To think a lot of people don't really care about others?

[marymarkle]

By others I mean those outside their family and friends. I know there are exceptions. People who volunteer and go out of their way to do lovely things for others who need a helping hand.
But most people vote for the policies that benefit them and their family, don't care about things that harm the vulnerable if they are not part of that group, and won't go out of their way to help someone who is not a family member or friend.

Course there are people that don't care about others, but I can't stand the ones that PRETEND they do. Then quickly back off when they sense a problem is coming their way. Often these people I've noticed a pattern - never want other people round their houses.

YANBU. I think that the world is divided into two types of people - category 1: those who understand that they have to share the planet with other humans who have feelings and needs like they do, and category 2: those who don’t (or do, but believe their wants and needs take priority).

It’s not even about how you vote or charitable giving. I think the acid test is how you feel about playing music in public. Would you play music from your phone or a portable speaker on public transport or in a local park?

A. No, I like my music but others might not, so I use headphones.
B. Yes, I’ve got the right to listen to music anywhere I want, whether other people like it or not.

If you answered A, you’re category 1. If you answered B, you’re category 2.

DonCorleone I really don’t think paying for care for aging and ill parents is comparable to sending your kids to private school! One is very much a necessity, the other is not. What I said was that I don’t believe in elitism and buying privilege, not that I wouldn’t offer financial assistance to someone in a life or death situation! I wouldn’t buy into optional societal structures that promote social division. That is in no way comparable to financially helping someone in genuine need

@DonCorleoneTheThird
I wouldn’t buy into optional societal structures that promote social division.

You could argue this with much more than private school though, could you not? Living in a nice area, owning your own home, having two parents, having a spare bedroom in your house, having a yearly holiday, being able to send your children on school trips, all gives advantage to children which could be argued promotes social divisions.
I hope I'm not coming across as goody, but I'm genuinely interested as to how you justify (if you do), the above yet shun private school if you can afford it?
Personally I don't think one necessarily trumps the other and it's up to individuals how to spend their own money. But by saying well a house in a decent area is fine, but a better (in some circumstances) education is not, seems a little contradictory to me.

Sorry, my message should have been to @snoutandab0ut

Private school is literally about buying better opportunities. I’m not disputing the quality of the education may in some cases be very good, but it isn’t just about that - it’s the networks you can build there and the way that some schools hold such prestige you can use the name to fast-track into jobs etc. Having a spare bedroom or a yearly holiday is unlikely to give you that kind of leg-up in life. Having said that, I don’t own a house, have a spare bedroom or have a yearly holiday! I do go on holiday occasionally but I don’t regard it as a necessity, it’s very much a luxury and a treat. That said, as I have already stated, there is nothing in socialist thinking that says people aren’t allowed to treat themselves! It’s a false equivalence to compare luxuries like buying new clothes or going on holiday to a established, exclusionary structure like private schooling

Buddytheelf85

I actually completely agree with this. I find people who choose to negatively impact others in really basic ways really bother me. It upsets me so much when I see people on their phones whilst driving, or driving badly with no care for others safety. Noise is another big thing for me, there's no need to be a noisy neighbour (bar unavoidable noise) or not picking up litter and dog poo. It's this low level selfish antisocial behaviour that I can't begin to understand. But this has absolutely nothing to do with politics, my conservative MP is fantastic on local issues like this.

I agree also Raspberry88. Doing smallish things everyday to make the world a better place is the way to go. Reducing waste, limiting noise, picking up dog shit, these are all ways to limit the negetive impacts your actions and choices have on other people. I have had some really bad moments throughout my life, you know what helped me the most? It wasn't peope handing over wads of cash, it was the strangers who took time to thank me holding open a door (and thereby acknowledging my existence) , the random bloke asking me if needed hand when I dropped a basket of shopping on the floor. I think people do mainly care about others, but some people's expectations on how this should be presented are unrealistic.

I give to homeless charities. I do feel a bit sorry for some people who see themselves as caring empathetic though. Quite often they seem to get really mugged off by con people. You can see them walking into it and you can warn them, but they don't listen.

A bit of self preservation and healthy scepticism is not a bad thing.

I confess to not understanding some of the hysterical responses on here to something happening to a person, young or old, who the poster has never met, let alone known. I just don't get why they cry all day at something they hear on the news.

