100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: ugly classism | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Hold it!!!
I am appalled by the conversation about poverty that has been taking place in this discussion thread. First, when I compared poverty in the USA to poverty in 3rd-world nations, I had this kind of poverty in mind. 
If that kind of poverty were to be discovered in the USA today, both government agencies and private charities would move Heaven and Earth to eliminate it. Thankfully, to the best of my knowledge, poor people in the USA don't live in the way that is depicted in the above image. Yet, people in the USA can find themselves without homes and incomes due to no fault of their own. I used to work for a homeless shelter operated by the Salvation Army in the USA, during which time, I encountered and assisted people who had nothing but the few possessions that they could carry. Sure, I encountered homeless people who were poor as a result of their own bad choices. At the same time, I encountered people who became poor and homeless as the result of someone else's misbehavior. Those people worked to escape from their impoverished state. So, I consider it to be ugly classism for someone to automatically label a poor person as being lazy or unmotivated to escape poverty. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By the way, a poor person may have certain "luxury" possessions because the person acquired those possessions before becoming poor.
It is a mistake to automatically assume that such possessions were acquired after the person became impoverished. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Thu 11/14/13 09:41 AM
|
|
Thankfully, to the best of my knowledge, poor people in the USA don't live in the way that is depicted in the above image.
They are not called "poor" they are called "homeless" because they don't happen to have a "house." But they do exist -- and government agencies and private charities do what they can to help --- sometimes. When the Colorado State Mental institution passed a law about who should be housed in their facility, many of these mentally ill people who were determined not to be a risk to themselves (suicidal) or others (homicidal) were released. Many of these people are on medication or dysfunctional because they can't get the proper medication anymore. These people, having no place to go, you will find, are the people who live under bridges, I.E. ---the homeless. Other people choose to live the lifestyle and have no respect for society and want no part of it. Some people are evicted from their homes by bankers who foreclose on their house. In the large cities, entire societies of 'poor' and 'homeless' live in the underground tunnels. In the west, groups of "moneyless' people live in caves either by choice or necessity. Even in my small town there are homeless and poor who live in run down houses or abandoned shacks. Some are on assistance, some are not. Some are addicts, some are disabled, and some mentally ill. We have a housing community here that rents to elderly and disabled people charging only a percentage of their income and we have a group called "sage services" that prepares a meal for them, but only four days a week, for $3.00 and delivers it or serves it at the senior center. If a person can't afford to pay for the meal, they don't have to pay. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
massagetrade
on
Thu 11/14/13 03:20 PM
|
|
First, when I compared poverty in the USA to poverty in 3rd-world nations, I had this kind of poverty in mind.
If that kind of poverty were to be discovered in the USA today, both government agencies and private charities would move Heaven and Earth to eliminate it. Thankfully, to the best of my knowledge, poor people in the USA don't live in the way that is depicted in the above image. I don't understand your post at all. I do not see the extreme tragedy of 3rd world poverty and disempowerment being depicted in that photo. I don't see people dying the most horrible deaths due to preventable diseases. I don't see people dying in the worst way because the entire region lacks the infrastructure or the political freedom to get medication needed to them. I don't see anyone clearly and obviously starving to death. I don't see people who unambiguously lack any access to clean drinking water. And beyond material poverty: I don't see children carefully following a path to avoid landmines, or walking to school while machine guns rattle in the distance. Sorry, I'm on a bad screen at the moment so I really might be missing something, but what is depicted in that photo is not unlike what you actually see in the USA. I've known many hundreds of homeless people in my life. Many make dwellings out of discarded items. A few of them actually prefer to make ugly, crazy looking dwellings out the weirdest choices of trash, and live in dwellings similar to the one in the photo. Edit: If you are trying to suggest that some people in the US have it as bad as some 3rd world people; that goes without saying. There is a spectrum of poverty, and the worst poverty in the third world goes way beyond the worst in the US. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
personal responsibility is not somehow lacking in a person just because they are impoverished,,, Of course not. I don't see anyone saying that. There are many reasons a person might be financially 'impoverished' (esp. temporarily), other than a lack of personal responsibility. It just happens that many, many poor people in the US suffer from an attitude of entitlement and poor person responsibility, and those two factors should not be completely ignored when discussing the causes and cures of poverty. what power does a single mother have with 1000 per month? This depends a lot on where you live. In some cities, you can't even rent a place to live. Since we criminalize homelessness, you really don't have much power in those cities. But in many towns, this gives you the power to have a room, a working kitchen, a working shower, use of public transit, an excellent bicycle, an ugly but reliable car (if you are sensible about it), and more than enough nutritious, safe-to-eat food. You can buy an old laptop for $50 (one for which you'd have paid $2,000 a decade ago). IM so sick of people poo pooing real struggle of human beings because they are able to have some tiny fraction of 'luxury' like hair care or internet,, what is that? 50 a month?
