Entitlement

[MakiSupaStar]

So I'm walking into my local large corporate coffee establishment this morning and before I get to the door this old guy sticks his Styrofoam (obviously not from the local large corporate coffee establishment) cup out at me and tells me (not asks)

"See what you can do for me on the way out"

I just looked at him and said "sorry" and walked in

I'm not against helping people in need. I give a signifigant amount of cash each month to different charities and relief organizations, but this type of expected, entitlement begging really pisses me off.
As I got in my car, I saw a lady dump a bunch of change in his cup.
If people would stop giving, people would stop begging

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and agree with you. I wouldn't have given money to that guy either. However, I do give on occasion. Usually, when someone asks I ask them what they want it for. One dude wanted something to eat so I bought him a burrito. Another dude was honest, so I bought him a beer. You'd be surprised how ticked some of these guys get when you ask them what for? So those are the guys that don't get anything.

 

[Sundogue]

Giving should be a selfless act.



You contradict yourself.



If you are giving money to a drug addict you ARE directly contributing "enabling" as you say to their misery. You are correct in that it is their responsibility to make the necessary changes (stop using). I and others refuse to contribute to their slow demise.

Giving is a selfish act. You would think it should be selfless, but you would be wrong. Giving unto others is directly benefiting yourself, even if you are not aware of it. You are too concerned with things.

I don't believe in enabling. It's condescending to the human experience and undermines our existence. I also don't believe in victims, except that we are victims of our own choices.

Does that mean I don't have empathy for others? No, I do. But I choose to uplift rather than tear down. How someone else chooses to live their own life has no bearing on how I choose to live mine.

Someone is a drug addict and you give them money, hoping they will buy food with it, and instead they buy drugs. You are giving them money for food...that is your choice. They go and buy drugs with that money...that is their choice. You are not contributing to their choice, for that choice is ALL their own. Giving drug addicts money does not prevent them from buying food with it. It's their choice. You provide a means to eat, they choose not to. You are not contributing to anything other than giving them something. Whether they eat with it or not is not your choice to make, nor your problem. It is all theirs.

You give too little credit to our own power to control our own lives. And you also give too much credit to our ability to control others' lives.

 

[bkim]

Giving is a selfish act. You would think it should be selfless, but you would be wrong. Giving unto others is directly benefiting yourself, even if you are not aware of it. You are too concerned with things.

I don't believe in enabling. It's condescending to the human experience and undermines our existence. I also don't believe in victims, except that we are victims of our own choices.

Are you saying that 1.you don't believe that enabling exists or 2.I don't believe that I should enable someone.

I'm pretty sure you're down with #1. Most addicts won't change until they hit what they perceive as rock bottom or when they realize that the drugs will cause them to lose loved ones, etc.

Enabling or whatever you would call it keeps people from hitting that point.

If you are giving to get something back then that is selfish. I don't thik most people think of it that way though.

Its great to give, but maybe better to give to an organization that can help people with their core problems imho

 

[Indiana Mike]

Last time I gave money to a beggar it was because he was honest .

He said " can you spare some money for beer?"

Being a beer man myself I gave him $10.00

 

[Sundogue]

Are you saying that 1.you don't believe that enabling exists or 2.I don't believe that I should enable someone.

I'm pretty sure you're down with #1. Most addicts won't change until they hit what they perceive as rock bottom or when they realize that the drugs will cause them to lose loved ones, etc.

Enabling or whatever you would call it keeps people from hitting that point.

If you are giving to get something back then that is selfish. I don't thik most people think of it that way though.

Its great to give, but maybe better to give to an organization that can help people with their core problems imho

I don't believe enabling exists. It's an illusion we create because of the belief that we have control over other people's lives. Controlling our own lives is a full time, all engrossing task by itself. To think we have any control over others is an illusion, and so therefore enabling is as well.

I am giving to get something back, and I get it back immediately, right at the moment I give.

We are ALL connected to one another. Think of a drug addict or a homeless person as your left hand (if you are right handed). If your left hand was in pain, would you deny it comfort simply because you consider it a useless appendage? No, you would try to help lessen the pain, because though you may never use your left hand, it is a part of you and comforting it makes you as a whole, feel better.

And so it is with giving to the homeless, or drug addicts, etc. As you give unto them, you give unto yourself.

And just to clear up a misconception about my feelings on selfishness...

You assume that selfishness is the same as only caring about yourself.

To me, selfishness is caring about one's self, but you can be selfish AND care about others. Selflessness, is having no regard for one's self. Unless you are selfish, how can you be of any use to anyone else? Besides, we are all selfish. It is our nature to be, and impossible to function in any way without it. Selfishness is not a bad thing, in and of itself.

