Living The Dream: What Do You Own – Really?

[Elder Iptuous]

So, there was an article i read recently regarding a study that indicated wealth doesn't translate into happiness if you buy things, but it does if you buy experiences.  So buying a giant TV will make you content for a short while, and then you take it for granted, returning to your overall happiness in life that you have maintained, but if you blow the cash on, say, base jumping down that giant hole in Mexico, or visiting some majestic ancient temple, or whatever, then your overall happiness actually increases for the duration...

So, owning memories is important.

wait. if were going to argue the finer points of 'ownership' then why not clear up the definition of 'you' first?  

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

In my experience, moving closer to the middle actually gives you less ability to control where you want to be one the spectrum. Most shitty jobs, in part because they're shitty, offer a lot of flexibility as to how much you work, especially if you're good at the job. And if a shitty job doesn't allow you the flexibility you need, it's usually not hard to move on to another shitty job (well, maybe not these days, but up until recently). More "respectable" jobs almost all require that you trade away a minimum of 40 hours a week, during specified times, and sometimes require you to make lifestyle adjustments (you need to follow the dress code, be able to pass the drug test, get a haircut, whatever) in return for the paycheck. When I drove a cab, I could work 2 or 3 days a week if I wanted, as long as I was willing to deal with the consequences (eating once a day, not being able to do anything that cost money, occasionally getting utilities shut off because I misjudged how much I'd make on the nights I worked), and there were a lot of times when I did just that to so I could work on personal projects. Now that I have a "real" job, I don't have that option. I'm expected to be here 40 hours a week even if I'd rather have the time to myself instead of the money.

It's not so much "get a better job, you bum." More "re-assess what constitutes 'necessity.'"

But that assessment only works if you have a certain amount of leeway to begin with.

If you are a young single person, it's not that hard to survive on a shitty part-time job. Add kids to the equation and see what happens. And don't give me some facile solution like "then don't have kids" because that's glib bullshit.

[The Rev]

Hey, stop knocking my extremely priviledged worldview!



Anyway, it's sounding like The Rev has the notion that the perfect state of being is a hedonistic, "do as you please" series of behaviors 100% of the time.  He neglects to notice that this state of being has never existed, at any point in time. 

Life is hard work, even for us rich white men. 

And, as an aside, I should point out that the most fun and joy I have is entirely free of monetary cost.  I have things, and they make me comfortable, but they don't make me happy.

No. No. No.

The point is that what many of the things we call choices are not choices, but driven by necessity. Within those necessities lie certain choices, but the choices are still being driven by some external force.

[Cramulus]

I am saying that you can find ways to experience happiness even if you're poor, even if you live in a shitty system.

Nowhere did I say that poor people choose to be poor.

I thought it was an interesting discussion, but you seem hell bent on making it into a personal issue.
*shrug*

[The Rev]

It sounds like you're saying that we have no choice about how we spend our time and are basically victims of our capitalist environment.

I think that we have to take responsibility for our own happiness DESPITE having to work shitty jobs and shitty hours.

I do not think happiness is a middle class privilege. I think it's something that we all have control over, even if we are poor.




"It ain't all about the dolla bill. You could be flat broke and be a scholar still." - MF DOOM

In perspective, if one is deciding whether to pay the light bill or the water bill, is most certainly is about the dollar bill. Whether one is deciding between paying the rent or buying groceries it is most certainly about the dollar bill. When one is deciding between buying medical services, including prescriptions, and any of the above it is most certainly about the dollar bill.

Isn't it?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

As far as "you have control over your own happiness", that is partially true. You usually have some control over your own happiness. However, there are ample studies on happiness and poverty, and the greatest detractor from happiness is survival stress. It is hard to be happy when you are stressed about whether you will be able to maintain your shelter and feed your kids. Very poor people are often happy, when they have a secure home and a steady source of food. Most urban poor don't have that.