If you feel that you can't afford to feed yourself, do NOT choose any luxuries for yourself. Doing so is flat out stupid. And if you are accepting public assistance, its selfish. You are basically saying that you think its okay to use other people's money (taken from them by force!) to buy yourself luxuries, while they are working to provide for themselves. I'm not poo pooing their real struggle - I'm saying that people who waste their money are *helping to make their own struggle*. Telling them that their poverty is in no way their own fault, and telling them they are entitled to get more, for free, is only hurting them. this is america, , yes we have it BETTER Than other natiions, but does that mean we dont have any need to do better?
Yes, we should do a lot better. We should do a lot better at appreciating what we have. We should do better at examining and checking our attitudes of entitlement. a C is better than an F, does that mean children shouldnt strive for the A if they are capable of it?
seriously? Hahahahahahahahahahaa when it comes to luxuries, there is no thing as an 'A'! The line just keeps going and going and going. This is the danger and poison of entitlement attitudes. The same poor people who think its just fine to waste their money on luxuries and then cry about how they can't meet their needs would do so no matter how many luxuries we give them. Edit: Cultivating appreciation for what we have, as I think JB brought into the dialog, is really important and helpful here. ,,I don't know what to tell such out of touch people other than struggle is real, whether someone else struggles more or not,,,
the 'well others have it worst' response is like arguing that rape victims should not be complaining because other people have been tortured and killed No, it really isn't. Being poor in america is not at all like being raped. lol. It really isn't. sorry, I dont buy that people having it worse makes it ok for people to have it bad and be treated as second class unnecessarily,,,
Okay, we probably agree there. But what is 'treating as second class' ? Meeting claims of hardship and poverty with an investigation into means by which they can take greater personal responsibility is NOT treating them as second class. We should do this to everyone, all the time. Rich people can be personally irresponsible, too! And they can have the worst entitlement attitudes. Poor people are not less than other people! Massage, you are so right! Not only do I know you are right, I have been working to help a family with a daughter "immersed" in the entitlement mentality that proves you are right. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whether or not you are poor can often be a matter of deliberate personal choice.
I know the (hopefully not-yet-ended) story of a man who decided to make himself the canary in the coal mine of modern society. He resolved not to partake of the criminal fraud and slavery that goes on every day all around us. This means he made a conscious decision to quit scrambling to find a grindstone to attach his nose to and survive. He decided not to pull up his own socks and see if anyone would offer to pull them up for him. Being an honest man, he resolved not to turn to crime to survive. Being an honourable man, he resolved not to beg. Being an intelligent man, he knew he was a creditor and how to claim his rights & how to play the fraud to get all the money he wanted, but decided not to, because survival shouldn't be a matter of IQ or willingness to partake of the ongoing crime. He wanted to see if there was enough unselfish human compassion in society for people to walk up and simply offer him what he needed. If they did, he would graciously accept and thank them; if they didn't, he would leave them alone and wouldn't even look their way, so as not to play on their conscience. He looked like your regular street bum, with his clothes getting old & ragged & pockets full of cigarette butts he picked up on his "rounds" I used to help him out when I saw him, and I used to talk to him about what he was doing. He told me that his family threw him out because he couldn't provide for them anymore and had nothing of monetary value left to give them. This forced him to seek shelter (stairwells, bridges, etc.) wherever he could find it, which in this climate is OK in the summer, but death in the winter. It's getting very cold here now, and I haven't seen him on his "rounds" lately. I try to keep a good thought and hope that someone took him in and offered him food & shelter. (He was determined not to go to a shelter or soup kitchen unless taken there by a stranger who cared) I've heard no reports of an indigent dying on the street, but I know that isn't newsworthy, so not hearing anything is no indication that he's OK. The frightening thing that keeps running thru my head is "I walked among ye, yet ye knew me not." and I can't help feeling that Judgment Day may have already come and gone. I can't stop thinking that the canary may have smelled too much gas. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some are poor because of booze and drugs. It is all they really care about.
