Posted by Dan L. on March 5, 2010, 4:28 pm
> Dan L. wrote:
> >
> >> balvenieman@invalid.net wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I would never do something like that. It would lead to being
> >>>> personally marked as "always" having a surplus, which I would
> >>>> "owe" to people, with zero understanding that I had worked for
> >>>> the extra food. Many people blow things out of proportion, and
> >>>> have an amazing sense of entitlement.
> >>>>
> >>>> If I wanted to donate food, I would do so via a food bank, soup
> >>>> kitchen, shelter, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> This isn't about being "selfish." It's about having healthy
> >>>> boundaries. I have learned to sort of depersonalise any
> >>>> generosity, because so many prospective recipients just have no
> >>>> limits to what they expect, demand, and feel entitled to from me.
> >>> LOL! As has been stated: "Deja vu, all over again". No more in-kind
> >>> donations for me. Frankly, I discovered years ago that "help your
> >>> neighbor out a little if you can" bizness requires closer
> >>> acquaintace with neighbors than I want!
> >>
> >> I understand what you and CFC are saying but I have another
> >> situation. I get on well with all my neighbours and we are as close
> >> as we want to be, which varies but doesn't involve spending days at
> >> each other's house but does include actually talking and interacting
> >> beyond superficial politeness. We all help each other and give each
> >> other things. If somebody needs a lift to town or to be towed out
> >> of a bog it is done, if somebody has excess veges they give them
> >> away, if somebody has to do something and needs a child minder such
> >> will be found.
> >>
> >> There is no sense of entitlement nor of keeping score, nothing is
> >> given grudgingly nor does anybody ask for too much. It's kind of
> >> nice.
> >>
> >> David
> >
> > Same as in my neighborhood which is in the country. I used to live in
> > the city, life is different in the city. In the country most of my
> > neighbors are close as one can get to self sufficiency. If something
> > fails in the country, the community will come and help. Most people in
> > the country are "jack of all trades". Sort of like the Amish
> > communities. In the country "Good deeds are rewarded".
> >
> > The cities are like complex machines and much more efficient than in
> > those living in the country. One cog fails and the system grinds to a
> > halt, resulting in chaos. The cities require specialized trades to
> > keep the system going. When the chaos heats up it will be neighbor
> > against neighbor. If you give to your neighbor in the city, that
> > specialized neighbor will be dependent on you. In the city "No good
> > deed goes unpunished".
> >
> > My worldly views... Dan
>
> I should have said explicitly that I am in a rural situation, these
> neighbours are 400m or more apart in the main. Aside from the lack of
> specialisation there is the time factor. You have time to talk. In the
> city social interaction must be abbreviated because the pace is faster and
> there are so many meetings in a day that you cannot afford more than a few
> seconds on each one. Both contribute to failure to develop real communities
> and to personal isolation. Humans like rats are not at their best in a rat
> race. I think the contrast in views about charitable acts can be largely
> traced to such differences in community structure.
>
> David
Wow! I have alway compared the human race to rats also.
I have always used the phrase "Humans breed like rats".
The future communications of the human race may be like in Isaac
Azimov's empire novels. The future may not have personal relationships
at all. Everyone will communicate with computers while the population
shrinks to zero. For those that communicate by computers may help in
population reduction. After all I am single, never married and no kids.
No rat breeding for us that communicate by computer! Now where did my
robot go.
Enjoy Life... Dan
--
Garden in Zone 5 South East Michigan.
Posted by Bill who putters on March 5, 2010, 4:59 pm
In article
> The future communications of the human race may be like in Isaac
> Azimov's empire novels. The future may not have personal relationships
> at all. Everyone will communicate with computers while the population
> shrinks to zero. For those that communicate by computers may help in
> population reduction. After all I am single, never married and no kids.
> No rat breeding for us that communicate by computer! Now where did my
> robot go.
>
> Enjoy Life... Dan
You surly do not speak for me.
Sort of reminds me of Italian nobility circa 1500. They thought the
world was going south and decided not to breed. Now extinct.
I on the other hand have five kids. Age 25 to 35 but no grand kids yet
just two by marriage. If you look at my family 2 boys 1 girl we have 8
off spring. Wife side has 2 males and one female with 3 offspring.
One of the 8 passed early so we have 7 + 3 = 10 kids. This for 12
adults.
Our diminishment = 17%
So far 3 with 1 due grand kids.
Look at this movie sometime a comedy with a tidbit of truth.
<
(Amazon.com product link shortened)
UTF8&s=dvd&qid67825859&sr=1-1>
I sort of favor contrarian philosophies as the main stream seems
shallow and tied to the factory no beauty.
--
Billl Garden in shade zone 5 S Jersey USA
Posted by Dan L. on March 5, 2010, 8:47 pm
> In article
>
>
> > The future communications of the human race may be like in Isaac
> > Azimov's empire novels. The future may not have personal relationships
> > at all. Everyone will communicate with computers while the population
> > shrinks to zero. For those that communicate by computers may help in
> > population reduction. After all I am single, never married and no kids.