[The Rev]

So, there was an article i read recently regarding a study that indicated wealth doesn't translate into happiness if you buy things, but it does if you buy experiences.  So buying a giant TV will make you content for a short while, and then you take it for granted, returning to your overall happiness in life that you have maintained, but if you blow the cash on, say, base jumping down that giant hole in Mexico, or visiting some majestic ancient temple, or whatever, then your overall happiness actually increases for the duration...

So, owning memories is important.

wait. if were going to argue the finer points of 'ownership' then why not clear up the definition of 'you' first?  

Money will not buy happiness is rather vague. If happiness is being able to do for your family, even in the most basic way, then the possibility certainly is there. By tasking this to the extremes of the base jumping example you are ignoring the majority of the population of the world.

If I can meet my monthly obligations and have food on the table I find myself very satisfied.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I am saying that you can find ways to experience happiness even if you're poor, even if you live in a shitty system.

Nowhere did I say that poor people choose to be poor.

I thought it was an interesting discussion, but you seem hell bent on making it into a personal issue.
*shrug*

It's not personal. I am arguing against what you are saying, not against your validity as a human being.

Your argument seems to be boiling down to "if you're not happy, you're not trying hard enough" and I think that's incredibly naive and oversimplistic.

[Doktor Howl]

I am saying that you can find ways to experience happiness even if you're poor, even if you live in a shitty system.

Nowhere did I say that poor people choose to be poor.

I thought it was an interesting discussion, but you seem hell bent on making it into a personal issue.
*shrug*

It's not personal. I am arguing against what you are saying, not against your validity as a human being.

Your argument seems to be boiling down to "if you're not happy, you're not trying hard enough" and I think that's incredibly naive and oversimplistic.

You can be free regardless of circumstances, but sometimes it is impossible to be happy.

[The Rev]

I am saying that you can find ways to experience happiness even if you're poor, even if you live in a shitty system.

Nowhere did I say that poor people choose to be poor.

I thought it was an interesting discussion, but you seem hell bent on making it into a personal issue.
*shrug*

It's not personal. I am arguing against what you are saying, not against your validity as a human being.

Your argument seems to be boiling down to "if you're not happy, you're not trying hard enough" and I think that's incredibly naive and oversimplistic.

You can be free regardless of circumstances, but sometimes it is impossible to be happy.

Right now I don't feel that I am free. I do however have plans, and the prospect of those plans is bringing me some happiness. Conversely the potential happiness comes from the prospect that my plans will bring me freedom.

I mean free with a minimum of comfort, not the living under a bridge kind.

[BabylonHoruv]

I guess in a lot of ways in the discussion we're having here it's worth rememberig that ownership is not physical or objective. I feel like I own more than many of you. I own my time; I rent t to the government for money and favors. I own my house (it's rented) so far as it represents my needs and I have possenrion of it by being in it. I own my thoughts; even if they're derivative of other things, a person with only sprout al thought is, you know, detached from reality, and I tend to know who I want to let in or not.

To own something, you decide to feel as though you own it.
Of course, this is not the case in the legal sense of the OP.

If you weren't renting your time in exchange for money and favors, how would you eat and retain possession of the house? To me, ownership of your house is physical, to a degree. While it will never be completely owned, just unencumbered by a mortgage possibly, fail to pay your annual rent to the government and see exactly what you own.

Renting your time for money and favors reeks of prostitution.  Don't misunderstand me, to have comforts it has to be done, but thinking you own your time sounds, to me, like denial of reality.

This whole thing seems completely fucking stupid. If I buy a phone and it spams me and breaks and cuts out and is generally a piece of shit, it is STILL MY PHONE.

If my time is used doing stuff that other people want me to do, even if my job sucks, I still own my time.

If I have to put my elbow on my nose to be able to use my phone to call my great aunt Amanda, the phone sucks. BUT IT IS STILL MY PHONE.

If I have to spend my time folding 100 fucking pizza boxes to get paid, well that's a lame way to spend my time. BUT it's a lame way to spend MY TIME.