Some are poor because mental illness. Many are poor because of an entitlement society that has taught them to sit and wait for a handout as it is a better deal than working. Many are poor because they are taught to be poor by their parents who value education little and industry even less. They are convinced by parts of our government that to take is their right and they should take as much as they can. Many are poor because the upward mobility jobs of building trades have been taken away by illegal aliens. They now have no place to start. Many in our country are illegal aliens who are poor from somewhere else. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whether or not you are poor can often be a matter of deliberate personal choice. I know the (hopefully not-yet-ended) story of a man who decided to make himself the canary in the coal mine of modern society. He resolved not to partake of the criminal fraud and slavery that goes on every day all around us. This means he made a conscious decision to quit scrambling to find a grindstone to attach his nose to and survive. He decided not to pull up his own socks and see if anyone would offer to pull them up for him. Being an honest man, he resolved not to turn to crime to survive. Being an honourable man, he resolved not to beg. Being an intelligent man, he knew he was a creditor and how to claim his rights & how to play the fraud to get all the money he wanted, but decided not to, because survival shouldn't be a matter of IQ or willingness to partake of the ongoing crime. He wanted to see if there was enough unselfish human compassion in society for people to walk up and simply offer him what he needed. If they did, he would graciously accept and thank them; if they didn't, he would leave them alone and wouldn't even look their way, so as not to play on their conscience. He looked like your regular street bum, with his clothes getting old & ragged & pockets full of cigarette butts he picked up on his "rounds" I used to help him out when I saw him, and I used to talk to him about what he was doing. He told me that his family threw him out because he couldn't provide for them anymore and had nothing of monetary value left to give them. This forced him to seek shelter (stairwells, bridges, etc.) wherever he could find it, which in this climate is OK in the summer, but death in the winter. It's getting very cold here now, and I haven't seen him on his "rounds" lately. I try to keep a good thought and hope that someone took him in and offered him food & shelter. (He was determined not to go to a shelter or soup kitchen unless taken there by a stranger who cared) I've heard no reports of an indigent dying on the street, but I know that isn't newsworthy, so not hearing anything is no indication that he's OK. The frightening thing that keeps running thru my head is "I walked among ye, yet ye knew me not." and I can't help feeling that Judgment Day may have already come and gone. I can't stop thinking that the canary may have smelled too much gas. I wonder if it ever occurred to him to help someone else. Sitting around waiting for someone else to do for you, give to you, care about you seems like a pretty empty way to live any life. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whether or not you are poor can often be a matter of deliberate personal choice. I know the (hopefully not-yet-ended) story of a man who decided to make himself the canary in the coal mine of modern society. He resolved not to partake of the criminal fraud and slavery that goes on every day all around us. This means he made a conscious decision to quit scrambling to find a grindstone to attach his nose to and survive. He decided not to pull up his own socks and see if anyone would offer to pull them up for him. Being an honest man, he resolved not to turn to crime to survive. Being an honourable man, he resolved not to beg. Being an intelligent man, he knew he was a creditor and how to claim his rights & how to play the fraud to get all the money he wanted, but decided not to, because survival shouldn't be a matter of IQ or willingness to partake of the ongoing crime. He wanted to see if there was enough unselfish human compassion in society for people to walk up and simply offer him what he needed. If they did, he would graciously accept and thank them; if they didn't, he would leave them alone and wouldn't even look their way, so as not to play on their conscience. He looked like your regular street bum, with his clothes getting old & ragged & pockets full of cigarette butts he picked up on his "rounds" I used to help him out when I saw him, and I used to talk to him about what he was doing. He told me that his family threw him out because he couldn't provide for them anymore and had nothing of monetary value left to give them. This forced him to seek shelter (stairwells, bridges, etc.) wherever he could find it, which in this climate is OK in the summer, but death in the winter. It's getting very cold here now, and I haven't seen him on his "rounds" lately. I try to keep a good thought and hope that someone took him in and offered him food & shelter. (He was determined not to go to a shelter or soup kitchen unless taken there by a stranger who cared) I've heard no reports of an indigent dying on the street, but I know that isn't newsworthy, so not hearing anything is no indication that he's OK. The frightening thing that keeps running thru my head is "I walked among ye, yet ye knew me not." and I can't help feeling that Judgment Day may have already come and gone. I can't stop thinking that the canary may have smelled too much gas. Mental illness can cause people do all sorts of things... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One thing I have learned is that you may have a lot of people who care about you, or seem to care about you, or you may have just a few who care about you. Maybe there is no one who cares..... But there is no one who cares about your welfare more than you.
