A philosophical question for car enthusiasts

[bjk]

your last point seems to some up, and not to be derogatory to you, the sort of general populations view on it all. My time = my money = my choice on how it's spent. And not that this is 'incorrect', but in my own opinion, it is sad that as a culture we don't have more focus on our global obligations, to put it one way. As said, it takes very little of our expendable income to do a lot of good. And with people with almost ridiculous amounts of expendable income, it can do that much more.

Yea i probably shouldnt have this agenda and its probably even worse that i do but me right now changing my mind and donating the little i could afford to maybe sponsor one child overall is neglegent, if everybody or one person dictating this to us got a good chunk of the population involved then yea, id be more inclined knowing that something is gonna happen, some kind of difference is going to happen. But when you hear that charity companies and whatnot sometimes take money and people stealing/embezzlement etc is deterrs you a fair bit, and i guess knowing that its not going to be ' i donate a dollar, and thats what this kid is gonna get' not this kid is going to get 17c (or whatever the figure is i have no idea)
With the way the world is now though and the people in it this situation is never going to change. The only way i see it changing is over population and we then need there land to live so we then have to step in. Apart from that i will refer to a good ol' matrix reference "what do all men with power want? more power" (can also substitute money in there too lmao)

I don't think falling back on selfishness should prevent us from doing things though. Sorry to be picky again, but a lot of people already sponsor children, particularly through World Vision where you can be sure the money goes where you've been told it's going. So in that regards, a difference is already happening, but obviously there's still a long way to go.

[Astron_Boy]

Bit of a read, was sent this quite a while ago, not exactly in regards to this thread, but the end point is the same in my view.

And I don’t think there has ever been a better explanation of the importance of incentive than this example
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism".. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied 'hard' were upset and the students who studied 'little' were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied 'even less' and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied 'little'.

The second test average was a 'D'. No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that "socialism" would also ultimately 'fail' because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
Could not be any simpler than that.
Remember, there IS a test coming up. " elections sometime soon – perhaps the sooner the better"
Your chance to have YOUR say.
These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

In the end, what one person works for, they believe is their entitlement and no-one elses.
If one person works hard for many, then there is always someone else in there for a free ride.
If I don't look out for me, who else will.

These are the thoughts that drive the majority. For those in denial, there is Mastercard.

[bjk]

Won't quote the whole thing back to save space, but thanks for putting that up. Like you said, not entirely the same situation. I think there's a difference in the amount of awareness someone has about the help they receive vs. the effort they put in. I mean that particularly for overseas aid, because I don't think you can equate working and wages, to bare necessities.

As I said first time around, can't force anyone to do anything, it's very much an individual choice.

[bjk]

For example, to use that analogy, it would be like someone giving part of their A grade to someone who was incapable of anything above an F, so they became a B and the other person a D or whatever.

[Astron_Boy]

Correct.
My point though however was more to the fact that it's a mental thing.
If someone feels as though they are doing more a share of things than someone else, they will slack off.
If I think that Joe Rich's 100,000 donation is enough for the people who have no water, then I am less likely to donate if my persona enjoyment is less than I would like it to be.

It perhaps wasn't a well appropriate example, but to me rings more to truth of peoples mentality when faced with choices involving others.
Do I do this for me, or the greater good?
Do I hold out for more money for my benefit, or to benefit others to feel as good as me.. etc.

[Sahin]

We should all donate money to taz coz he's a poor c**t

[PHIL069]

Why do all the poor people always want the rich people to give away thier fortune to others?
If you suddenly became rich would you give it all away and stay poor?
It's easy to say you would but really would you?
I wouldn't, I have been poor for long enough! I would buy, buy, buy! Ferrari, motor yatch, giant house, heaps of big boys toys, travel.

[bjk]

Why do all the poor people always want the rich people to give away thier fortune to others?
If you suddenly became rich would you give it all away and stay poor?
It's easy to say you would but really would you?
I wouldn't, I have been poor for long enough! I would buy, buy, buy! Ferrari, motor yatch, giant house, heaps of big boys toys, travel.