I'm arguing against the habit of people volunteering away their SENSE OF OWNERSHIP by deciding that things that aren't working for them simply AREN'T THEIRS. Yes, you may have a MILLION shitty impositions on your time. BUT you have a million impositions on YOUR TIME, not on your bosses. Unless you want to give it up in your mind.

Talking about Mortgages; well that's where we're leaving the zone of perception reality and moving into the zone of legal realities, which I already pointed out I wasn't referring to.

If you can't sell your phone, that is when the question of whether or not it is really your phone becomes an issue.  Or if you can't share it, or take it apart and try to figure out how it works.

You certainly do not own any music that might happen to be on your phone, or on a CD in your home for that matter.  You also don't own the apps on the phone.

[Placid Dingo]

Hey, stop knocking my extremely priviledged worldview!



Anyway, it's sounding like The Rev has the notion that the perfect state of being is a hedonistic, "do as you please" series of behaviors 100% of the time.  He neglects to notice that this state of being has never existed, at any point in time. 

Life is hard work, even for us rich white men. 

And, as an aside, I should point out that the most fun and joy I have is entirely free of monetary cost.  I have things, and they make me comfortable, but they don't make me happy.

No. No. No.

The point is that what many of the things we call choices are not choices, but driven by necessity. Within those necessities lie certain choices, but the choices are still being driven by some external force.

So a choice is a choice, except when it's between a good option and a bad one?

And OHGODOHGOD any moment now somebody's going to say the words F--- W--- and then we're ALL fucked.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/13/news/economy/poverty_rate_income/index.htm

46.2 million people in the US live below the poverty line.

I want to know when the last time the people ITT talking about "assessment" and "choices" made less than 11k/yr with no one else providing support.

[The Rev]

Hey, stop knocking my extremely priviledged worldview!



Anyway, it's sounding like The Rev has the notion that the perfect state of being is a hedonistic, "do as you please" series of behaviors 100% of the time.  He neglects to notice that this state of being has never existed, at any point in time. 

Life is hard work, even for us rich white men. 

And, as an aside, I should point out that the most fun and joy I have is entirely free of monetary cost.  I have things, and they make me comfortable, but they don't make me happy.

No. No. No.

The point is that what many of the things we call choices are not choices, but driven by necessity. Within those necessities lie certain choices, but the choices are still being driven by some external force.

So a choice is a choice, except when it's between a good option and a bad one?

And OHGODOHGOD any moment now somebody's going to say the words F--- W--- and then we're ALL fucked.

Where did I say that?

Your last sentence adds what to the conversation?

[BabylonHoruv]

In my experience, moving closer to the middle actually gives you less ability to control where you want to be one the spectrum. Most shitty jobs, in part because they're shitty, offer a lot of flexibility as to how much you work, especially if you're good at the job. And if a shitty job doesn't allow you the flexibility you need, it's usually not hard to move on to another shitty job (well, maybe not these days, but up until recently). More "respectable" jobs almost all require that you trade away a minimum of 40 hours a week, during specified times, and sometimes require you to make lifestyle adjustments (you need to follow the dress code, be able to pass the drug test, get a haircut, whatever) in return for the paycheck. When I drove a cab, I could work 2 or 3 days a week if I wanted, as long as I was willing to deal with the consequences (eating once a day, not being able to do anything that cost money, occasionally getting utilities shut off because I misjudged how much I'd make on the nights I worked), and there were a lot of times when I did just that to so I could work on personal projects. Now that I have a "real" job, I don't have that option. I'm expected to be here 40 hours a week even if I'd rather have the time to myself instead of the money.

It's not so much "get a better job, you bum." More "re-assess what constitutes 'necessity.'"

But that assessment only works if you have a certain amount of leeway to begin with.

If you are a young single person, it's not that hard to survive on a shitty part-time job. Add kids to the equation and see what happens. And don't give me some facile solution like "then don't have kids" because that's glib bullshit.

Not so bad in the US currently, we still have a fairly robust welfare system.

I doubt that will continue much longer, but it is the case at the moment.