| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/25/2012 02:23:08 PM · #251 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Excess doesn't need to mean wealthy. |
Where does it say that in the Bible? |
Come again? |
How do you reconcile this culture of excess with the fact that the overwhelming majority of the promoters of an economy based on ever-increasing consumption of goods purport to be "Christians" -- of all the passages in the Bible this one seems most relevant to the issues of the day ...
Originally posted by The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to Timothy:
6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some
coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves
through with many sorrows.
6:11 But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after
righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness. |
Message edited by author 2012-04-25 14:25:35. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 02:24:16 PM · #252 |
Originally posted by yanko:
I'm trying to understand what you mean by that. The examples you gave are confusing. Debt = Excess? Poor health = Excess? The one clear example of excess (i.e. monetary wealth) and the one that can be the most destructive to entire societies, you seem to ignore. |
Hmmm. I guess I'm not getting your confusion. If you live with credit card debt and beyond your means, doesn't that mean you live in excess? If you have poor health due to consuming 4,000 calories a day isn't that excess?
I look to TV and media because it lives and dies by the tastes of the public. If nobody likes the message of "I'm gonna get me some" then those shows die and are quickly replaced by what the public DOES like. So what is on TV and in our music and in our movies reflects what our culture likes. And by that token we like excessive material possessions, excessive violence, and excessive sex. When we eat we like sugar, salt, fat. All in excess.
The fact that this isn't plainly obvious only plays to Ross' point. We are so steeped in it we don't realize how out of proportion it is. Jeb's argument that we aren't hedonistic, that we don't do things because they feel good and damn the consequences, is like arguing the sky isn't blue.
Message edited by author 2012-04-25 14:25:11. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 02:38:31 PM · #253 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
How do you reconcile this culture of excess with the fact that the overwhelming majority of the promoters of an economy based on ever-increasing consumption of goods purport to be "Christians" -- of all the passages in the Bible this one seems most relevant to the issues of the day ...
Originally posted by The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to Timothy:
6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some
coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves
through with many sorrows.
6:11 But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after
righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness. |
|
I would say that IF this is true then they are bad Christians (which is Ross' whole point; we don't need less religion, we need less bad religion). I can find 5 verses along the lines of what you say for any verse someone could come up with that would defend their lifestyle of hedonism.
"For we also were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, enslaved to various desires and pleasures, spending our lives in wickedness and envy, despicable, hating one another. 4 But when the kindness and love for mankind of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us"
"But the one who lives for sensual pleasure is dead even though she lives."
"Older men are to be temperate, worthy of respect, self-controlled, sound in faith, in love, and in endurance. 3 Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not slanderous, not enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good, 4 in order that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands and to love their children, 5 to be self-controlled, pure, busy at home, good, being subject to their own husbands, in order that the word of God may not be slandered. 6 Likewise, exhort the young men to be self-controlled, 7 concerning everything showing yourself to be an example of good deeds, in your teaching demonstrating soundness, dignity, 8 a sound message beyond reproach, in order that an opponent[a] may be put to shame, because he[b] has nothing bad to say concerning us. "
Message edited by author 2012-04-25 14:40:56. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 02:53:34 PM · #254 |
Ross agrees with you Paul. He writes this in the prologue:
The United States remains a deeply religious country, and most Americans are still drawing some water from the Christian well. But a growing number are inventing their own versions of what Christianity means, abandoning the nuances of traditional theology in favor of religions that stoke their egos and indulge or even celebrate their worst impulses. These faiths speak from many pulpits--conservative and liberal, political and pop-cultural, traditionally religious and fashionably "spiritual"--and many of their preachers call themselves Christian or claim a Christian warrant. But they are increasingly offering distortions of traditional Christianity, not the real thing.