And those who don't know me, are not aware of the depths I have risen from. My wife and I both help people with all kinds of problems, from being homeless to drug and alcohol addictions, to low self esteem, depression, etc.

The first step in helping these people is to not deny them resources (and not make judgments as to how they use these resources). Secondly, we get them to take responsibility for their lives and get them to understand they can control their own lives (and in fact they always have, and are at this very moment). Their thoughts, choices and actions have led them to where they are. You cannot be a drug or alcohol addict without making the choice to use it, or abuse it. Once you become physically addicted, to claim you are powerless over it is negative and defeatist.

It is this negative thinking that has led our society to play the blame game and always believe everything negative is something or someone else's, fault. Funny how we are willing to take credit for the good and positive in our life, but we blame others for our problems. Take responsibility for ALL of it, and your life will be lived with purpose.

We don't believe that people are in the position they are in because of anything outside themselves. To believe that, is to predispose yourself to a negative, defeatist attitude. The "poor me" pity party. Get this...everything in YOUR life...it's ALL your fault. It's also to your credit. You choose how you want your life to be lived, and NO ONE can do this for you.

Your life is your life, but know that ALL the people of the world are a part of your life, just like your left hand is a part of your body. If you don't give to others, you are only taking away from yourself.

 

[Chriss62]

I absolutely refuse to give money to beggars. Wayne State in downtown Detroit is ruthless. I will not support whatever habit they're wasting their money on, cuz it sure ain't food or clothing. And one year, a guy proved one bum around campus to actually be employed, and just panhandled for change cuz it brought him in extra money. Funny thing is, the fake bum was really, really charismatic and always got passersby to give him change. It took the kid about 2 months worth of flyers and shouting contests with the fraud before we didn't see him again.

This is America dammit, and I don't see anything wrong with panhandling for extra scratch. People choose to give you money. That being said, did this bum make himself out to be homeless, or just in need?

*also holds out hand for change*

P.S.
I love saying,"This is America, dammit!"

 

[Jeremy Crockett]

Giving is a selfish act. You would think it should be selfless, but you would be wrong. Giving unto others is directly benefiting yourself, even if you are not aware of it. You are too concerned with things.

You cannot change the meaning of words to fit your own personal beliefs. Giving must be in-and-of-itself an unselfish act.
Otherwise it's an investment. Someone is "giving" in anticipation of a "return" real or imagined.

I don't believe in enabling. It's condescending to the human experience and undermines our existence. I also don't believe in victims, except that we are victims of our own choices.

Just be cause you don't believe in something does not mean it does not exist or is not a real condition. The pop-psychology term "enabling" is nothing more than that. There is a difference between directly contributing to something and the misnomer "enabling".

Someone is a drug addict and you give them money, hoping they will buy food with it, and instead they buy drugs. You are giving them money for food...that is your choice.

So being in denial is an excuse for contributing to the debauchery of another?

They go and buy drugs with that money...that is their choice. You are not contributing to their choice, for that choice is ALL their own. Giving drug addicts money does not prevent them from buying food with it. It's their choice. You provide a means to eat, they choose not to. You are not contributing to anything other than giving them something. Whether they eat with it or not is not your choice to make, nor your problem. It is all theirs.

No one is arguing the responsibility of the drunk in question. Your well-meaning action is trumped by your denial of the actual facts of the situation. You're more interested in your return on investment.

You give too little credit to our own power to control our own lives. And you also give too much credit to our ability to control others' lives.

No I don't. Re-read the post. I clearly stated that the druggie is responsible for his actions. I'm responsible enough not to contribute to his demise.

 

[Sundogue]

You cannot change the meaning of words to fit your own personal beliefs. Giving must be in-and-of-itself an unselfish act. Otherwise it's an investment. Someone is "giving" in anticipation of a "return" real or imagined.

Again, you are equating the act of giving with the object being given. You assume I am giving something that belongs to me, so that it no longer belongs to me, but to the person I give it to. I'm talking about the act of giving. You fail to understand where I am coming from. We are ALL one. If I give to you, I am giving to myself. We are ALL one. I cannot possibly give to you and not be giving to myself. It is impossible. Whatever I give, I have also received.

Just be cause you don't believe in something does not mean it does not exist or is not a real condition. The pop-psychology term "enabling" is nothing more than that. There is a difference between directly contributing to something and the misnomer "enabling".

You believe that if you give money to a drunk, you are enabling that person to buy a drink. I am suggesting to you that when you give that person money you are doing nothing more than enabling that person to make a choice. What they choose is not for you to say. Your judgment is irrelevant.

So being in denial is an excuse for contributing to the debauchery of another?

