LatinsforPaul
04-15-2011, 04:31 PM
Wow, this (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/04/14/966812/-Debt-is-Good) is unbelievable... :eek::eek::eek::eek:
Yes, debt is good. Feeling indebted is even better. 'Cause it means you've got something to be grateful for--somebody's done you a favor, perhaps without even knowing it, and, as a result, you're inclined to do a favor for someone else. Some people call that "paying it forward." But, regardless of what you call it, the impulse to reciprocate a benefit is what the social web is all about. It feels good. Trust me.
Of course, that doesn't answer the question why so many people are so down on debt they can hardly talk about anything else. I think it's because they feel debts are something that's imposed, not chosen, and so they resent them. That it may be a perception problem probably doesn't occur to them. Or maybe they feel tricked because they got a benefit and didn't anticipate someone would expect them to do some good deed in return. Maybe they just don't have the ability to anticipate or, at least, anticipate with any degree of accuracy. Maybe their expectations are of the 'tit for tit' variety, instead of 'tit for tat,' and it doesn't occur to them they're not expected to give back, but can give something else, or even to someone else.
That would explain a lot. If you think that you have to give back whatever you got, then it might not be worth getting anything at all. And you'd rather not be beholden; much less a burden. People who worry about debts a lot can frequently be heard to say they don't want to be a burden. Which is probably true. What's also probably true is that whether they want it or not, they are a burden to someone. And that's largely because such people are endemically incapable of recognizing an obligation, of realizing that they owe something and of making an effort to discharge that obligation. And that's sad.
Obligations are what we owe, either for benefits received or promised. It's a concept which, for some reason, seems foreign to conservatives, especially conservative politicians--aka public servants. That the Constitution imposes obligations and that we the people pay public servants to carry them out is apparently incomprehensible to some of the people now serving in Washington.
They not only deny that they owe the public service, but would perforce convince us that being in debt is a fate worse than death. Mainly, I think, that's because they don't want to pay up. And the reason they don't want to pay up is because they don't really know how. And the reason they don't know how is because they don't know what other people want. For that matter, conservatives don't even know what they want for themselves. Our conservative brethren only know what they don't want and, as Harry Reid so accurately observed, won't take yes for an answer.
The Party of No is aptly named. The frustration is palpable and sad.
My comment: http://www.dailykos.com/comments/966812/41197020
Yes, debt is good. Feeling indebted is even better. 'Cause it means you've got something to be grateful for--somebody's done you a favor, perhaps without even knowing it, and, as a result, you're inclined to do a favor for someone else. Some people call that "paying it forward." But, regardless of what you call it, the impulse to reciprocate a benefit is what the social web is all about. It feels good. Trust me.
Of course, that doesn't answer the question why so many people are so down on debt they can hardly talk about anything else. I think it's because they feel debts are something that's imposed, not chosen, and so they resent them. That it may be a perception problem probably doesn't occur to them. Or maybe they feel tricked because they got a benefit and didn't anticipate someone would expect them to do some good deed in return. Maybe they just don't have the ability to anticipate or, at least, anticipate with any degree of accuracy. Maybe their expectations are of the 'tit for tit' variety, instead of 'tit for tat,' and it doesn't occur to them they're not expected to give back, but can give something else, or even to someone else.
That would explain a lot. If you think that you have to give back whatever you got, then it might not be worth getting anything at all. And you'd rather not be beholden; much less a burden. People who worry about debts a lot can frequently be heard to say they don't want to be a burden. Which is probably true. What's also probably true is that whether they want it or not, they are a burden to someone. And that's largely because such people are endemically incapable of recognizing an obligation, of realizing that they owe something and of making an effort to discharge that obligation. And that's sad.
Obligations are what we owe, either for benefits received or promised. It's a concept which, for some reason, seems foreign to conservatives, especially conservative politicians--aka public servants. That the Constitution imposes obligations and that we the people pay public servants to carry them out is apparently incomprehensible to some of the people now serving in Washington.
They not only deny that they owe the public service, but would perforce convince us that being in debt is a fate worse than death. Mainly, I think, that's because they don't want to pay up. And the reason they don't want to pay up is because they don't really know how. And the reason they don't know how is because they don't know what other people want. For that matter, conservatives don't even know what they want for themselves. Our conservative brethren only know what they don't want and, as Harry Reid so accurately observed, won't take yes for an answer.
The Party of No is aptly named. The frustration is palpable and sad.
My comment: http://www.dailykos.com/comments/966812/41197020