Wednesday, 27 January 2010

Why are we hooked on getting out of a recession

What we all need is to stop growing and adjust to a recession which could be a good thing for all of us.

A lack of growth, an acceptance of a "lower standard of living", fewer "things" - cars, larger houses, gadgets is a good thing for most of us.

Materialism has widened the gap between people. People - good friends - have become less important than "things".

Don't we need a new direction - "backwards" ?

The world's resources cannot sustain "growth" - we're already consuming too much.

Isn't it more important to be thinking of completely new concepts of satisfying some of our basic needs?

Aren't these :

Having a safe roof over your head - preferably your own?

Having satisfying work that brings us into contact with other people in a stress free environment?

"Doing" less, "working" less, with more time for reflection?

Living contented lives?

Not being hung up with "fairness"?

Not feeling an overriding need for something: drink, clothes, sex, money, drugs, "friends" ?

Any others!

We all need to think in a completely different way.

I don't believe you can legislate this - which is top down thinking.

What we really appreciate is bottom up thinking:

Start with ourselves : think what we really want.

Plan out with those immediately around us how to achieve this.

Then encourage others in our locality to adopt this new way of thinking.

.

18 comments:

Gladys Hobson said...

I agree with most of what you say, but maybe it is easier for most oldies to say it. For many people do not have a safe home. Some women and children are particularly at risk. Others, having been persuaded to buy homes, or who are unable to pay the rent might find themselves about to be evicted. Many young people have no jobs and are unlikely to get one for quite some time.
So too, a lot of people have no choice but to continue in stressful jobs.

Wealth beyond essential needs rarely brings happiness. Unfortunately, advertising, the media and the present celebrity cult, tell people otherwise. This attitude was strengthened when the Government brought about the lottery. The few winners gain but millions lose the money needed for daily living. These include the poorest within society. So you are right in many of the things you say. Good friends, simple good food, decent shelter, family values, are the things to treasure.

I, and others of my generation were fortunate to have been brought up in times of austerity, (As my RED BOXES book reveals) I feel sorry for those who were born in more (so called) prosperous times.

As you say, materialism divides people. But there is a need for everyone to have a chance to do honest work where skills and talents will be appreciated.

Schools should be teaching more hands-on crafts, and home/life skills. Obsession with academic tests and exams is not helpful for those not so inclined, nor is it helpful for life after school when the real education begins.

As you indicate, health and happiness comes from a contented spirit.

Geoff Dellow said...

I agree that safe homes and satisfying jobs are the true objectives we should be striving for.

Somehow we need to help each other to achieve these. Too often us oldies who have enjoyed the benefits of being at the right place at the right time need to rethink what we are doing and the direction we are going in.

Anyone with insights as to where this could be?

I just operate on intuition and try to develop relationships with as wide a range of people as I can. Bringing together as many different people as possible in satisfying interactions. Hence the pottery, gardening, Dogfest, Halloween and Christmas Eve.

Keep knocking at doors and now and again something will happen!

Jack Simpson said...

Can you justify/explain your position that "people are less important than things."? If not then it is so much more self-serving rhetoric, often found on this site!

Geoff Dellow said...

This sounds like a compliment!

Rhetoric: the art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, esp. the use of figures of speech and other compositional techniques.
• language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its audience, but is often regarded as lacking in sincerity or meaningful content. Example: all we have from the opposition is empty rhetoric.

The ideas expressed here attempt to express what I think. They are often deliberately provocative so that others may come up with alternative views.

Being presented with opposing views helps me redefine my own thinking.

It may be a mathematical approach : define the extreme cases, at zero and infinity, will help the understanding of what is in the middle.

Yes, I regularly come across people that I feel have been sidetracked away from enjoying life resulting from a preoccupation with "things".

When approaching a house, a lot of energy has been is put into the "extras" that aren't entirely needed: a high fence in immaculate condition, inside is a pristine driveway with a very tidy plain lawn fitted with sprinklers but few flowers. On the driveway is parked the latest model of a large 4 x 4, lights come on to illuminate you as you approach.

By contrast you approach a well built 100 year old terraced house, up some old tiled steps to a front door made to last and weathering. The door is answered and you're invited in which, considering you're a stranger is unusual. Inside there are untidy piles of newspapers, books, a bicycle, tools and 'stuff' running the length of the hallway well. You find that you were lucky to catch the family in as the are often out with many activities - darts and the local, walking the dog in the park, working with others on a project to raise money or provide entertainment of some kind.

Do you get the gist of what I'm trying to say.

Which are you?

.

Gladys Hobson said...