Again, you give me (and all people) too much credit for having some kind of control over other's lives. How can one possibly contribute to the "debauchery of another", if the "other" person chooses NOT to pursue that activity? Just like you cannot contribute to their recovery if they choose NOT to recover. It is their choice. No one can ever make anyone do anything they choose not to do, no matter how much coercion you apply. Depending on the level of coercion, they might eventually choose to do it, but it is not your coercion that makes them do it. It is still their choice to do it.

Your ideals are a part of the problem of the blame game. You even blame me for someone drinking/doing drugs simply because I gave them money. Very naive.

No one is arguing the responsibility of the drunk in question. Your well-meaning action is trumped by your denial of the actual facts of the situation. You're more interested in your return on investment.

As we all should be. My return on my investment is immediate, as I give to others I am giving to myself. We are ALL one. And what are the actual facts of the situation? Have you ever been homeless? Live in a cardboard box? Share your last scrap of food with ten other people who are starving? Give your only coat to someone who is feeling the effects of freezing more than you?

You have no idea what the actual facts are unless you have lived it. I am telling you, we are ALL one. Until you "believe" that, you are the one that will continue to live in denial and feel that your fellow man is somehow not worthy of your gifts, because they are not living life up to your standards.

No I don't. Re-read the post. I clearly stated that the druggie is responsible for his actions. I'm responsible enough not to contribute to his demise.

You either give or take. You either contribute to the world, or you detract from it. I could tell you many tales of addicts and homeless people who have died because of the choices they, and you (and ALL of us), have made. Something as simple as a quarter for a phone call to a loved one or someone who could help, that you might have denied someone, simply because you felt they were not worthy, nor capable of making their own choice.

But it is your choice, and you live with your choices. As we all do.

 

[ric1312]

The more you give, the more you get.

Don't confuse your intentions with those whom you give to.

We live in abundance of everything we could ever want or need (for everyone). As a society (heck, as humans) we are too competitive and the "I got mine, you get yours" mentality really does no one any good in the long run. Give, and it will be replaced by more of the same. Keep it to yourself, and you will lose it.

One can either add to the world, or subtract from it. By that, I don't mean resources or objects, but what we bring to this world that makes it a better place for having been here.

"What does it benefit a man to gain the whole world, yet lose his soul?"

Sorry, but this is a bunch of nonesense. Sure I believe in karma and if your a jerk that's what you are getting back. But when it comes to beggers, giving to them is just enableing them. Most beggers aren't so much homeless, down on their luck people. Most are actually drunks/drug addicts or people who are mentally off and refuse to get a job.

And there is nothing wrong with competition, it weeds out the week so that the strong prosper and produce more strong.

By giving to beggers you actually enable them and create more beggers. If no one gave to beggers and there were strictly enforced laws against it, they would be forced to get jobs or seek help for their problems.

 

[Sundogue]

Sorry, but this is a bunch of nonesense. Sure I believe in karma and if your a jerk that's what you are getting back. But when it comes to beggers, giving to them is just enableing them. Most beggers aren't so much homeless, down on their luck people. Most are actually drunks/drug addicts or people who are mentally off and refuse to get a job.

And there is nothing wrong with competition, it weeds out the week so that the strong prosper and produce more strong.

By giving to beggers you actually enable them and create more beggers. If no one gave to beggers and there were strictly enforced laws against it, they would be forced to get jobs or seek help for their problems.

You fail to see the bigger picture. We are ALL one. What we see in others is what we see in ourselves. Sometimes we don't like what we see. Myself included.

The difference between one who is homeless and one who has a home, or one who is addicted to drugs and one who is not, is not the home nor the drug, but awareness.

Competition is ultimately self defeating.

 

[Jeremy Crockett]

Again, you are equating the act of giving with the object being given. You assume I am giving something that belongs to me, so that it no longer belongs to me, but to the person I give it to.

The context here is giving money to the drug addicted homeless person. Thus, yes, I am equating the act of giving with the object being given because that's what we are talking about.

To repeat: you cannot re-define a word based on convenience.

I'm talking about the act of giving.

You can give two things resources or time. We are not discussing "giving your time" ie- counseling folks that are drunks or drug addicts.

You fail to understand where I am coming from.

I understand exactly where you are coming from. I'm questioning your motivations for "giving".

We are ALL one. If I give to you, I am giving to myself. We are ALL one. I cannot possibly give to you and not be giving to myself. It is impossible. Whatever I give, I have also received.

By that logic,"giving" means absolutely nothing. By that logic we would not even have the concept of giving.

You believe that if you give money to a drunk, you are enabling that person to buy a drink. I am suggesting to you that when you give that person money you are doing nothing more than enabling that person to make a choice.

Apart from the blatant contradiction of that statement; I thought you didn't believe in "enabling".

What they choose is not for you to say. Your judgment is irrelevant.

