Theory re those who object to present buying

[pinetreedog]

I reckon th epeople who decide to reduce their Christmas spend, or who object most strongly to the commercialism or who scrap present-buying and give to charity instead, are people who have had pretty comfortable lives. In terms of money.

That's my theory today.

Is it now.

How frightfully, frightfully original a theory. Goshdarn.

what a load of bolleaux.

Sounds plausible to me.

Why so aggressive, folks?

Does it matter? Eh? Or is this part of the Oh All LiberalPinkoTypesDon'tKnowThey'reBorn view?

I think it is pretty nasty to suggest that people who are poor or who have been poor can't also be charitable or unselfish.
or that poor people can't object to commercialism
or try to reduce their spending.
or that poor people can't see beyond the obtaining of Things.
nasty and untrue

And as someone who now has a reasonably comfortable standard of living I resent the implication that my views are only the result of that reasonable comfort.

I think the major problem with theories based on sweeping generalisations, is that they are based on sweeping generalisations.

rather a sweeping generalisation, there HC??

Huge cliche alert.

My grandmother, who lived a life of grinding poverty, would (and did) give money to anyone she thought needed it.

And she was of the 'hasn't got two brass farthings to her name' variety of poor person.

People are people.
Some are nice.
Some are Nasty.
Most are middling.

So, what are your views, motherinferior?

Me? Yes, I'm giving (when I get round to it) a donation to the Disasters Emergency Committee instead of sending Christmas cards. This deftly gets me off the hook off Christmas cards with a benevolent aplomb .

sweeping generalisations eh?
dontcha just hoover them up
n
spit em out?

pinetree didn't say that poorer people don't give to charity - as we all know, proportionately, they give more than richer people. She said that richer people are more likely to substitute charitable donations for gift-giving. In my personal experience, this is true.

no she didn't say that rich people were "more likely to" anything
she said the people who give to charity and do all the things she talks about are peoplewho have had pretty comfortable lives.
no caveats
no "in most cases"
no "morelikely to be"
only people who have always been comfortable do these things.
a massive generalisation. and offensive
imo

She said 'people who...scrap present-buying and give to charity instead are people who have had pretty comfortable lives'.

(Am I missing something here? Has there been a contentious thread while I've been knee-deep in PTA grotto business?)

"I reckon th epeople who decide to ...are people who have had pretty comfortable lives. In terms of money."
yep. no qualification

pinetreedog - what motivated you to sharpen your own sword???

maybe my other comment was bit flippant probably

i really object to commercial manipulation aspects of christmas ...but am not poor nor rich..
try to give to help and give to charities i believe in when i can.. christmas or no
not charity per se
hate red nose et al stuff personally

i think there is some truth in this actually

i havent got any inclination guts to give my dad a goat for christmas when i know he will read n enjoy his book...

Must we qualify everything before we make a statement? I'm with wonky .. I've obviously missed something here. The bristling indignation seems entirely disproportionate to the OP.

A theory is open for discussion. There will always be those individuals who fall outside the sweeping broom of a generalisation, but why some people feel personally offended is always beyond me.

Actually Desi, I think 'Thou shalt hedge about thy pronouncements with more qualifications than an Emeritus Professor' is one of the MN Commandments.

but even that's no sanctuary, wonk!! Have thought lots of times previously to have something to cut n' paste, or have an emocion that says "please read my words rather than your fantasy of what I may have said.."..but then that sounds a tad like Wubya, innit.

wasn't talking about charitable giving. Was only talking about people who decide to cut back on Christmas. That's all.

Based only on personal experiences of people like my mum (who had life of poverty) who love to spend loads on prestns at Christmas and friends who are fairly well off who do most giving of charity presemts.

I am not being farkin offensive

Dead right you weren't, PD. I am still roffling at the notion that your OP was offensive.

We live below the national wage. I clean to earn a few extra bucks, and my ds can have whatever he wants at Christmas. The more presents the merrier, I say. Neither me or DH are in debt, so this helps, I guess. No credit cards, cash purchases only, etc.

I was brought up by a single mum who was also pretty much skint ... and we had shed loads of presents at Christmas, too. We didn't get much for the rest of the year, but that was what made it so magical.

So yes, if you have a five bed house, and you want to buy a donkey for the Sudan on behalf of your nephew, feel free.

The OP ain't wrong.