It depends on what your definition of poor people is. That is, low income vs. overseas poverty. But in the giving away thing, I guess it's not so much that they give away EVERYTHING they earn, but their capacity to give away is much greater than the average person, and would really leave them not particularly worse off.

I've thought about it before (like lottery winning), and it would depend on how much I won. If it was anything like $1mil, I think I would be both practical and a bit selfish (buy an FTO, mod it a bit to how I'd like it; probably buy a nice stage keyboard (of the musical variety); pay off my university debt, probably help out my parents with their finances a bit, and a few people I know) then I'd bank that sh*t so it can earn interest. So instead of just throwing a lump some at charity I can do it over my lifetime (although it would depend on whether they could do similar).

If it was something preposterous like $60mil, the things I would get would be much the same I think, but I'd probably be more practical again and get a house.

[Daniel2019]

Why do all the poor people always want the rich people to give away thier fortune to others?
If you suddenly became rich would you give it all away and stay poor?
It's easy to say you would but really would you?
I wouldn't, I have been poor for long enough! I would buy, buy, buy! Ferrari, motor yatch, giant house, heaps of big boys toys, travel.

I donate things that I dont use like clothes etc. However things such as car parts, games, etc. makes me happy. Probably because it gives an immediate result with obvious feedback. THat probably makes me an asshole, but its true. Humans are selfish without realising it. For example when you go buy a shirt and find a $50 one, you dont go look for a $25 one then donate the leftover to charity, even though you could. Its indirect, most people dont mean to do it.

As above is also correct. The amount of donation, for example, possible is relevant. Theres no point me donating $10 to something, because thats all I can afford (literally) which may be for example 5% of my bank account, but there is a point to donating 5% of a multi-millionaires bank account. Its based heavily on situations. I work hard for the little money I earn, I cant afford to part with it usually, and when I do I buy almost trivial things like as mentioned, car parts, because it makes me happy and gives a sense of achievement.

*Bracing for incoming anger messages*

[bjk]

Why do all the poor people always want the rich people to give away thier fortune to others?
If you suddenly became rich would you give it all away and stay poor?
It's easy to say you would but really would you?
I wouldn't, I have been poor for long enough! I would buy, buy, buy! Ferrari, motor yatch, giant house, heaps of big boys toys, travel.

I donate things that I dont use like clothes etc. However things such as car parts, games, etc. makes me happy. Probably because it gives an immediate result with obvious feedback. THat probably makes me an asshole, but its true. Humans are selfish without realising it. For example when you go buy a shirt and find a $50 one, you dont go look for a $25 one then donate the leftover to charity, even though you could. Its indirect, most people dont mean to do it.

As above is also correct. The amount of donation, for example, possible is relevant. Theres no point me donating $10 to something, because thats all I can afford (literally) which may be for example 5% of my bank account, but there is a point to donating 5% of a multi-millionaires bank account. Its based heavily on situations. I work hard for the little money I earn, I cant afford to part with it usually, and when I do I buy almost trivial things like as mentioned, car parts, because it makes me happy and gives a sense of achievement.

*Bracing for incoming anger messages*

Don't think you'll cop much flak on this issue.

I'd tend to disagree with the 'no point in donating thing'. Sure, it's not achieving as much, but it's something, and every contribution counts. If everyone who was currently donating $10 decided it wasn't worth it, it would pile up pretty quick I think.

[Daniel2019]

Why do all the poor people always want the rich people to give away thier fortune to others?
If you suddenly became rich would you give it all away and stay poor?
It's easy to say you would but really would you?
I wouldn't, I have been poor for long enough! I would buy, buy, buy! Ferrari, motor yatch, giant house, heaps of big boys toys, travel.

I donate things that I dont use like clothes etc. However things such as car parts, games, etc. makes me happy. Probably because it gives an immediate result with obvious feedback. THat probably makes me an asshole, but its true. Humans are selfish without realising it. For example when you go buy a shirt and find a $50 one, you dont go look for a $25 one then donate the leftover to charity, even though you could. Its indirect, most people dont mean to do it.