If you don't care about yourself then why expect a total stranger to? People need to take care of themselves first and not expect others to do it, --- especially total strangers. People mostly have their own problems to deal with. Unless they get all their satisfaction and joy out of helping total strangers, most people will not pay much attention to them, especially if these people are not even bothering to ask anyone for help. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder if it ever occurred to him to help someone else. Yup...he was always helping people if it looked like they needed help, and he wouldn't take money for his favours unless it was freely offered after the fact. I understand that he used to have a fair bit of stuff (and money), but gave it all away when he decided that stuff with only monetary value was of no value to him at all. Mental illness can cause people do all sorts of things... Like ignore people who need help because it might cost something? No wonder when he used to talk to me he called it my society that he wanted no part of, preferring his "society" that he claimed to belong to. It kinda makes me wonder if he was really mentally ill, or if everyone else is. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Leigh2154
on
Sat 11/16/13 04:13 PM
|
|
Mental illness can cause people do all sorts of things... Like ignore people who need help because it might cost something? No wonder when he used to talk to me he called it my society that he wanted no part of, preferring his "society" that he claimed to belong to. It kinda makes me wonder if he was really mentally ill, or if everyone else is. Check your temperature... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Leigh2154
on
Sat 11/16/13 04:14 PM
|
|
Yup...he was always helping people if it looked like they needed help, and he wouldn't take money for his favours unless it was freely offered after the fact. I understand that he used to have a fair bit of stuff (and money), but gave it all away when he decided that stuff with only monetary value was of no value to him at all. In an earlier post, you said this, "He told me that his family threw him out because he couldn't provide for them anymore and had nothing of monetary value left to give them." So do I have this right, you're championing a man who gave his stuff away at the expense of his family in order to test the "goodness" of society?  ...Like I said earlier, mental illness can cause people to do all sorts of things...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yup...he was always helping people if it looked like they needed help, and he wouldn't take money for his favours unless it was freely offered after the fact. I understand that he used to have a fair bit of stuff (and money), but gave it all away when he decided that stuff with only monetary value was of no value to him at all. In an earlier post, you said this, "He told me that his family threw him out because he couldn't provide for them anymore and had nothing of monetary value left to give them." So do I have this right, you're championing a man who gave his stuff away at his families expense in order to test the "goodness" of society...Like I said earlier, mental illness can cause people to do all sorts of things... Right. Something is wrong with that guy. I don't think I'm going to let this societal guilt trip stick to me. People need to stop blaming everyone else and "society" for their chosen life style. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
JustDukkyMkII
on
Sat 11/16/13 04:33 PM
|
|
Yup...he was always helping people if it looked like they needed help, and he wouldn't take money for his favours unless it was freely offered after the fact. I understand that he used to have a fair bit of stuff (and money), but gave it all away when he decided that stuff with only monetary value was of no value to him at all. In an earlier post, you said this, "He told me that his family threw him out because he couldn't provide for them anymore and had nothing of monetary value left to give them." So do I have this right, you're championing a man who gave his stuff away at the expense of his family in order to test the "goodness" of society? ...Like I said earlier, mental illness can cause people to do all sorts of things...
He gave it away when he still had a job and could still provide for his family. After he got laid off, he wouldn't beg for unemployment, pension, or welfare. He tried to beg for his family's sake, but was told if they needed money they would have to "apply" themselves. Consequently, it was costing his family money to pay for the food he ate, so they kicked him out of the house he originally bought for them (He had long ago transferred title to his wife). People need to stop blaming everyone else and "society" for their chosen life style. He didn't blame the people, so much as a society structured to condition people to prefer monetary values over human ones. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After he got laid off, he wouldn't beg for unemployment, pension, or welfare. He tried to beg for his family's sake, but was told if they needed money they would have to "apply" themselves. Consequently, it was costing his family money to pay for the food he ate, so they kicked him out of the house he originally bought for them (He had long ago transferred title to his wife).
This story sounds like it has another side to it. I would wonder if his family really did "kick him out" so they would not have to feed him. If he got laid off and had a family, he should have gotten unemployment for their sake. That is what it is for. One does not "beg" for unemployment. You just sign up for it. Of course Canada might be different from U.S. If Welfare told him that his family would have to apply themselves, then why didn't they apply? They are a family and normally a family applies TOGETHER. Perhaps he was not legally married to them... Anyway, its a sad story, but it just does not sound right. Oh well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After he got laid off, he wouldn't beg for unemployment, pension, or welfare. He tried to beg for his family's sake, but was told if they needed money they would have to "apply" themselves. Consequently, it was costing his family money to pay for the food he ate, so they kicked him out of the house he originally bought for them (He had long ago transferred title to his wife).