I understand feeling sorry if someone in the public eye has died but that doesn't result in me crying for hours. A lot of people seem rather self obsessed these days and it's ridiculous, it makes it all about them and their reaction rather than the person who died.

There's a difference between feeling well disposed towards people and actively helping them. You can't help everyone.

It does send a shiver through me when someone I know and like laughs at real footage of someone being hurt; I'm thinking, that's an actual person, how can you be so callous. If you ask they say, well I don't know them. But on the other hand I walked past a few homeless people in the cold last night and didn't give them any money. Everyone has their limits.

I haven't read the whole thread but in my own opinion : People are generally selfish. The ones that do a runner at the first sign of any real problems or trouble are the ones to avoid forever after.

Most are self absorbed and let you down.
Kind acts do help and remembering your part of a whole community does go a long way. I try to do random kind acts , give to charity etc but it's not much.
You live and learn in life: as someone else said I used to think people were generally good but you soon wise up!

Yes it's the little things that often really make a difference. Also agree with pp, everyone has their limit, especially if you're grappling with your own problems, you just sometimes have to switch off or haven't got the energy. I mean regarding things like bad news or beggars. Things like random stuff, opening doors, or quick chat, etc those things seem to be automatic, regardless of how you're feeling.

@raspberry88 and @dayman

That’s exactly it! I think arguing about things like charitable giving is totally misleading. Those are the behaviours people WANT you to see and judge them on. For example, Jimmy Saville was famed for his philanthropy. I think we can all agree he was a repugnant individual who didn’t give a shit about anyone else. Quite the contrary - he derived pleasure from harming others, frequently the most helpless. It’s an extreme example, but you get my point.

To me, the extent to which you care about others is in your day-to-day - or even hour-by-hour - behaviour and how it impacts on people you will probably never even meet. Are you conscious of the noise you make? Do you bin your litter? Do you pick up your dog’s shit? Do you try to recycle and reduce waste? Would you give up your seat for a pregnant woman on the train? Do you hold doors open for others? Do you try to drive safely and park considerately? Do you try to avoid driving where you can? Do you wipe the toilet seat at work if you accidentally sprinkle on it? If something’s on offer for free - like sweets or whatever - do you go in and take all you can carry, or do you leave some for other people?

Those are the behaviours people WANT you to see and judge them on

Exactly. I think that overt moral behaviour, or 'virtue signalling' is in many ways the new religion. Now that we live in a largely secular society those people who would have been front row at church in their Sunday finest have to find a new way to signal their worth. Charitable giving, posting on Facebook about refugees, chatting about Jeremy Corbyn at work... doesn't matter that they cut you up at a junction, or fail to stop at a crossing because they're 'good people.' (Not accusing anyone in this discussion of being like this of course)

Chatting about Jeremy Corbyn at work is virtue signalling???!

You live in a different world than I!

OP, what do you think people should actually do to meet your definition of “caring for others”?

Is it just NOT doing some of the things PP consider selfish?

Or much more than that? Volunteer? Do favours for acquaintances? Donate a certain proportion of their income?

I spent two years of my life volunteering overseas for a famous charity. A lot of the money went to the managers and higher up staff. They lived in luxury with staff and cars and chauffeurs and mansions, suffice to say we didn’t.

One of the managers was awarded an MBE for “a life given to charitable service”. For at least ten years they had say in a huge house near the beach with maid, cook, the works and hosted parties for visiting Brits. I lived in a hovel with a hole for a loo. I didn’t get a medal!

Buddytheelf what you are describing is just being ocnsiderate on a day-to-day basis.

That is pretty easy to do , at least for me.

What I do object to is higher taxes and abolishing privilege which money buys, where it benefits my dcs.

@marymarkle
OP, what do you think people should actually do to meet your definition of “caring for others”?

This would be quite an interesting question for you to answer OP. Where is the line drawn in your mind between caring for others and only caring about your family? For example, if someone raises money for a charity that has benefited a family member, is this selfish as the family member would benefit or caring because other people may or may not benefit as well. What about other charities that have not benefited from the fund raising? Is it better to raise a substantial amount for one charity or smaller amounts for several?
I'm not trying to put you on the spot here, merely point out that caring for others is vastly subjective and to dismiss people as selfish or uncaring because they do things differently to how you'd do something is not a particularly rounded way of looking at things.