I never said it was. Why would you even say that? Where in my posts have I indicated that I had the power to influence their behavior. My judgment is relevant in that I have judged that the I won't directly contribute to their bad habits.

Again, you give me (and all people) too much credit for having some kind of control over other's lives.

Show me where I have done that. I have stated time and time again that it is the responsibility of the drunk not to purchase the booze. You keep accusing me of something I NEVER POSTED.

How can one possibly contribute to the "debauchery of another", if the "other" person chooses NOT to pursue that activity? Just like you cannot contribute to their recovery if they choose NOT to recover. It is their choice.

What? You keep agreeing with me and, yet, continue to try and prove me wrong.

Your ideals are a part of the problem of the blame game.

No, my ideals place the responsibility squarely on each person's shoulders.

You even blame me for someone drinking/doing drugs simply because I gave them money.

No, I accuse you of being in denial because you'd give money to someone, KNOWING they'll use it on drink/drugs but you HOPE they'll buy food. Well, I HOPE to win the lottery. The difference between us is reality.

 

[jm3sb0nd007]

that guy needs to get his life back together and focus on getting a job instead of begging. Even homeless guys that get money by going around with a grocery cart picking up cans to recycle are more admirable then him. At least they make an effort.

 

[Jeremy Crockett]

We are ALL one.

You keep saying that and yet have offered nothing to support it.

Have you ever been homeless? Live in a cardboard box? Share your last scrap of food with ten other people who are starving? Give your only coat to someone who is feeling the effects of freezing more than you?

According to you I don't need to because we are all one. Apparently I not only own Microsoft, I eat out of garbage cans as well.

You have no idea what the actual facts are unless you have lived it.

There is no air on the moon. Do I need to go there to "prove" that? Because that is what you are saying.

I am telling you, we are ALL one. Until you "believe" that, you are the one that will continue to live in denial and feel that your fellow man is somehow not worthy of your gifts, because they are not living life up to your standards.

How am I in denial when I know my actions will not directly contribute to the further suffering of another person? I'm not giving money to someone who is going to spend it on booze or drugs. That makes me what? Evil? You're not making any sense whatsoever.

I could tell you many tales of addicts and homeless people who have died because of the choices they have made.

That's where that needs to end. You keep saying that people are responsible for their own lives and yet suddenly want to foist their bad decisions on ME. Do you realize how schizophrenic that is?

Something as simple as a quarter for a phone call to a loved one or someone who could help, that you might have denied someone

Collect call maybe?

simply because you felt they were not worthy, nor capable of making their own choice.

I have been saying all along that they are not only capable but responsible for their choices. There was no mention of "worthiness". Quit putting words in my mouth.

 

[soulgeezer]

Apparently I not only own Microsoft, I eat out of garbage cans as well.

That right there is damn near sig worthy!

 

[bkim]

Once you become physically addicted, to claim you are powerless over it is negative and defeatist.

.

The most successful addiction treatment system in the world (AA- and the millions of people it has helped)would disagree with you.

Your thoughts seem to be a hybrid Christian/Buddhist/Hindu/Santa Fe New Age.

How did you arrive at your philosophy?

 

[ric1312]

You fail to see the bigger picture. We are ALL one. What we see in others is what we see in ourselves. Sometimes we don't like what we see. Myself included.

The difference between one who is homeless and one who has a home, or one who is addicted to drugs and one who is not, is not the home nor the drug, but awareness.

Competition is ultimately self defeating.

Get your head out of your phylisophical ass.

Cmon, time to live in the real world. We are not all one.

The difference between someone who is addicted to drugs and one who isn't is awareness?

What we see in others is what we see in ourselves?

If I ever heard anyone talk straight out of their ass, that was it right there.
It is you who fails to see the the bigger picture which is the plain truth and logic of the world.

 

[Alan Vorse]

I usually tell beggars I'm a musician so i don't have any money.

My fiancee worked at a Target in the heart of down-town Minneapolis. She said homeless people came in and did not buy food, but tried to buy cough syrup so they could get a buzz (the cashiers were instructed not to sell it to them if they smelled of alchahol).

 

[Sundogue]

Get your head out of your phylisophical ass.

Cmon, time to live in the real world. We are not all one.

The difference between someone who is addicted to drugs and one who isn't is awareness?

What we see in others is what we see in ourselves?

If I ever heard anyone talk straight out of their ass, that was it right there.
It is you who fails to see the the bigger picture which is the plain truth and logic of the world.

LOL. You are so right...what was I thinking?

 

[ric1312]

LOL. You are so right...what was I thinking?

Apparently not much.

 

[Sundogue]

Apparently not much.

You'd have to be living my life to understand.

Oh well, go with whatever works for you.

Cheers.