This story sounds like it has another side to it. I would wonder if his family really did "kick him out" so they would not have to feed him. If he got laid off and had a family, he should have gotten unemployment for their sake. That is what it is for. One does not "beg" for unemployment. You just sign up for it. Of course Canada might be different from U.S. If Welfare told him that his family would have to apply themselves, then why didn't they apply? They are a family and normally a family applies TOGETHER. Perhaps he was not legally married to them... Anyway, its a sad story, but it just does not sound right. Oh well. He was lawfully married and still is. His family couldn't apply for welfare because they made too much money to qualify. In technical terms, his wife (according to the wedding vows) was REQUIRED to support him (in sickness & in health, etc.) but she didn't like him any more, wanted a divorce and wanted him out, so rather than fight his own family over the issue (they were all starting to hate him for not "pulling up his own socks" and getting a job. (he was still trying to at the time, but not having much luck) Of course, after he left, he determined to not bother looking for a paying job and to conduct his "social experiment." In Canada, there are NO claim forms for people, only for corporations that employ people. A human being has to fill in an application form. An application form is an ASKING (pleading, entreating, begging) for something. His position was that no one should have to beg or ask for anything that is theirs by right; doing so gives COMPLETE control of the contract to the "askee." Since he considered himself an honourable man who would never beg for anything (especially from an uncaring government holding his property in "trust"), he could not bring himself to beg on his own behalf, and was quite disappointed that nobody in his family bothered to beg for him, as he would happily do (as he TRIED) to do for them. As I said before, he was a very intelligent man who knew all this stuff, and could probably claim whatever he needed or wanted from government, but it was his position that getting your human rights shouldn't be a matter of an "IQ test" in law. How many people would even know where to begin? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sat 11/16/13 05:43 PM
|
|
Okay, so he conducts this "social experiment" and you lost track of him. What is his ultimate purpose in conducting this social experiment? Is he attempting to start a new gifting society, or is he going to write a book about it, or is his research simply for his own benefit?
Yes, filling out an "application" is basically asking, but it is not really "begging" as one thinks of begging in today's standards. It is part of how our current society works, like it or not. So he chooses to drop out of society because he doesn't like it. What would happen if everyone did this I wonder? If he fails to survive, and people don't give him what he needs without him asking for it and he dies, then what has he accomplished? If he succeeds, and continues to live well or he starts a new society or movement what then? Will it last? Will it thrive? (I doubt it) What kind of society will it be? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After he got laid off, he wouldn't beg for unemployment, pension, or welfare. He tried to beg for his family's sake, but was told if they needed money they would have to "apply" themselves. Consequently, it was costing his family money to pay for the food he ate, so they kicked him out of the house he originally bought for them (He had long ago transferred title to his wife).
This story sounds like it has another side to it. I would wonder if his family really did "kick him out" so they would not have to feed him. If he got laid off and had a family, he should have gotten unemployment for their sake. That is what it is for. One does not "beg" for unemployment. You just sign up for it. Of course Canada might be different from U.S. If Welfare told him that his family would have to apply themselves, then why didn't they apply? They are a family and normally a family applies TOGETHER. Perhaps he was not legally married to them... Anyway, its a sad story, but it just does not sound right. Oh well. He was lawfully married and still is. His family couldn't apply for welfare because they made too much money to qualify. In technical terms, his wife (according to the wedding vows) was REQUIRED to support him (in sickness & in health, etc.) but she didn't like him any more, wanted a divorce and wanted him out, so rather than fight his own family over the issue (they were all starting to hate him for not "pulling up his own socks" and getting a job. (he was still trying to at the time, but not having much luck) Of course, after he left, he determined to not bother looking for a paying job and to conduct his "social experiment." In Canada, there are NO claim forms for people, only for corporations that employ people. A human being has to fill in an application form. An application form is an ASKING (pleading, entreating, begging) for something. His position was that no one should have to beg or ask for anything that is theirs by right; doing so gives COMPLETE control of the contract to the "askee." Since he considered himself an honourable man who would never beg for anything (especially from an uncaring government holding his property in "trust"), he could not bring himself to beg on his own behalf, and was quite disappointed that nobody in his family bothered to beg for him, as he would happily do (as he TRIED) to do for them. As I said before, he was a very intelligent man who knew all this stuff, and could probably claim whatever he needed or wanted from government, but it was his position that getting your human rights shouldn't be a matter of an "IQ test" in law. How many people would even know where to begin? Since you don't seem to have any reservations about sharing the details of this man's life, care to share with us exactly how (and how much) you "helped him out" ...I'm curious... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
JustDukkyMkII
on
Sat 11/16/13 08:04 PM
|
|
After he got laid off, he wouldn't beg for unemployment, pension, or welfare. He tried to beg for his family's sake, but was told if they needed money they would have to "apply" themselves. Consequently, it was costing his family money to pay for the food he ate, so they kicked him out of the house he originally bought for them (He had long ago transferred title to his wife).