> > No rat breeding for us that communicate by computer! Now where did my
> > robot go.
> >
> > Enjoy Life... Dan
> You surly do not speak for me.
I most surly do not speak for others. How about generalize.
> Sort of reminds me of Italian nobility circa 1500. They thought the
> world was going south and decided not to breed. Now extinct.
I think you are wrong here. There are lots of Italians in this world.
However, I will surly agree there no noble Italians in the world :)
> I on the other hand have five kids. Age 25 to 35 but no grand kids yet
> just two by marriage. If you look at my family 2 boys 1 girl we have 8
> off spring. Wife side has 2 males and one female with 3 offspring.
>
> One of the 8 passed early so we have 7 + 3 = 10 kids. This for 12
> adults.
> Our diminishment = 17%
>
> So far 3 with 1 due grand kids.
If you want more grandkids - take their computers away!
I will look for it and see if I can watch it on-demand for free first.
> I sort of favor contrarian philosophies as the main stream seems
> shallow and tied to the factory no beauty.
My favorite dictionary is "The Devil's Collection: A Cynic's Dictionary"
It's out of print. I am a skeptic and a cynic. A contrarian... maybe :)
Some definitions.
Children:
Items that have become so expensive, only the poor can have them.
Happiness:
An agreeable sensation arising from contemplating the misery of another.
Enjoy Life... Dan
--
Garden in Zone 5 South East Michigan.
Posted by kate on March 5, 2010, 8:32 am
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 20:48:46 -0500, "Dan L."
>> balvenieman@invalid.net wrote:
>> >
>> >> I would never do something like that. It would lead to being
>> >> personally marked as "always" having a surplus, which I would
>> >> "owe" to people, with zero understanding that I had worked for
>> >> the extra food. Many people blow things out of proportion, and
>> >> have an amazing sense of entitlement.
>> >>
>> >> If I wanted to donate food, I would do so via a food bank, soup
>> >> kitchen, shelter, etc.
>> >>
>> >> This isn't about being "selfish." It's about having healthy
>> >> boundaries. I have learned to sort of depersonalise any
>> >> generosity, because so many prospective recipients just have no
>> >> limits to what they expect, demand, and feel entitled to from me.
>> > LOL! As has been stated: "Deja vu, all over again". No more in-kind
>> > donations for me. Frankly, I discovered years ago that "help your
>> > neighbor out a little if you can" bizness requires closer acquaintace
>> > with neighbors than I want!
>>
>> I understand what you and CFC are saying but I have another situation. I
>> get on well with all my neighbours and we are as close as we want to be,
>> which varies but doesn't involve spending days at each other's house but
>> does include actually talking and interacting beyond superficial politeness.
>> We all help each other and give each other things. If somebody needs a lift
>> to town or to be towed out of a bog it is done, if somebody has excess veges
>> they give them away, if somebody has to do something and needs a child
>> minder such will be found.
>>
>> There is no sense of entitlement nor of keeping score, nothing is given
>> grudgingly nor does anybody ask for too much. It's kind of nice.
>>
>> David
>Same as in my neighborhood which is in the country. I used to live in
>the city, life is different in the city. In the country most of my
>neighbors are close as one can get to self sufficiency. If something
>fails in the country, the community will come and help. Most people in
>the country are "jack of all trades". Sort of like the Amish
>communities. In the country "Good deeds are rewarded".
>The cities are like complex machines and much more efficient than in
>those living in the country. One cog fails and the system grinds to a
>halt, resulting in chaos. The cities require specialized trades to keep
>the system going. When the chaos heats up it will be neighbor against
>neighbor. If you give to your neighbor in the city, that specialized
>neighbor will be dependent on you. In the city "No good deed goes
>unpunished".
>My worldly views... Dan
I live in the city. There are good neighbors and not so good neighbors
everywhere, I suspect. I think what you project is often what you
receive.
I like giving.
Posted by Dan L. on March 5, 2010, 4:44 pm
wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 20:48:46 -0500, "Dan L."
>
> >
> >> balvenieman@invalid.net wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I would never do something like that. It would lead to being
> >> >> personally marked as "always" having a surplus, which I would
> >> >> "owe" to people, with zero understanding that I had worked for
> >> >> the extra food. Many people blow things out of proportion, and
> >> >> have an amazing sense of entitlement.
> >> >>
> >> >> If I wanted to donate food, I would do so via a food bank, soup
> >> >> kitchen, shelter, etc.
> >> >>
> >> >> This isn't about being "selfish." It's about having healthy
> >> >> boundaries. I have learned to sort of depersonalise any
> >> >> generosity, because so many prospective recipients just have no
> >> >> limits to what they expect, demand, and feel entitled to from me.
> >> > LOL! As has been stated: "Deja vu, all over again". No more in-kind
> >> > donations for me. Frankly, I discovered years ago that "help your
> >> > neighbor out a little if you can" bizness requires closer acquaintace
> >> > with neighbors than I want!