As above is also correct. The amount of donation, for example, possible is relevant. Theres no point me donating $10 to something, because thats all I can afford (literally) which may be for example 5% of my bank account, but there is a point to donating 5% of a multi-millionaires bank account. Its based heavily on situations. I work hard for the little money I earn, I cant afford to part with it usually, and when I do I buy almost trivial things like as mentioned, car parts, because it makes me happy and gives a sense of achievement.

*Bracing for incoming anger messages*

Don't think you'll cop much flak on this issue.

I'd tend to disagree with the 'no point in donating thing'. Sure, it's not achieving as much, but it's something, and every contribution counts. If everyone who was currently donating $10 decided it wasn't worth it, it would pile up pretty quick I think.

Thats true. If everybody were paying, for example, $10 every so often to something, then sure I'd be in. I guess its one of those "nobody else does it so my contribution is futile" type things. I wouldnt have a problem contributing if everyone else did too, but one again, many people have the same view as me. And for lack of a better term, I guess its kinda like a paradoxical loop if that makes sense? Paradox isnt quite the word im looking for, but its close enough.

[Daniel2019]

We should all donate money to taz coz he's a poor c**t

Wouldnt that just be donating to you seeing as he owes you money?

NICE TRY SAHIN, BUT I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE

[bjk]

We should all donate money to taz coz he's a poor c**t

Wouldnt that just be donating to you seeing as he owes you money?

NICE TRY SAHIN, BUT I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE

Good pick up sir. Although it would be better than donating it to him directly, because then Taz would still owe him just as much!

[PHIL069]

Lets start a save the FTO fund, then we could all have hot modified FTO's
We could take them to Africa and give starving children joy rides, it would take thier minds off of food for a while.
No offence intended

[bjk]

Lets start a save the FTO fund, then we could all have hot modified FTO's
We could take them to Africa and give starving children joy rides, it would take thier minds off of food for a while.
No offence intended

Only if you're volunteering to cover the costs of transporting them there and back.

[spetz]

Humans are very selfish and the ability to ignore what does not affect us directly is uncanny.
Think about it, most of us will feel worse about finding a scratch on our cars, than hearing about millions of children dying of hunger.

[Astron_Boy]

^

[Taz]

For the record, i don't owe him jack sh*t

[bjk]

Humans are very selfish and the ability to ignore what does not affect us directly is uncanny.
Think about it, most of us will feel worse about finding a scratch on our cars, than hearing about millions of children dying of hunger.

Sadly true. I remember finding one I had no idea how it got there. Fairly minuscule things that we make such big deals out of. It's unfortunate that guilt tripping and shock tactics like those on facebook seem to do more harm than good.

Although maybe people need to feel sick and unsettled before they do anything about it?

[Nacho]

For those interested, a question.

Although this is not specific to cars but much of "Western" culture, as this is relevant to the forum and to myself, I'll keep it on that theme.

Essentially, can you justify modifying your vehicle, visually or mechanically, beyond its requirements to function, especially as these can cost many thousands of dollars, in light of issues like global poverty? I realise it's a bit of a cliche, but although I cannot control how others spend their money, or indeed even tell them how they should, because I can make my own decisions, I don't think it would be morally defensible for me personally.

TL;DR, starving children in Africa, why spend money on cars?

Very interesting topic......but you need to dig deeper. It sounds like a great topic to write a thesis on. But the questions I asked myself when I came to this realization was:

a) Is it my goal in life to help those who are in need?

If you can truly answer yes to this question then really you would already be prepared to give your life to someone else because that's your goal and purpose. There is a significant difference in donating a few hundred dollars compared to being out there digging out a well to estalish a solid water supply.....there's a lot more sacrifice.

So going back to digging deeper.......I suggest conducting a deeper study on human behaviour at its primitive level. I wrote a thesis on a completely different topic but the experiment is essentially the same and almost impossible to test. It involves isolating the subjects (from birth) to any moral, emotional and cultural influences so you can test at a primitive (survival) state.

Picture you have two people who have no knowledge or influences of morality, capitalism, communism, jealousy, social status. If one were starving and other had food.......would it share it's food with the other?

This is very hard to apply this to today's standards but if you could understand a human at its core then it may help understand how we think.

And no.....this is not a rant.....just another point of view.

Feedback?