Pubbie v. left THUNDERDOME (apparently)

[EyeKhan]

Americans have bought into this Work for Money idea as the definition of success, by paying others to do all sorts of things we could do within our families....if we weren't all so damn busy working, to make money, to pay others to help us....

I have not said anything like the "Work For Money Defines Success." IMHO, people who work their ass off all their lives at a job they don't like so they can have lots of life's goodies, retire to Florida, and travel to Africa when they're 70 are NOT necessarily successful at life or in our society. I don't even know what success in life is, frankly. I don't really want to talk about that in this discussion either - though on the surface, that sounds like a great topic. I'm merely observing that money is at the center of more or less everything we do. Period. Good or bad. Conservative or liberal. Proud or modest. Evil or Angelic. Rich or Poor or Middle-Class, money is the center.

[GGT]

I have not said anything like the "Work For Money Defines Success."

No, but I did. What's this, I'm supposed to read your posts and figure out what you mean, but you don't return the favor?

IMHO, people who work their ass off all their lives at a job they don't like so they can have lots of life's goodies, retire to Florida, and travel to Africa when they're 70 are NOT necessarily successful at life or in our society. I don't even know what success in life is, frankly. I don't really want to talk about that in this discussion either - though on the surface, that sounds like a great topic. I'm merely observing that money is at the center of more or less everything we do. Period. Good or bad. Conservative or liberal. Proud or modest. Evil or Angelic. Rich or Poor or Middle-Class, money is the center.

And I'm disagreeing with you. Or at least challenging your premise. The center of more or less everything we do isn't based on money, but which interactive services we value (at least for Americans, traditionally). That's just the evolution of my personal opinion regarding success as independence, and valuing the nuclear unit over the extended unit....*at our own peril*.

[LittleFuzzy]

Money is a fantastic concept, there's no question about it. You describe it as a tool, but I think its more than that. Its really the essence of civilization. Almost nothing happens without money being involved in some way or some role. It motivates and enables. It shapes decisions and plans. Its really amazing when you sit down and think hard about it.

You're not looking under the hood. Interpersonal exchange is the essence of civilization. Money is purely a derivative concept.

[Nessus]

You're not looking under the hood. Interpersonal exchange is the essence of civilization. Money is purely a derivative concept.

I am really digging this post

[EyeKhan]

No, but I did. What's this, I'm supposed to read your posts and figure out what you mean, but you don't return the favor?

Ok, so you respond to a post of mine about money as the center of our culture by aruging that money is not the measure of success, as though that is what I said. Then I complain that isn't what I said, and ask why you are arguing with me about that. And then you complain that I'm not giving you the curtousy of figuring out that you have just begun an entirely different idea, even though you gave no indication that that is what you were up to?

And I'm disagreeing with you. Or at least challenging your premise. The center of more or less everything we do isn't based on money, but which interactive services we value (at least for Americans, traditionally). That's just the evolution of my personal opinion regarding success as independence, and valuing the nuclear unit over the extended unit....*at our own peril*.

Okayyyy.....

You're not looking under the hood. Interpersonal exchange is the essence of civilization. Money is purely a derivative concept.

Trade, essentially. Whether it involves or requires currency or not. That's the core of civilization and human culture? Interpersonal trade of just about anything some human decides they want is a fundamental characteristic of humanity. Hmmm.

I am really digging this post

Yeah. I'm thinking a lot about it too.

[LittleFuzzy]

Trade, essentially. Whether it involves or requires currency or not. That's the core of civilization and human culture? Interpersonal trade of just about anything some human decides they want is a fundamental characteristic of humanity. Hmmm.

Trade connotes physical goods. I prefer my phrasing. And I wouldn't necessarily say that it's the core, but it is certainly a cornerstone and so the perspective that life is centered around it or the ubiquitous tool we have developed for facilitating it should be accepted as valid.

[EyeKhan]

Trade connotes physical goods.

I didn't mean just goods, but trade of literally anything. If one human being finds something of value and wants it, trade is possible no matter if its just an idea - intellecual property - a service of any type, whatever....

I prefer my phrasing.

Of course you do.

And I wouldn't necessarily say that it's the core, but it is certainly a cornerstone and so the perspective that life is centered around it or the ubiquitous tool we have developed for facilitating it should be accepted as valid.

If you break it down, its really a fundamental of cooperative behavior - people sharing their skills, abilities, goods, ideas, etc with the expectation that they will get like behavior in return.

[GGT]

Money is a fantastic concept, there's no question about it. You describe it as a tool, but I think its more than that. Its really the essence of civilization. Almost nothing happens without money being involved in some way or some role. It motivates and enables. It shapes decisions and plans. Its really amazing when you sit down and think hard about it.

You're not looking under the hood. Interpersonal exchange is the essence of civilization. Money is purely a derivative concept.

Yeah. I'm thinking a lot about it too.

Trade, essentially. Whether it involves or requires currency or not. That's the core of civilization and human culture? Interpersonal trade of just about anything some human decides they want is a fundamental characteristic of humanity. Hmmm.