This story sounds like it has another side to it. I would wonder if his family really did "kick him out" so they would not have to feed him. If he got laid off and had a family, he should have gotten unemployment for their sake. That is what it is for. One does not "beg" for unemployment. You just sign up for it. Of course Canada might be different from U.S. If Welfare told him that his family would have to apply themselves, then why didn't they apply? They are a family and normally a family applies TOGETHER. Perhaps he was not legally married to them... Anyway, its a sad story, but it just does not sound right. Oh well. He was lawfully married and still is. His family couldn't apply for welfare because they made too much money to qualify. In technical terms, his wife (according to the wedding vows) was REQUIRED to support him (in sickness & in health, etc.) but she didn't like him any more, wanted a divorce and wanted him out, so rather than fight his own family over the issue (they were all starting to hate him for not "pulling up his own socks" and getting a job. (he was still trying to at the time, but not having much luck) Of course, after he left, he determined to not bother looking for a paying job and to conduct his "social experiment." In Canada, there are NO claim forms for people, only for corporations that employ people. A human being has to fill in an application form. An application form is an ASKING (pleading, entreating, begging) for something. His position was that no one should have to beg or ask for anything that is theirs by right; doing so gives COMPLETE control of the contract to the "askee." Since he considered himself an honourable man who would never beg for anything (especially from an uncaring government holding his property in "trust"), he could not bring himself to beg on his own behalf, and was quite disappointed that nobody in his family bothered to beg for him, as he would happily do (as he TRIED) to do for them. As I said before, he was a very intelligent man who knew all this stuff, and could probably claim whatever he needed or wanted from government, but it was his position that getting your human rights shouldn't be a matter of an "IQ test" in law. How many people would even know where to begin? Since you don't seem to have any reservations about sharing the details of this man's life, care to share with us exactly how (and how much) you "helped him out" ...I'm curious... I used to give him some food and cigarettes, and ask him quaestions, simply because I was curious about how such an intelligent man had fallen to such an apparently low estate. He'd tell me all I needed to know about the "system" and how it works. He gave his knowledge freely and would have given it to anyone who asked. Apparently I was the only one who ever bothered to ask, and in the process of questioning him, I learned a great deal about the law and how the commercial system works. He reminded me of a professor I knew that I used to drink with many years ago at the university. Bertrand Russell had always been one of my idols and it turned out in the course of our beer-laden talks in the university pub, that when my prof was a young man, he stayed with Russell while studying in England. I never would have known this if the "scruffy" old prof and I hadn't gotten into a discussion about the book "Godel, Escher, and Bach" and started talking about Russell. I Idolized that very "oddball" old prof that the other students used to laugh at because of his unorthodox ways. I used to chortle to myself "If they only knew." They never did of course, because like this other guy, I seemed to be the only one that ever bothered to talk to him, or wanted to. I learned a world of knowledge from him, and I learned things about Russell that probably nobody else knows, to the extent that I felt like I'd known him (at least a little bit) myself. I used to see the old prof perched on a post in the parking lot reading a book, and knew he'd been there for hours doing that. One day I didn't see him anymore, and found out later that he fell over on his bicycle, bashed his head on a curb in the parking lot and died. To say I grieved his loss would be an understatement, but I felt honoured to have known him at all. I also felt sorry for everyone who didn't know him as I did. I feel the same for this other man, who taught me so much about the law. Once again, a wealth of knowledge coming from what appeared on the surface to be such an unlikely source. It only drives home the lesson that we should never judge a book by it's cover. |
|
|
|
|
