue' of recognising dignity of labor is so often confused with their undue reverence for money. That is, in the US scheme of things, the lure of lucre takes precedence over everything else than elsewhere in the world and this is sadly construed as the great American virtue of respecting a person no matter what he does. But the relevance is not in what he does but how much he earns. That it is not a great virtue by any standards. The litmus test is whether a person will be regarded with the same esteem as another if his income is also less. If that is true , then my salutations to the American virtue. Thanks for your weighed assessment.

In response to:Dignity of labour - an American virtue ?

Sat, 23 Jun 2007 20:46:00 +0200

Hello,

You make some profound and just points. There is a confusion between values of different types of work and earnings. I tend to believe the confusion is purposely generated to cloak the veneration of greed into something society would find easier to appease consciences. Thinking people like you will see through such deceits.

There is currently a school in Prague, run by an ex-British taxi driver who is training East Europeans to be taxi drivers in the U.K. He will not train existing taxi drivers for this work as he does not value their risky driving behaviours. This man selects educated people, they have degrees, some are vets, economists, teachers, entrepreneurs who cannot make a decent living wage or pay for medical treatment for their sick children.

Those who succeed this tough course, obtain jobs working long hours to earn levels of cash they could not dream of earning at home. Even allowing for the difference in the cost of living, and after all general expenses are disbursed, they could still be quite well off. These taxi drivers value themselves in terms of money and level of service given, as do their employers and from what I heard, the public who use the taxi firms who hire these drivers. Their academic and skills worth in other areas of training was not sufficiently rewarded because of their countries' economic circumstances. You wonder though, if those skills would be given the value if their countries could afford to give it or would we be looking at another American style dream?

Fascinating blog entry.

In response to:Dignity of labour - an American virtue ?

Thu, 14 Jun 2007 06:46:59 +0200

In the US , Mammon is God.