Would you deem somebody who had no ambition...

[FSM_scot]

Blazing saddles. great film .

[Birdguy1979]

It all depends on what you call a loser. I have people down the road from me that are on welfare and on rental assistance. I believe they are called "section 8". I would believe that they have not had jobs in ten years, maybe not ever. It is clear that they have at least one kid. Who is the loser here? The ones that don't work and have everything taken care of for them? Not at all, because they have reproduced. I work my ass off at work and at home to pay for my own home and for a portion of theirs. I would say that clearly myself and others like me are the losers here.

[Logica Humano]

That's right, I derailed it with relevance.

[namiloveyou]

(05-01-2013 11:23 PM)Birdguy1979 Wrote:  It all depends on what you call a loser. I have people down the road from me that are on welfare and on rental assistance. I believe they are called "section 8". I would believe that they have not had jobs in ten years, maybe not ever. It is clear that they have at least one kid. Who is the loser here? The ones that don't work and have everything taken care of for them? Not at all, because they have reproduced. I work my ass off at work and at home to pay for my own home and for a portion of theirs. I would say that clearly myself and others like me are the losers here.

They are the losers, since they're parasitical. Healthy people are not as such.

[Bucky Ball]

Actually the question is non-sensical. It's incomplete. "Deem" is an intransitive verb. It certainly is improper English, or it's meaningless. The question apparently was "would you deem someone 'worthwhile' " or some such crap. The question is "deem them what ?" http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deem

[cheapthrillseaker]

[namiloveyou]

(05-01-2013 08:53 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  Is this thread a personal reflection? You don't contribute, so what use are you?

Or did you just a Google a list of controversial junk to post on random forums?

Controversy and "edgy" topics don't exist in modern society.

[namiloveyou]

(05-01-2013 09:05 PM)bemore Wrote:  As long as whatever they were doing was making them happy I see no reason to judge. If I did it would be a mixture of sterotypical and over generalisations.

You seem to question morals a lot Nam... in my eyes we are ultimately our own judge of what we do to the most intimate level, broken into and pressured by societys influence.

A PC answer, if there ever was one.

Who are you to say I cannot question morals?

[namiloveyou]

(05-01-2013 09:25 PM)kim Wrote:  

(28-12-2012 10:38 AM)namiloveyou Wrote:  loser?

what use are people who don't contribute?

No. Who says that someone with no ambition doesn't contribute? I have no ambition. My contribution is to tell you to piss off.



You can thank me some other time.

Why is it so "bad" to deem (yes, it means judge or evaluate) those without ambition as losers?

I have no time for PC rhetoric or value systems.

[namiloveyou]

(05-01-2013 08:39 PM)trikeramolubi Wrote:  There is no objective way to quantify someone's worth.

According to whom? You?