> >>
> >> I understand what you and CFC are saying but I have another situation. I
> >> get on well with all my neighbours and we are as close as we want to be,
> >> which varies but doesn't involve spending days at each other's house but
> >> does include actually talking and interacting beyond superficial
> >> politeness.
> >> We all help each other and give each other things. If somebody needs a
> >> lift
> >> to town or to be towed out of a bog it is done, if somebody has excess
> >> veges
> >> they give them away, if somebody has to do something and needs a child
> >> minder such will be found.
> >>
> >> There is no sense of entitlement nor of keeping score, nothing is given
> >> grudgingly nor does anybody ask for too much. It's kind of nice.
> >>
> >> David
> >
> >Same as in my neighborhood which is in the country. I used to live in
> >the city, life is different in the city. In the country most of my
> >neighbors are close as one can get to self sufficiency. If something
> >fails in the country, the community will come and help. Most people in
> >the country are "jack of all trades". Sort of like the Amish
> >communities. In the country "Good deeds are rewarded".
> >
> >The cities are like complex machines and much more efficient than in
> >those living in the country. One cog fails and the system grinds to a
> >halt, resulting in chaos. The cities require specialized trades to keep
> >the system going. When the chaos heats up it will be neighbor against
> >neighbor. If you give to your neighbor in the city, that specialized
> >neighbor will be dependent on you. In the city "No good deed goes
> >unpunished".
> >
> >My worldly views... Dan
>
> I live in the city. There are good neighbors and not so good neighbors
> everywhere, I suspect. I think what you project is often what you
> receive.
Not receive, taken! by others from those that live in the city.
You can have that delusional world called the "city" :)
> I like giving.
Sounds like a preachers wife or goes to church in the hope of salvation.
Do you give because if you do not give, you will not be in Gods favor.
If you give and expect absolutely nothing in return, including salvation.
Then I have the highest respect and regards to you!
Enjoy Life... Dan
--
Garden in Zone 5 South East Michigan.
XML site map
> >
> >> balvenieman@invalid.net wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I would never do something like that. It would lead to being
> >>>> personally marked as "always" having a surplus, which I would
> >>>> "owe" to people, with zero understanding that I had worked for
> >>>> the extra food. Many people blow things out of proportion, and
> >>>> have an amazing sense of entitlement.
> >>>>
> >>>> If I wanted to donate food, I would do so via a food bank, soup
> >>>> kitchen, shelter, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> This isn't about being "selfish." It's about having healthy
> >>>> boundaries. I have learned to sort of depersonalise any
> >>>> generosity, because so many prospective recipients just have no
> >>>> limits to what they expect, demand, and feel entitled to from me.
> >>> LOL! As has been stated: "Deja vu, all over again". No more in-kind
> >>> donations for me. Frankly, I discovered years ago that "help your
> >>> neighbor out a little if you can" bizness requires closer
> >>> acquaintace with neighbors than I want!
> >>
> >> I understand what you and CFC are saying but I have another
> >> situation. I get on well with all my neighbours and we are as close
> >> as we want to be, which varies but doesn't involve spending days at
> >> each other's house but does include actually talking and interacting
> >> beyond superficial politeness. We all help each other and give each
> >> other things. If somebody needs a lift to town or to be towed out
> >> of a bog it is done, if somebody has excess veges they give them
> >> away, if somebody has to do something and needs a child minder such
> >> will be found.
> >>
> >> There is no sense of entitlement nor of keeping score, nothing is
> >> given grudgingly nor does anybody ask for too much. It's kind of
> >> nice.
> >>
> >> David
> >
> > Same as in my neighborhood which is in the country. I used to live in
> > the city, life is different in the city. In the country most of my
> > neighbors are close as one can get to self sufficiency. If something
> > fails in the country, the community will come and help. Most people in
> > the country are "jack of all trades". Sort of like the Amish
> > communities. In the country "Good deeds are rewarded".
> >
> > The cities are like complex machines and much more efficient than in
> > those living in the country. One cog fails and the system grinds to a
> > halt, resulting in chaos. The cities require specialized trades to
> > keep the system going. When the chaos heats up it will be neighbor
> > against neighbor. If you give to your neighbor in the city, that
> > specialized neighbor will be dependent on you. In the city "No good
> > deed goes unpunished".
> >
> > My worldly views... Dan
>
> I should have said explicitly that I am in a rural situation, these
> neighbours are 400m or more apart in the main. Aside from the lack of
> specialisation there is the time factor. You have time to talk. In the
> city social interaction must be abbreviated because the pace is faster and
> there are so many meetings in a day that you cannot afford more than a few
> seconds on each one. Both contribute to failure to develop real communities
> and to personal isolation. Humans like rats are not at their best in a rat
> race. I think the contrast in views about charitable acts can be largely
> traced to such differences in community structure.
>
> David