<p>I found the first post ridiculous on so many levels.
However, after reaching this point I’m feeling quite mollified. So Funky (and others who brought up pertinent points), you did a pretty good job explaining yourself 
Personally, I would say money is important. Like R (StanfordReality) brought up at some point in this thread, try saying Money isn’t important to anyone in this world. We live in a consumerist generation. Fact is, pretty much everything in this era is dominated by money. Perhaps some idealistic-lofty-philosopher part of you(and me) is offended right now, but you cannot deny that money does determine the quality of our material life, our opportunities, our social status and (sometimes, sadly) the amount of respect you garner. It might annoy you (or not!), but that is the way it is.
That said, do I value money as the most important thing in my life? No. Funky asked several times what any of us would consider more important. For me, it’s my relationships with certain people. There are some people in my life who are incredibly, amazingly, ridiculously important for various reasons, and I doubt there is anyone here who doesn’t have at least one person in their life who’s a rock to lean on. And I don’t necessarily mean your parents. Along with my relationships, I value my dignity, integrity, and opinions extremely high. Basically, I would definitely like to earn a comfortable income-comfortable enough to dine well, travel a bit, buy some good clothes and shoes. But would I trade an obscene amount of money for my relationships, self-respect, integrity, or all three? Hell no.
This might seem painfully obvious, but you did ask what we’d consider more important, so there you go ;)</p>
<p>I don’t think you should discredit passion so soon. I envy people who are incredibly passionate about one thing. When I’m with my Youth Group worker from church (she works with Third Culture Kids in loads of places) I don’t look at her and think “Damn, she probably doesn’t make an awful lot of money.” I usually think,“She is so damn happy!” It really shows. When you’re passionate about something, you really don’t care about money or cars or clothes. You’re just focused on that one thing, regardless of how much $ it gets you. If money’s your passion, then great, I’m not the one to judge. It’s kind of like your favorite activity you know? When I’m writing or reading, hours can pass by without me noticing. However, when I sit down to do Energetics in Chemistry 5 minutes seem like an age. It’s the same with passion-when people really really love what they’re doing, they do it wholeheartedly and everything else takes a backseat. I think this is why you don’t see many people pursuing unconventional passions-it takes a lot of drive and effort to really work at it against all odds, and that sheer amount of effort a person puts in only reinforces their love of the subject (not saying pursuing a more conventional course and being successful doesn’t require effort, but hopefully that was implicit). I think the key here is the satisfaction and happiness a person gets from their interests. For some, money provides that satisfaction. But for lots, it doesn’t. Which is why people still pursue side activities aside from their jobs that they really love, like gardening for my dad, or yoga for my mom, or reading/singing/violin/running/I-haven’t-really-figured-it-out-yet for me. Some are bold enough to pursue those side options as their careers or vocations. Some are content with doing it as a past time. Point is, you can’t say that people will always choose the money making option over the one they’re more passionate about. Hasty assumption. Imagine what a horribly homogeneous society we’d have if everyone wanted to be petrochemical engineers from HMC. Society depends and thrives on diversity, so people should be allowed and encouraged to pursue their wishes, regardless of the economic benefits. For some it may be the one with the higher salary. For others it may not. Regardless of that, no one should be chastised for their decision. </p>
<p>Another rant. I apologize. It doesn’t happen often, so count yourself lucky.</p>
<p>^ Well said arunemo.
Damn, some of you guys sound really smart with your posts …</p>
<p>Anyway, I do get nice lines for my essays while reading posts on CC, especially from the long ‘moral’ kind of posts. :)</p>
<p>
I think the mistake you’re making here is you’re equating certain things with money. I’m sure very few of us would do something stupid like trade our parents for money.
The millionaires of today aren’t solitary social outcasts. They have relationships with their fair share of people too. They experience emotion and they might fall sick and lie on their deathbed soon. EVERYONE goes through these things. I’m sure every one of the 6 billion people on the planet have special relationships, experience ‘love’ and sooner or later die. But with the money, everything else is taken care of. </p>
<p>
I agree; I know many people like this. My argument:
- Let’s be practical. She is a woman who probably has a husband to tend to her needs. Money is not a necessity to her.
- Some people can afford to follow their less-money-making passion. But it’s much harder for a man, who’s expected to run a family with that salary.
- For women who run their family doing what they love and for men who do with they love, regardless of the money involved, I admire you a lot. That takes courage. I admit, that’s not something I would be able to do.</p>
<p>^You did ask what I’d consider more important. I never said billionaires are lonely schmucks with no life. Of course they’re not, and that wasn’t implied anywhere in my post. If it sounded like that, then I’m sorry and I hope this clarifies. I did say that what I wrote may seem ‘painfully obvious’. About you saying no one will trade their parents for money-people like that do exist. Perhaps not so much with their parents, but with their friends and others, yes. I’m not accusing anyone here of doing so, but it does happen.</p>
<p>
Hasty assumption again. She’s not married. She’s in a relationship with another man who’s in the same organization. She supports herself and always has since she graduated. She’s not in very good terms with her family-with her mother, yes. But her father wasn’t the best man around.