(later he says)In this America, too, the Christian teaching that every human soul is unique and precious has been stressed, by the prophets of self-fulfillment and gurus of self-love, at the expense of the equally important teaching that every human soul is fatally corrupted by original sin. Absent the latter emphasis, religion becomes a license for egotism and selfishness, easily employed to justify what used to be considered deadly sins. The result is a society where pride becomes "healthy self-esteem," vanity becomes "self-improvement," adultery becomes "following your heart," greed and gluttony become "living the American dream." |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 03:12:41 PM · #255 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
Guess who doesn't run a balance on his credit cards. :)
I highly recommend it. Your money is a lot more effective when it's not servicing debt. Living within one's means means your means mean more over time. Fortunately, I had excellent parenting that stressed the importance of frugality and personal responsibility. |
I think you've identified the most important factor in learning behavior, moral or immoral (however you define those terms), and that is the example set by parents. I think one is far more likely to have a happy and successful marriage if one's parents had a happy marriage, religious or not. I think one is far more likely to deal appropriately with conflict if a good example was set by one's parents in that regard, religious or not. I think one is far less likely to use their home as an ATM machine, or to be materially acquisitive, if one's parents weren't spendthrifts, religious or not. I think one is far better able to withstand the negative influence of culture and peer pressure if one's parents provide a solid example of how to do that, religious or not. I just don't think that religion exerts much of an influence on behavior anymore, independent of so many other factors, and I therefore wonder why we spend so much time talking about it. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 03:24:39 PM · #256 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by yanko:
I'm trying to understand what you mean by that. The examples you gave are confusing. Debt = Excess? Poor health = Excess? The one clear example of excess (i.e. monetary wealth) and the one that can be the most destructive to entire societies, you seem to ignore. |
Hmmm. I guess I'm not getting your confusion. If you live with credit card debt and beyond your means, doesn't that mean you live in excess? |
Beyond your means? Probably. Living in excess? By who's measure?
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If you have poor health due to consuming 4,000 calories a day isn't that excess? |
Excess to what? It's the lack of exercise that would lead to the poor health, not the number of calories. Athletes are more likely to be on a 4,000 calorie diet than the obese.
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I look to TV and media because it lives and dies by the tastes of the public. If nobody likes the message of "I'm gonna get me some" then those shows die and are quickly replaced by what the public DOES like. So what is on TV and in our music and in our movies reflects what our culture likes.
And by that token we like excessive material possessions, excessive violence, and excessive sex. |
You need to do some research on this because that is not the case. There are a lot of factors that go into what gets on TV or in theaters, most of which has nothing to do with what the public likes. Oh and it's not a bunch of atheists making these decisions either. Quite the opposite.
Message edited by author 2012-04-25 15:25:18. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 03:31:38 PM · #257 |
| FWIW I think that currently about one-eighth of the US population qualifies for Federal assistance ("Food Stamps") to eat ... and I'm pretty sure that a majority of members of Congress (and televangelists) are millionaires ... |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 04:02:29 PM · #258 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
FWIW I think that currently about one-eighth of the US population qualifies for Federal assistance ("Food Stamps") to eat ... and I'm pretty sure that a majority of members of Congress (and televangelists) are millionaires ... |
Six months ago (man, time flies), I had a patient in my office on food stamps and public insurance who was having a phone conversation about how she would be quite pissed if her preorder of the iPhone 4S was not fulfilled on the first day possible...
Excess comes in many forms.
Message edited by author 2012-04-25 16:08:41. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 04:06:19 PM · #259 |
| I think you are just playing devil's advocate Richard. If not you are truly down the rabbit hole and there is no reasoning with you. I'm sure there is an exception for every generality, but take the generality for what it's worth. If we, as a nation, are swimming in $771 billion dollars of credit card debt, I hope you have the common sense to understand that is out of whack with propriety. If you don't, there's no reason to continue the conversation. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 04:08:12 PM · #260 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
FWIW I think that currently about one-eighth of the US population qualifies for Federal assistance ("Food Stamps") to eat ... and I'm pretty sure that a majority of members of Congress (and televangelists) are millionaires ... |
Six weeks ago I had a patient in my office on food stamps and public insurance who was having a phone conversation about how she would be quite pissed if her preorder of the iPhone 4S was not fulfilled on the first day possible...
Excess comes in many forms. |
You should be legally obliged to slap her for that. I can't even justify spending the money on an iPhone and the cell plan to go with it, and I work 12 hour days.
|
|
|
|
04/25/2012 04:30:34 PM · #261 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If we, as a nation, are swimming in $771 billion dollars of credit card debt, I hope you have the common sense to understand that is out of whack with propriety. If you don't, there's no reason to continue the conversation. |
Nice strawman. If you want to have that discussion then at least wait for me to provide my opinion on that subject. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 04:38:53 PM · #262 |
Student loan debt just exceeded one trillion dollars ... if Congress does nothing student loan interest rates are scheduled to double ... of course, people will waste their time in college when they could easily be flipping burgers, picking strawberries, or cleaning toilets ...
Message edited by author 2012-04-25 16:39:27. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 04:40:08 PM · #263 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If we, as a nation, are swimming in $771 billion dollars of credit card debt, I hope you have the common sense to understand that is out of whack with propriety. If you don't, there's no reason to continue the conversation. |
Nice strawman. If you want to have that discussion then at least wait for me to provide my opinion on that subject. |
I'm all ears. Hopefully your opinion will be consistent with the fact that credit card debt goes up as income goes up. But I get ahead of myself. Go for it. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 04:42:19 PM · #264 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Student loan debt just exceeded one trillion dollars ... if Congress does nothing student loan interest rates are scheduled to double ... of course, people will waste their time in college when they could easily be flipping burgers, picking strawberries, or cleaning toilets ... |
What's your point? I hope you aren't trying to imply that I think ALL debt is excess...
