The Recession Thread.

[pikey]

@Baldy wrote:

…an attitude of shocking self-centredness and self-entitlement that places import on technological trivialities over human relationships. This, in turn, diminishes our society.

@Baldy wrote:

…most of us wish to do some good.

Which is it to be? It seem difficult to have it both ways. I don’t think modern consumerist society is in any such malaise. This all just seems a flowery version of ‘The Youth of Today…’ or ‘When I Were a Lad…’. I think people, in general, are just the same mixture of ill-tempered, good natured, self centred, spiritual, cultural and charitable that they’ve always been. What era is being held up as greater than our current one in this respect?

And where is the evidence for this bizarre assertion about a new prefence for gadgets over people? Who here would honestly exchange their love or even their friendship for the lastest Nokia phone or LG telly? Surely yourself and Esmeralda are proof that the arts and the finer aspects of life are just as vital now as ever they were. How many charitable fun runners and baked bean sitters are there for every mugger? How many people express their spirituality through the New Age or revival Paganism.

That’s not to say everything is perfect, obviously, but there is nothing new under the sun. Go through old newspaper reports and the scum are still there; drunk sailors throwing crying babies into fires because they couldn’t keep them quiet, stabbings in pubs (ask Marlowe), neglected old folk and animals, football hooliganism, corrupt and venal politicians, war, famine, injustice – it’s all there.

Humanity has never been pretty to behold.

[sharongooner]

@pikey wrote:

@Baldy wrote:

…an attitude of shocking self-centredness and self-entitlement that places import on technological trivialities over human relationships. This, in turn, diminishes our society.

@Baldy wrote:

…most of us wish to do some good.

Which is it to be? It seem difficult to have it both ways. I don’t think modern consumerist society is in any such malaise. This all just seems a flowery version of ‘The Youth of Today…’ or ‘When I Were a Lad…’. I think people, in general, are just the same mixture of ill-tempered, good natured, self centred, spiritual, cultural and charitable that they’ve always been. What era is being held up as greater than our current one in this respect?

And where is the evidence for this bizarre assertion about a new prefence for gadgets over people? Who here would honestly exchange their love or even their friendship for the lastest Nokia phone or LG telly? Surely yourself and Esmeralda are proof that the arts and the finer aspects of life are just as vital now as ever they were. How many charitable fun runners and baked bean sitters are there for every mugger? How many people express their spirituality through the New Age or revival Paganism.

That’s not to say everything is perfect, obviously, but there is nothing new under the sun. Go through old newspaper reports and the scum are still there; drunk sailors throwing crying babies into fires because they couldn’t keep them quiet, stabbings in pubs (ask Marlowe), neglected old folk and animals, football hooliganism, corrupt and venal politicians, war, famine, injustice – it’s all there.

Humanity has never been pretty to behold.

=D> =D> =D>

same old stories, just differing eras of this old thing we call life dude

[stephen1]

@pikey wrote:

@Baldy wrote:

…an attitude of shocking self-centredness and self-entitlement that places import on technological trivialities over human relationships. This, in turn, diminishes our society.

@Baldy wrote:

…most of us wish to do some good.
Which is it to be? It seem difficult to have it both ways.

It is to be both ways. Human-kind lives with contradictions of all sorts, side by side. We can by turns hate someone, yet desperately desire them. We can be overbearing and rude to the people we work with, and then gentle with our family. The dichotomy of such action is everywhere.

I don’t think modern consumerist society is in any such malaise. This all just seems a flowery version of ‘The Youth of Today…’ or ‘When I Were a Lad…’. I think people, in general, are just the same mixture of ill-tempered, good natured, self centred, spiritual, cultural and charitable that they’ve always been. What era is being held up as greater than our current one in this respect?

The point you make about looking back upon former times and seeing them through rose-coloured glasses is a good one. But, I never said things were better before, I only stated what I see now. Yes, people are the same as they’ve always been, but technology is not. The technologies that have been created now, not only allow us to be more insular that we were before, but actually force us to be; at least in some measure. As to their being a consumerist malaise, I think I made it quite evident that the opposite is true. We buy for the sake of buying, because HD is the new thing, or suddenly we all need GPS to find our way around. Do keep up!

And where is the evidence for this bizarre assertion about a new prefence for gadgets over people? Who here would honestly exchange their love or even their friendship for the lastest Nokia phone or LG telly? Surely yourself and Esmeralda are proof that the arts and the finer aspects of life are just as vital now as ever they were. How many charitable fun runners and baked bean sitters are there for every mugger? How many people express their spirituality through the New Age or revival Paganism.

