i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
Then you should be telling Him that there are poor, suffering, impoverished people on this planet of His, instead of trying to save the world yourself.
In my experience, Splash, God works through us, not instead of us. That way, we develop the necessary virtues, which He can reward.
I'm off now, for the night. Keep safe, everyone.
Best wishes, 2RM.
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
First provide some evidence that god exists then we can talk about his favouritism.
Cofty, there is no such objective evidence, and in my opinion, there never will be. God will not interfere with our freedom to believe, or disbelieve, as we prefer.
But really, we are straying a long way from the thread theme, which is 'Wealth, Poverty and Morality' and I do not propose beyond here to continue this tangent.
Best wishes, 2RM.
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
Then why did you start the thread...etc
Cofty, forgive me, but I thought this to be a religious forum. I therefore thought one of Jesus' parables an entirely appropriate way to introduce the thread.
Best wishes, 2RM.
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
Lol what a douce . Someone who works, plans and sacrifices to have the finical means to live a good life gets punished in the afterlife?
screw you and your “god”. And be advised your idea of “best wishes” are not welcomed by me.
Get used to the idea, _Morpheus, that all your wealth, however derived, is down to God's providence far more than it is due to your own virtue. And it is given to us to steward wisely on His behalf, not fritter on consumer indulgences.
Best wishes, whether you want them or not. 2RM.
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
No, I didn't say that, and I don't mean it. At the risk of oversimplifying, one can be good, and a believer. One can be evil, and a believer. One can be good, and not a believer. One can be evil, and not a believer. I am sure God will dispose appropriately of our souls, in whichever quadrant of the matrix they inhabit.
But this is really a topic that deserves a thread of its own.
Best wishes, 2RM
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
So SRM is holding up Jesus as the source of goodness - the same Jesus who, according to SRM, will torment those who remain unconvinced about his goodness in the fires of Hell for all eternity.
Cofty, do you really think the callous rich should get the best of this life, and the best of the next, too? I'm afraid goodness doesn't work like that. Justice will be done. So I believe.
Best wishes, 2RM.
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
the reason I charge (say) three times as much as the competition, is because ...
ALL your customers stopped listening right there.
Actually, my friend, in a previous life I had some considerable success selling Apple computers, which at the time were three times the price of cheap IBM compatible PCs. So, I am not entirely ignorant whereof I speak.
My business consultancy rates are $0.00 per hour.
As you said, 'if you pay peanuts, you will get monkeys'.
Why should I ask for money, which I cannot collect over this forum, when I do not need it, anyway?
Best wishes, 2RM.
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
So, dubstepped, I have just returned from the local hostelry, where I spent a pleasant hour over a pint of warm english real ale, ruminating on what I might do in your predicament. Before I say anything else at all, I must commend you for your enterprise, and hope that, whatever you do, it returns you a just reward.
The first thing I notice is that if you pay peanuts, you will get monkeys. Often these monkeys are not really monkeys at all, but just consider themselves exploited. And, working unsocial hours for minimal pay, who can really blame them?
The next thing I notice is that one either competes on price, or one competes on quality. If one competes on price, one needs a large volume of sales to earn a decent return. If one competes on quality, one needs fewer sales, but to offer a better service.
So, I would tend to put it my customers, current and prospective, that the reason I charge (say) three times as much as the competition, is because I pay my staff (say) twice as much. And they all own a share of the business. That way, I can say, I can be sure of recruiting and retaining the most diligent, the most loyal, the most committed people available, the consequence of which is that they get the most dependable, reliable, conscientious service.
To be sure, you might lose some customers, with this strategy. But those you keep will be on board for the best reasons, and less likely to cancel contracts when a (slightly) cheaper offering is made by the competition. All you need, to sell quality, is a good story to tell, and a persuasive salesman to tell it.
My business consultancy rates are $0.00 per hour. So you can ignore me, and it won't have cost you a dime. All I ask is, that if you do proceed along these kind of lines, and it works for you, you make a small donation to Oxfam, as you see fit.
Best wishes, 2RM.
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
Ah, the old lie that is Marxism...
Simon, I can't be bothered to address your post until you can be bothered to read the thread.
Best wishes, 2RM.
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
I think in some instances people make choices that keep them in poverty. For instance I had an employee who made about twice the minimum wage at the time. She would spend her money on alcohol and cigarettes instead of nutritious food for her two daughters. Her daughters nutritional needs came second to her wants of alcohol and tobacco. Giving someone more money doesn’t fix the irresponsibility of people, especially in the developed world.
Just fine, I think this is right. People need moral stature, spiritual development, a certain solid definition of character, to make accurate ethical decisions. And I am not at all sure that this maturity is best acquired in an indulgent, consumer culture.
Best wishes, 2RM.
