Give Me Your Money Scott Adams
First of all, apologies to Scott Adams. This is not, as it may seem, a gratuitous name grabbing attempt at attention. Instead it is the product of life bubbling’s, investigations, pain, joy and everything else that went into the tips of my fingers…right…now!
The point I’m going to make is that we’re constantly arguing about the wrong things. And, there’s a reason for this that is not fun to know about. But when you think about how we argue as humans, war, violence and punishment, I hope that on this holiday weekend (at least for a whole lot of people) this might shed some light in a place that has been long forgotten and yet is all powerful.
I think Scott Adams should give me his money. I need it. My life, it can be argued, would be better off…more money less problems is pretty true now a days, right? Well, and even if it wasn’t me who actually “needed” it, there’s plenty of room to make the case that Scott’s money should go to someone else who really needs it. Is there any doubt that there’s a child, right now, innocent and dying, that if Scott was to give them $1,000 or $10,000 it would save their life, now, today? This is the point…
Scott Adams give me your money!
Scott could probably save hundreds of babies with his money, right now. Today. Now just throw the others into the mix, Musk and Gates and Kim Dotcom and Mark Cuban…just imagine – we’re half way to saving every baby on the planet. Just give us your money.
After all – people are in danger. Babies are in danger. They’re in danger right now. Give us your money. It’s your duty to save them. Give us your money. It’s your social responsibility to save them, give us your money. You’re evil, Scott Adams, if you don’t think you should give us your money.
Have you even thought about this? Why don’t you do it? Do you have a good, logical reason not to save all those babies?
“I don’t want to” is the reason.
“I don’t want to save all those babies” is the reason.
And the only thing anyone should be arguing about this holiday season, if they’re going to argue, is…Is that ok?
And this is the only thing that anyone should be arguing about because this is what all the other arguments, one level up, two levels up, 100 levels up from the foundation of “I want” are about. Is it ok to “Want”. Is it ok to have a personal desire?.
DO NOT let yourself get sidetracked by the viciousness of the “only if it doesn’t hurt anyone” lameness. That’s lame and it says a lot about the process of the person using it. The debate can be had and needs to be had about it being not just ok but enough, that’s right, ENOUGH, to have a desire. It’s enough that you have a want and it’s enough that you don’t have to justify it and it should be enough that you don’t have to prove your worth as a human being for having the want that you have.
If this is not the case. If wanting something is not enough and we live in a civilization that supersedes an individuals want with another’s through force, well then…
Scott Adams Give Me Your Money.
PS – I love what Scott Adams does and I think, maybe, he’s appreciate this if he ever read it. And if it helps redirect the arguments, well then, that’s what I wanted.