Perhaps it’s how you worded your statement, and perhaps you didn’t imply this at all, but that sentence seemed very presumptuous to me. It’s like you’re saying since she’s a woman following something pretty unconventional, she must have a husband backing her up financially. Women are perfectly capable of supporting themselves and doing whatever they wish without a man’s help. I’m not accusing you of being a chauvinist, and possibly I misinterpreted your statement (in which case I apologize), but in the future try not to assume things like that. It makes you sound narrow minded and prejudiced, when I’m sure you’re nothing of the sort.
I admire people who have the guts to follow their passion so relentlessly. I highly doubt I could do something like that (although I am majoring in something that I’m highly passionate about, so it kind of works out for me) for the rest of my life.</p>
<p>Compscifan-I really hope you were joking about the essay bit, right?</p>
<p>Arunemo I’ll just sit here and watch. You’re able to express your views (which agree with what I believe in)in a much more diplomatic manner than I would (I would probably lose my temper in disgust). :)</p>
<p>I second the two people above me… If I say something, it won’t be so well-worded and eloquent… Thanks to arunemo, and I am in full support of this… I tried to say a somewhat similar thing… ( but ah! I flared up at the topic and vented…)</p>
<p>All hail thee!</p>
<p>Funky: I don’t know what to say anymore. You’re an absolute idiot. A man doesn’t need to “support” a woman. For you to suggest that a woman can take it easy and rest on the successes of her spouse is enormously disgusting. One of my best friends at LSE already has a number of BBs vying for her and she hasn’t even entered second year yet. She’s a girl and will most likely be very wealthy. It certainly doesn’t seem like she’ll be needing a guy to depend on. Another one of my friends is very involved with Amnesty and is studying Sociology at the same school. She will most likely not make as much, but will undoubtedly be completely independent and contribute much to the world through her efforts. Finally, another close friend of mine, a guy, is studying at HMC on full-aid. I can assure you that his decision to go to the school had nothing to do with his ‘responsibilities’ in providing for his future family. Avoid stereotyping gender roles in the future.</p>
<p>Also, a lot of people have a lot of money but they give it up to do something meaningful or utilize it to actually make a difference. For example, Benazir Bhutto was a billionaire who could’ve lived the rest of her life in luxury. But did she choose to? No, because she had certain social responsibilities to fulfill. Money is very important, but it’s not above one’s duty to mankind. If you want to earn money just for the sake of earning money, I am sorry but I pity you. Oh, and Bhutto didn’t need a man’s help or support to become Prime-Minister and money certainly couldn’t take care of her in her time of need.</p>
<p>I feel so sorry for the incoming freshmen at Cornell…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>^ lmaooo.</p>
<p>Haha, if you need help with your essays, feel free to PM me. :)</p>
<p>R, I applaud you. You’ve said so much that I wanted to say but didn’t for the sake of diplomacy. Tbh, I was outraged when I read Funky’s post. I wasn’t sure if he was that dogmatic or whether I was reading too much into it, since being a woman made me particularly sensitive to his remarks. I gave him the benefit of the doubt and for tact’s sake, decided to pare down my initial response.</p>
<p>Well, relationships, friendships, health, etc. and money are mutually exclusive. It is not an “either-or” situation. The stark reality is that money commands respect, love, affection and friendships. Why don’t we become friends with beggars? They must be great people at heart too, right? The answer is because they’re not of “our level”… If you get what I mean :S</p>
<p>Actually if you are REALLY passionate about something, be it culinary arts, queer studies or archaeology, you CAN excel at it and make TONS of money! Funky, you seem to be really passionate about wanting to be a cook. It may be risky but if you’re confident that you can do well at the profession you may very well become the next Hemant Oberoi or Sanjeev Kapoor and set up Michelin-starred restaurants! </p>
<p>You don’t get rich ONLY if you have an engineering degree or business degree.</p>
<p>Google “Vishal Gondal”. He’s a pretty big entrepreneur/angel investor and is the founder of India’s largest gaming company. He has dinner with the likes of Matt Groening and gives talks at places like Oxford and IIM. Well, he dropped out of an unknown college and calls himself a “T.Y.B.Com fail”. I happen to know him personally and am in complete awe of his passion for business/gaming. He may not be a Stanford graduate but he bloody well earns way more than 99 percentile of HYP graduates!
Passion truly can move mountains. You really don’t even need to go to college if you’re truly passionate about something. I could have given examples of El Jobso, Gates, etc. as well btw</p>
<p><em>Typed two more paragraphs, realizes that all the points have been made in posts, erases everything</em></p>
<p>StanfordReality, I might be needing your help too.