Now, Geoff, you are being judgmental.
We have several security lights. They illuminate the paths and stop me (and visitors to the house) falling over in the dark. We do have a Landrover parked but it is ancient and worth very little. Our own car is modest but needs to be efficient and labour free. It gets washed and cleaned only when it has its annual service. Our garden is too big to be pristine and we prefer informality, but we have a friend who will not grow flowers and keeps his large garden immaculate — he is in his eighties and has every right to spend his time as he likes. His large house is the same - no papers around and everything in its place. (Quite unlike our home) Even his garage and car (not new) are pristine.
We appreciate each other's friendship and accept our own way of doing things. Our friend's career depended on neatness and order - he and his wife (now dead) were alike in their way of doing things and their harmonious marriage (over 50 years) surely was a lighthouse to others?
Sure it is possible to be happy, helpful, friendly and so on, in a tip of a place. We may even feel more comfortable being with others in such a relaxed atmosphere, but we should not use these things as indications of the value people are to the society in which we live. We ALL have our own way of doing things, and some prefer to do them quietly and 'unseen',
Another matter. Some of us oldies are fortunate to have the health and strength to do whatever we decide to do. Few of my friends of many years, are able-bodied and quite a few are now dead. (Family members too.)
Do younger people welcome our views? Or do they regard our attempted involvement in social matters as interference? By just being who and what we are can influence others. Some might call it - letting your light shine.
It is good that you do so much for the community which is appreciated by many. What you do, is your
way of doing things — excellent too. You are an extrovert. Introverts contribute too, but in their own quiet way.
We may never know what influence we are within the workplace or a community. Sometimes we are surprised when hear of it. But making an effort to be what we are not does no good. At least, life has taught me that!

Jack S said...

Er No, I don't get your gist! I know of nobody who places things above people.

I really don't think a high fence or ownership of a 4x4 brands a person as careless about people.

You do seem to talk in riddles.

Geoff Dellow said...

Is talking in riddles a bad thing,Jack ?

It allows some leeway for others to interpret you. As I'm not sure what I mean a lot of the time and am feeling my way, then I'd have thought this is helpful to others who wish to express a view.

People also call me judgmental, prejudiced, opinionated, biased etc.

As I'm not wishing to carry people along with me but rather to provide them with something to disagree with (and sometimes agree with!), I'm content. It's good to hear people's views when they express them!

Geoff Dellow said...

As for Gladys, I'll deal with you later !

Gladys Hobson said...

Oh and I forgot to mention: the friend (wife now dead) who lives in an immaculate house with 'manicured' large garden, did a lot in their village. His wife organised a protest against the traffic thundering through the village, going as far as to stop the traffic. It was not long before their efforts were rewarded with a pedestrian crossing. Being a good organiser, she served on a committee to get other things done too.

But I strongly suspect that you are merely being outrageous to get a good response and discussion going! I will have to stop looking at your blog as I am easy bait!

A Farmer said...

If a lady of Gladys demeanour can see the error in your logic, why can you not accept that?

Gladys clearly makes her point in a non judgemental, non provocative manner typical of a lady of your generation. She shows depth of feeling and warmth of heart.

While she is obviously extremely intelligent, she does not flaunt her qualifications.

Gladys shows a real understanding of life and empathy with people.

You could learn much from her.

Get over yourself Geoff, get your head out of your a**, Gladys has just dealt with you!

Gladys Hobson said...

Thank you A Farmer for your generous remarks concerning myself. However, I can see Geoff grinning. He has done what he intended — provoke some kind of debate, and most generously provided me, and others, with a platform to express differing views!

Now I am grinning too. Leading a very quiet life these past few years (busy writing) he has brought me out of my shell to express my views. He's very good at doing this.
I know Geoff's life is (more or less) devoted to being an enabler. Okay, it seems he has an odd way of doing it. But, to, metaphorically speaking, stick his head up so often to receive rotten eggs and squashed tomatoes is surely to his credit.

Geoff says he is “often deliberately provocative so that others may come up with alternative views.
Being presented with opposing views helps me redefine my own thinking.”

That goes for all of us. To be sure of our own views and be able to express them does require honest debate.

At the moment I am wondering if A Farmer is really Dr Geoff Dellow in his true guise!

Geoff Dellow said...

Great stuff.

I'm busy digging, removing rubble and yanking out ivy and bramble roots.

Keen to get the concrete base cast for the proposed greenhouse. Nothing like getting the blood flowing to come up with some strong replies to this debate.

Sitting at a computer is left when I the need of a break.

Geoff Dellow said...

Gladys,

I would suggest that your example proves nothing.

We're talking generalisations, giving one or even two examples of an exception cuts no ice with me. I am not saying that everyone who fits the descriptions given fits the criteria of putting things before people.

I agree that the way we live , being true to ourselves is the most effective way of persuading but here we have people who hide behind anonymous and pseudonyms, they know very little about me and have never come to my house.

This blog must be regarded as a remote form of contact. It's aim is to halt people in their tracks and get them to think.

We live at a time when society in Britain has slowly started to fall apart. The vast differences in wealth just reported illustrated. I'm aware of being undeservedly well off compared with others, especially the young, (in fact in general the older generations have landed up with little to moan about by comparison and I believe we should to be made to shoulder far more responsibility for our societies future).