Are you looking for imperical evidence or studies? If it is studies, I’m afraid I can’t provide that. I have neither the inclination, nor time to spend on such an endeavour. However, I think if you look around you will see that children, in general, are more engaged with a screen of some sort, then they are with their parents. It is utterly common nowadays for there to be multiple computers in a home, and in an evening they are all being used, not a conversation in sight…at least none that are not of the cyber kind.:wink: Was there ever an era before where our children could let strangers into our homes in the wee hours of night, and all under the guise of a benign computer screen? I might ask you to show how many people are now expressing their spirituality through “New Age” or “Paganism.” I might even call such an assertion bizarre, but that would be churlish now, wouldn’t it?

Pikey, you are obviously an intelligent fellow, and you express yourself well. However, it also seems that you have a bee up your ass and you might do well to pull it out. I’m assuming by you calling me “Baldy” that you are referring to my character rather than my pate, as we have never laid eyes on one another. It seems bad manners to continue using it when my name is Stephen, but do as you will. It neither offends, nor bothers me, but it does make me think of you as an unworthy debating partner.

Stephen

[sharongooner]

God I never wanted to talk to my parents when I was a teen and the telly in the bedroom was a godsend when it finally arrived.

Isnt that teens allover? we all go through ageing, so I dont see the difference between a puter screen or a telly.

You is now sounding like Victor!

[rubyred]

@sharongooner wrote:

God I never wanted to talk to my parents when I was a teen and the telly in the bedroom was a godsend when it finally arrived.

Isnt that teens allover? we all go through ageing, so I dont see the difference between a puter screen or a telly.

You is now sounding like Victor!

TELLY int bedrooms ?? king ell ! sheest, my father had to get a telly to stop me looking in neighbours window back in 1965 ! and it wer black n white !

young uns dont know their born !!

[ForumHostPB]

@stephen1 wrote:

………..Pikey, you are obviously an intelligent fellow, and you express yourself well. However, it also seems that you have a bee up your ass and you might do well to pull it out. I’m assuming by you calling me “Baldy” that you are referring to my character rather than my pate, as we have never laid eyes on one another. It seems bad manners to continue using it when my name is Stephen, but do as you will. It neither offends, nor bothers me, but it does make me think of you as an unworthy debating partner.

Stephen

Stephen, may I offer you some unsolicited advice? Pikey’s ironic use of the nickname “Baldy” when quoting your posts, has more to to with what is known as “English humour” than with casting aspersions on either your character or your physical appearance.

However, I assume that you hail from the North American continent and as such may not fully appreciate his use of irony. If you feel at any time that a fuller explanation of this quintesentially English form of humour is required, please do not hesitate to ask.

[Sir Actor]

@forumhostpb wrote:

@stephen1 wrote:

………..Pikey, you are obviously an intelligent fellow, and you express yourself well. However, it also seems that you have a bee up your ass and you might do well to pull it out. I’m assuming by you calling me “Baldy” that you are referring to my character rather than my pate, as we have never laid eyes on one another. It seems bad manners to continue using it when my name is Stephen, but do as you will. It neither offends, nor bothers me, but it does make me think of you as an unworthy debating partner.

Stephen

Stephen, may I offer you some unsolicited advice? Pikey’s ironic use of the nickname “Baldy” when quoting your posts, has more to to with what is known as “English humour” than with casting aspersions on either your character or your physical appearance.

However, I assume that you hail from the North American continent and as such may not fully appreciate his use of irony. If you feel at any time that a fuller explanation of this quintesentially English form of humour is required, please do not hesitate to ask.

LOL Pikey vs Stephen.
The battle of the intellectual wannabes.
A sweaty, bruising, toe to toe punch up?
I doubt it. More like handbags at twenty paces.
But, just in case I’m wrong, I wonder which one of them is going to end up being the Amir Khan in this little ding dong?

[fastcars]

So Stephen is American is he. That would explain why he never uses few words when hundreds will do.

[Esmeralda]

No..Stephen is Canadian actually, and it’s called communication..intelligent, thoughtful communication, nothing you would know about fasty so don’t worry your pretty little head about it. Now off you go and dream up some more insults. :wink:

[Pete]

by the end of today the Halifax/Bank of Scotland may be no more

[Author]

Posts