It really gets so bizarro talking with you guys. Paul, point blank, do you think that amount of credit card debt in our country is reasonable? Yes or no and why? |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 05:02:30 PM · #265 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If we, as a nation, are swimming in $771 billion dollars of credit card debt, I hope you have the common sense to understand that is out of whack with propriety. If you don't, there's no reason to continue the conversation. |
Nice strawman. If you want to have that discussion then at least wait for me to provide my opinion on that subject. |
I'm all ears. Hopefully your opinion will be consistent with the fact that credit card debt goes up as income goes up. But I get ahead of myself. Go for it. |
What do you want to hear? The number you quoted (i.e. $771.7 billion) seems very high, as in bad, but how should we determine if that's too much? What do you think should be a good number? In the same link you provided it quotes the credit card debt for UK and Australia. For convenience I converted the values into dollars to compare with the US:
United Kingdom (March 2009) $104.2 billion
Australia (2010) $51.7 billion
That's much lower than the US but when you compare it based on population you get this:
United States cc debt per person: $2,481
United Kingdom cc debt per person: $1,675
Australia cc debt per person: $2,587
That's based on the US having 311 million, the UK 62.2 million and Australia 22.3 million people. So we're not as good as the UK but better than the Aussies so at least we're not last. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 05:10:23 PM · #266 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
What's your point? I hope you aren't trying to imply that I think ALL debt is excess...
It really gets so bizarro talking with you guys. |
Bizarro indeed. Just a second ago a doctor was trying to argue how I was supporting a certain behavior just by questioning the validity of the examples given. For every word that was actually posted, three more were automatically assumed. Crazy stuff. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 05:12:05 PM · #267 |
OK Richard, I'll point blank you as well. Do you think $771 billion dollars in credit card debt is reasonable? Yes no, why? You can quote other countries if you want as long as you give me an answer.
Your examples are close to the equivalent of considering yourself temperate because you only get drunk six nights a week while your buddy does it every night...
Message edited by author 2012-04-25 17:13:35. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 06:13:33 PM · #268 |
Evening DOc,
I read your comments regarding debts, calorie intake and the like and would hasten to point out that a great segment of your society is currently in debt due to financial issues that were brought upon them by unscrupulous investors, bankers and the like.
As for calorie intake, I would wager good money that what people can afford to eat is in all probability a significant factor that ought to be taken into consideration.
It really is too simple to make blanket generalizations on issues as complex as these and only an in-depth study on cause and effect could give valid quantifiers to this discussion.
Unfortunately, I have neither the time, resources nor inclination to pursue this any further.
ETA: Regarding the financial issues, I am remember a quote I heard many years ago that would seem appropriate in this instance:
" It's right hard to pay as you go when you are still paying for where you been at"
Ray
Message edited by author 2012-04-25 18:15:24. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 06:30:55 PM · #269 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
... I would hasten to point out that a great segment of your society is currently in debt due to financial issues that were brought upon them by unscrupulous investors, bankers and the like. |
This is manifestly not the case. Well... it IS true in the sense that these issues DID hurt people, but the "unscrupulous" individuals were preying upon a society infected with greed, a society that thought the bubble would never burst. In the larger sense, Americans have been living beyond their means for decades. Americans have been living in a culture that ENCOURAGES them to do this.
Originally posted by RayEthier:
As for calorie intake, I would wager good money that what people can afford to eat is in all probability a significant factor that ought to be taken into consideration. |
You'd lose your wager. Repeated studies have shown that this is not the case. Here's an article from the LA Times.
"Social class is also a big deal. The likelihood of being overweight in the poorest 25% of the population is twice that of people in the highest quarter of economic class. With obesity comes a wide array of serious diseases, including some, such as hypertension, that strike particularly hard at some ethnic groups. Children born into poverty will have illnesses far in excess of what confronts others, both in their childhood and later in life.
These stark effects of race and poverty on diet, activity and obesity might seem counterintuitive -- poverty should lead to food deprivation, plus poorer people are more likely to be engaged in hard physical labor.
Toss away intuition. People living in poverty find it hard to be physically active. Leisure time is rare and concerns with neighborhood safety keep both children and adults indoors. Poor individuals are less likely to work for companies with fitness facilities, and there is no discretionary income to join health clubs, have personal trainers, etc. Poor schools have worse facilities and fewer organized sports, and safety issues prevent children from walking or biking to school.