</p>
<p>Watch out for those PMs</p>
<p>Hehehe we all need his help I think.</p>
<p>Anyway, check this out: it substantiates SR’s point about Bhutto:</p>
<p>[The</a> Giving Pledge](<a href=“http://givingpledge.org/]The”>http://givingpledge.org/)</p>
<p>I’m sorry. That was a casual comment.
I guess I stereotyped. Money just seems to be less of a problem for women, that’s all.
I did not mean to bring up any chauvinistic remarks. I’m sure women can stand for themselves. I never doubted that. </p>
<p>We just happen to be living in a country where half a million people, mostly men, want to go to IIT, and usually for the sake of money. They don’t make many ground-breaking technological advancements there. So much for passion.</p>
<p>And Benazir Bhutto is one person. Rare exception. We mustn’t forget that her dad Zulfikar was also a Prime Minister, and we can’t argue with how much that helped her. And she remained quite rich throughout her life, not to mention the family fortune. </p>
<p>Also, speaking about Youth Groups. Youth Groups, and other groups dedicated to social work do have a primary source of funding - their donors. Which happen to be the big money-making businesses. These groups wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for them.</p>
<p>And I’m also presuming, from your arguments, that all of you would prefer working for a local NGO all your life than spend it in the lap of luxury, and donate 2% of your money and be called generous?
I’m sorry for being practical, but I wouldn’t.</p>
<p>Reverting to my initial point:
“Money isn’t everything. It’s just most everything.” --Nica Clark
“Lack of money is the root of all evil.” --George Bernard Shaw</p>
<p>
Screw diplomacy. That statement ****ed me off majorly. Are you honestly implying that most of us form relationships with people on the basis of money? I don’t know about you, but I certainly don’t. Money may go some way in catching everyone’s attention, but it’s not the only thing that makes people respect someone. There are plenty of people who have much more money than I do and whom I seriously don’t consider worthy of a second of my time. In other words, money may initially earn my respect, but you’re gonna have to do a hell of a lot more to sustain that respect.
Your comment on beggars not being on “our level” betrays an underlying sentiment-apathy. People don’t talk to beggars because of this false divide on the basis of money. I’m not against some people having more money than others-that’s a given. What I hate is when it creates a false sense of differentiation between those who do have some money and those who don’t, creating a sort of gap that makes beggars or whoever ‘different’. We’re all human beings all right? There are certain human emotions that transcend class, race, and sex. I’m not just saying this because it sounds lofty and idealistic-I’ve experienced it. When I went to Romania I ended up talking to this one girl who was around 10 and who lived in the village where we worked. We talked, laughed, played together and I had an incredible sense of connection with her. This, despite the fact that she lives in a one room brick house with 10 other siblings, that a fate similar to that of her sister (she’s a year younger than me and she’s married and pregnant) awaits her. We come from such wildly different backgrounds, and yet we could laugh together, communicate, and form a tentative friendship without even speaking the same language. I wasn’t the only one, everyone on that trip experienced that, and it was a very strange and surprising (yet pleasing) feeling. So yes, if we wanted to, we could bloody well talk to any beggar on the street, as long as we got rid of the stupid distinction between ‘us’ and ‘them’. That’s the sort of distinction that is the root of racism and segregation, and as long as people don’t get over that and realize that we’re all human beings at the end of the day, there’s no way we can work towards peace and ending war.
Someone once said that you can judge a man’s character not by how he treats his equals, but by how he treats his inferiors. That basically sums up my entire argument.</p>
<p>@arunemo:
The mere fact that you had to go to Romania to bond with people from a different financial strata of society is hilarious. We live in India.</p>
<p>I do not agree with aniruddh’s point, but I’m assuming you have tons of friends who are beggars, right?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know about the others but I’ve maintained throughout that I want to be as rich as possible. I am not embarrassed to say it either. However, money is not my ultimate goal. It’s just a way for me to contribute to society, do my part and enjoy my life as much as possible.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That was my point. She was insanely wealthy but chose to return to fight militancy and poverty in Pakistan. She lost her life while campaigning. Evidently, money wasn’t the most important thing for her.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, all those single mothers living from paycheque to paycheque just seem to be swimming in money don’t they? Oh wait, now are you going to say they’re struggling because they don’t have a man to support them? lol.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Those guys aren’t going to Cornell lol. Their thinking is more primitive (though not inferior) and their backgrounds more humble. You can’t expect them to understand that there’s more to life than simply owning a Mercedes when they have to deal with electricity shortages on a daily basis. I am sorry for holding you to a higher standard.</p>
<p>And in case you want to attack me again, I’ve taught many of these ‘beggars’ at a local NGO. It was a very gratifying feeling, yes. You could say I was friends with all of them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So people from IIT have to deal with electric shortages on a regular basis? Do you know how many IIT grrads end up at MIT? My dad is from IIT, and he happens to own a Merc. Feeling’s mutual. I thought you had some more class.</p>
<p>@ debarghya9: Sure, I’d love to help. PM me whenever you’d like.</p>