I didn't mean just goods, but trade of literally anything. If one human being finds something of value and wants it, trade is possible no matter if its just an idea - intellecual property - a service of any type, whatever.... Of course you do. If you break it down, its really a fundamental of cooperative behavior - people sharing their skills, abilities, goods, ideas, etc with the expectation that they will get like behavior in return.

What is the truth of our existence?, you asked. You're trying to boil life all down to its essence, the core of civilization and human culture, motivators or values or derivatives....

What happened to your "Life is all about breeding and pair-bonding" theory?

[EyeKhan]

What is the truth of our existence?, you asked. You're trying to boil life all down to its essence, the core of civilization and human culture, motivators or values or derivatives....

What happened to your "Life is all about breeding and pair-bonding" theory?

Life essentially has no purpose. Period. That's the real truth of our existance.

However, all living things strive to exist, to continue to exist by breeding, and that feels like a purpose or at least it is something for all living things to do. (On a side note, the germ cells in our body - our reproductive cells - are part of an unbroken continuous, immortal line from the beginning of life on Earth. When we breed, we take that unbroken line to the next generation.... ) Our genetics provide urges and needs that help make sure we feel purpose with breeding. Same with pair bonding, because for animals with our characteristics that's a pretty effective survival tactic. But all of this is genetics, part of our programming that we inherit from mom and dad.

As far as the truth of our existance question, I don't know. I have lately been tending to think its exactly what it appears to be.

Culture is different - its like an exterior behavioral genetics that we inherit via, essentially, language (written and spoken, of course). Money is part of culture not gentics (obviously) and its a powerful cultural meme that has enhanced our survival as a species by facilitating trade and cooperation. Culture evolves, is evolving incredibly fast today, and the money meme has grown in importance to the point that its at the heart of our culture. There is practically nothing about our lives that money doesn't act as a gate keeper, a moderator or at least a significant influence.

I think you mentioned child-care once or twice and how if your mom isn't working and you live nearby you can have her babysit instead of use a day care facility. Then you say money has no influence on that. But inevitably when you talk to someone who uses mom for daycare, they mention how much money they save because they're so lucky to have a mom nearby. Huh. Now, what factors allow or disallow mom to babysit? Well, she has to be retired - ie drawing a pension and/or social security as her source of money rather than working. She has to be close enough that the cost of commuting to her house isn't a huge wear and tear (money) or gas burden on the car. And what if you get an awesome job offer 500 miles away? You move even though mom can't afford to live in NYC because you make la lot more money and you can more easily pay for the day care. Maybe if you get a really good job you pay for a nanny and have 1:1 childcare which is better than daycare... But it all relates back to money one way or the other. In fact, if money were not a factor, you wouldn't be working anyway - you would stay home to raise the kids yourself.

At the heart of it, culture and genetics are two very similar different things - they both evolve, they both greatly affect our behavior, they both enhance the specie's survival, but they are not the same. Pair bonding and breeding came before marriage, God and dowry. Genetics tend to be very utilitarian whereas culture comes with a lot of subjective frills and baggage that may or may not be useful in some way. When I say money is the center of our culture, it conflicts in no way with the concept that pair-bonding and reproduction are the closest thing to a biological purpose humans can have. Again, money does not give purpose to life, but it acts as the center around which our lives - as organized, motivated, and limitied by our culture - revolve; like the sun and the planets.

[GGT]

Life essentially has no purpose. Period. That's the real truth of our existance.

No, that's what you've decided. If life has no purpose, then all we can do is survive and endure?

You've also decided that money is the root of all behavior and motivation, simply because we do need some money to survive. You've then turned instinctual survival drives for food, shelter, safety, sex, and procreation....into higher level genetics and cultural analysis....using money as the metric. That goes way beyond surviving or enduring.

There's an author whose book is about the "long goodbye", premising that much of what we DO in life is subliminal avoidance of Death. That even financial and monetary decisions are based on avoiding Death. We occupy ourselves with (as you said) making and managing money as a way to prolong, delay, or deny our inevitable Death. It just sounds more palatable if we say money buys us longer life.....

I think you mentioned child-care once or twice and how if your mom isn't working and you live nearby you can have her babysit instead of use a day care facility. Then you say money has no influence on that. But inevitably when you talk to someone who uses mom for daycare, they mention how much money they save because they're so lucky to have a mom nearby. Huh. Now, what factors allow or disallow mom to babysit? Well, she has to be retired - ie drawing a pension and/or social security as her source of money rather than working. She has to be close enough that the cost of commuting to her house isn't a huge wear and tear (money) or gas burden on the car. And what if you get an awesome job offer 500 miles away? You move even though mom can't afford to live in NYC because you make la lot more money and you can more easily pay for the day care. Maybe if you get a really good job you pay for a nanny and have 1:1 childcare which is better than daycare... But it all relates back to money one way or the other. In fact, if money were not a factor, you wouldn't be working anyway - you would stay home to raise the kids yourself.

You answered your own question in the last sentence. But you're conflating money with lifestyle. Our consumerist and individualist American culture hasn't valued family or extended family relationships for a few generations now. Instead, the value was placed on making money (as defined by best paying jobs) and what we could buy individually (expensive homes, cars, paying for nannies and lawn maintenance).