Food is a major issue as well. Studies have shown that poor individuals have limited access to healthy foods and considerable exposure to high-calorie, nutrient-poor foods. Declining numbers of supermarkets in inner cities is part of the reason. In 1963, there were 34 full-service supermarkets in inner-city Los Angeles; that number had dropped to 14 in 1991. By 2002, there were only 5. If one does not own a car, a trip to a supermarket might require several transfers on a bus and then the task of carrying groceries on the return trip."
A simple trip down Google lane looking for research on obesity and income, obesity and social class, etc, will deliver a plethora of studies to you.
R.
Message edited by author 2012-04-25 18:31:36.
|
|
|
|
04/25/2012 06:42:17 PM · #270 |
OK Ray, you wade in you get to answer the question (that nobody seems to want to answer). Do you think that amount of credit card debt is reasonable? Yes or no.
Your facts don't bear out. In the years after the financial crisis the credit card debt actually went DOWN. And nobody held guns to people's head as they treated the equity in their home as an ATM machine with HELOCs. Hey, my house is worth $100,000 more this year, let's go to Tahiti!
I think the original quote bears repeating because you guys seem to at the least be enablers if not participants in the orgy. Hey, look the UK and Australia are doing it too! Hey, it's not my fault that the banks sold toxic mortgages! Hey, I'm on food stamps so it's impossible that I spend my money unwisely. Hey, there is nothing behind the fact 7-11 sells a 64 oz Big Gulp now when they didn't 20 years ago. There's nothing behind the fact a Starbucks grande frappuchino has nearly half a day's calories.
From the Slate article by Ross Douthat:
If orthodoxy seems puritanical to you today, maybe it’s less because it’s inherently anti-fun and anti-feelgood than because we live in a society distinguished by such extraordinary excess—gluttonous, libidinous, avaricious—that what a different era might recognize as a healthy balance between asceticism and indulgence looks like hopeless prudishness instead."
Message edited by author 2012-04-25 19:19:50. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 07:28:04 PM · #271 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
What's your point? I hope you aren't trying to imply that I think ALL debt is excess... |
What other rhetorical or educational purpose is served by posting that statistic in the context you did? |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 07:30:47 PM · #272 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
What's your point? I hope you aren't trying to imply that I think ALL debt is excess... |
What other rhetorical or educational purpose is served by posting that statistic in the context you did? |
That CREDIT CARD debt is excessive? Wouldn't you agree?
Message edited by author 2012-04-25 19:31:29. |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 07:36:14 PM · #273 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
OK Ray, you wade in you get to answer the question (that nobody seems to want to answer). Do you think that amount of credit card debt is reasonable? Yes or no. |
That question does not support a yes or no answer. What percentage of that credit card debt is American Express charges at Chez Panisse (my "local" world-class restaurant), and how much was used (like mine) to pay the erlectric bill after a layoff reduced income by half?
Perhaps a more important stat would be how much of that balance is 60 days past due -- if the debt is being serviced on time, then it would seem to me to be "reasonable" regarless of the actual dollar figure.
Besides, if all that debt was paid off you'd have bankers going broke -- where do you think all those million-dollar bonuses come from? |
|
|
|
04/25/2012 07:43:58 PM · #274 |
Frankly that's a very lazy reply Paul. Either you can find those answers or you know them already. You guys seem to have a million opinions about things, but the moment someone tries to nail down an answer you get all Slick Willy on me.
Here's some stats to help you. This is cases where the individual has claimed Chapter 7 and concers monthly income:
Gross Monthly Income
Credit card debt generally increases with the income of debtors. However, about four percent of chapter 7 debtors report no income at the time of filing. These debtors, on average, have higher credit card debt levels than any other income range, except for debtors with incomes of more than $5,000 per month. About three percent of debtors have gross monthly incomes of more than $6,000. Average credit card debt for these high-income debtors is more than twice as high as the average for all chapter 7 debtors.
You can find the table on this site Table 3.
So we see SOME people might be trying to pay their electric bill, etc (the zero income earners), but we see in general that the more income you make the more debt you have. That does not support the idea that they are forced to pay their necessities by credit card.
|
|
|
|
04/25/2012 07:50:59 PM · #275 |
I'm a lazy kind of guy when I can be ... I expect the proponent of a porposition to provide the the relevant supporting data -- not to have to bring it out on rebuttal.
Now, what about those high-income debtors filing for bankruptcy -- they're probably in that once percent of the population ... so why do you try to tar the entire society with the brush of the excess of a tiny minority?
Sorry, I have to go to band practice, then get up at four a.m..... I probably won't be able to participate any further until the subject's morphed three or four more times ... |
|