In Ulverston we are fortunate because of our size that people can be far more important than when living in a city. We, I believe, are at a very sensitive point when everything needs to be done to bring people together. Materialism - which is what I'm dealing with - needs to be recognised and people persuaded that it is divisive.

We face a time (possibly as much as ten years away in Ulverston) when one section of society will soon be mindlessly attacking another because of perceived injustices. This is far less likely to happen if these injustices are first voiced clearly and secondly addressed and tackled meaningfully.

Lets take the opportunity that we are so privileged to have because of the unique nature of Ulverston to stem the flood of discontent that is creeping up steadily on us.

Where better than dealing with the misery of the situation that people living South Ulverston find themselves.

What has happened in the last few months gives me little hope.

Will we going over the same old ground in five years time (or even less) when floods again hit these houses.

Whilst the rest of us living on higher ground have shown sympathy but has there been any concrete action that is set to resolve the problem?

As for A Farmer,

It must be very annoying that I don't concede defeat easily. The views I express are not new to me and based on a lot of experience - in this case visiting about 2,000 houses in Ulverston and talking to many of those living in them. Doing this, one comes away with broad generalisations of the way people live. (let's not confuse wealth with materialism)

As I don't believe in the absolute truth on any subject but merely hold to my own truth which is right for me - and possibly no one else. Please don't interpret my statements as thinking that others are wrong. We all come to an argument with different premises which lead to different conclusions.

Being consistent is far more important than being right. This come back to Gladys's point that they way we live is the ultimate statement and not what we trot out on a blog.

Gladys Hobson said...

You may have a passion for doing things in South Ulverston, but do those living there want folk like me pushing their nose in? Though exactly what an oldie like me and many others oldies — most trying to deal with various infirmities — can do, you don't say.
Of course we care. No doubt all those living in Ulverston care.
But the people there are not a sub-division of society who are incapable of doing things for themselves, and why treat them as such? If help is asked, then is the time to volunteer. Have they sought help from the general public?
If there is a petition to sign to get more help from the council or whatever, of course we would sign it.

'My example' — I assume you mean our neat and tidy friends being community minded — is only one of many I could cite. But South Ulverston folk are no different to elsewhere when it comes to a choice of keeping a home tidy or just the opposite. Leaving everything to others or making an effort to get things done themselves. There will always be people who will do nothing but moan. But there are plenty who make the most of what they have.

Sitting chatting in a pub is great for some, others prefer a cuppa in a cafe — whether posh, transport or in-between. But you know, birds of a feather flock together.
As you must be aware, some elderly people pay twice the average in rates, although their incomes may be far less than average. Those rates go to pay for services all over the district, although the services they enjoy may be small in comparison. But this is accepted as it should be.

You do your political engineering if you must, this is my last comment.

Geoff Dellow said...

I suggest we ask the questions:

Do we accept generalisations?

Do we accept materialism as a concept?

Geoff Dellow said...

Thanks Gladys for your regular contributions.

Your comments certainly require a response.

I was surprised at your reaction. South Ulverston people can certainly speak up for themselves. They did at the Flood Summit and came away totally dissatisfied.

They came to the town for answers and we - our Town Council - provided no answers that made sense.

This is a two way process. I see myself as responsible for what my Town Council does. If I disapprove or think they could do more, it is my responsibility to speak up - or go and live elsewhere.

South Ulverston was quoted as a recent example of how one section of our society doesn't face up to the needs of another.

Another glaring example is the lack of Affordable Housing in Ulverston. This is true of the houses that are up for sale but even more so of the lack of good quality rented accommodation. Again the councillors have let the town down by ignoring the issue.

Another example would be the lack of job opportunities for the young - a topic that adds to the housing situation that knocks the stuffing out of one section of our society.

Then there is a refusal to take steps to stimulate and support our tourist industry. Grange and many other towns have quickly encouraged volunteer involvement in running the TICs. Broughton continues to thrive with voluntary support.

Then there is the lack of involvement in the badly run Neighbourhood Forums which fail to attract the involvement of the people in the town. Why? Because they've suffered in the past of from restricted and ineffective leadership. Portsmouth can demonstrate how this could
be done with considerable people participation in the running of the Forum. Let's how with new councillors in place , things will change.

As for the role of oldies in Ulverston, I'll deal with that in a separate posting. With the Furness U3A centred in our town; with its 280 membership; couldn't it be doing more than just entertaining its members.

Political engineering ? What's that all about?

Gladys Hobson said...

I meant my last comment on this post. I have already said enough.
Political engineering sounds about right for you:

One meaning of engineering:
to plan, manage, and put through by skilful acts.

I have no wish to be embroiled in politics. I leave that to those with the knowledge and skills to to do.

Geoff Dellow said...

I read:

"Man is by nature a political animal." Aristotle

Can we avoid it?

Isn't this the healthy option?