Who wants to be a millionaire?? I do I do!! Me too please... If you were what would you do with you money?? Kind of a boring question... But Regis has me thinking an aweful lot about it lately.. What would you do if you had that kind of cash?? I'm looking for totally selfish answers here... None of that give it all to charity crap...

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

Answers

The very first thing I would do is change my e-mail address, move, and get a new, unlisted phone number.

The problem the rich have is that it is a moral imperative (okay, that's subjective, but let's assume I'm correct) to assist the less fortunate and to attempt to raise the standard of living for society as a whole (such as Carnegie and Rockefeller did with their donations to the arts, and the Sun Microsystems donations for literacy, etc.).

On the other hand, one million dollars after taxes is only about $530, 000 (YMMV). And a half a mil, although a nice sum, really isn't enough to go around donating libraries and botanical gardens with all by itself. But does one have a moral imperative to take that money and invest it in ventures which would increase the size of that sum, therby making it (eventually) into a fortune worthy of a successful rich woman? Would this therby also obligate her to integrate that money back into society for something beyond society's economic good alone (i.e. "blowing it on stuff")? Or does one use that money to raise the bar for their fellow citizens, allowing better education, and a better standard of living for all? I say yes.

So I guess what I would do is invest the majority of the money in the market and perhaps a small business of my own, and grow the capital into something more substantial, from which both I and my fellow man might benefit. Thanks for asking.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

First things first: Liposuction on the ass (so I can fit nicely into the new clothes I'm going to buy).

Next, a bigger house in a nice climate, big enough that our 2 cats and dig can each have their own bedroom, stuffed full of their favorite napping, eating and playing items.

Then, I would make sure all of our friends and family got a nice chunk of cash so they can have fun and be debt free. Please don't tell my mom that the pets were taken care of before her. I don't need the guilt trip.

After that, I would just see where each day took me. I would set out each morning (with Charlie of course) and just randomly pick a place to go, whether we had to fly, drive, or go by boat. With a pocket full of cash, there's no way not to have fun travelling.

Oh, and we'd do the boring but practical thing, and invest enough money so we never end up like M C Hammer.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

I don't think I want any more of my posts to appear directly after Die Fledermaus. All of a sudden posting a frivolous (but true) answer makes me feel like a retard.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

Lisa E. - you shouldn't feel like a retard. It's our differences that make us wonderful, and Dennis-etc. really did ask for a frivolous response.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

who is this der fledermouse, and why don't I understand anything he says.

If I won a million bucks, I would buy a walk in beer cooler for my house. I think that is the ultimate in status.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

i would pay off all my bills.. buy a big ass car... and drive... and drive.... and drive... occasionally stopping to view the surrounding beauty.... and talk to nice people... the none oligarchic elite.. you know, the people who like people.. ..

walk in beer cooler.....cooool.... all canadians allready have one of those...we call it the back deck/patio.. it be cold up here... :)

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

First things first, pack the bags, we are going on a trip to Europe! (uhm, not so fast kiddos, you are staying with Nana and Papa).

New house...one with a view.

Clothes that fit.

Always wanted a Playstation...you know...for the kids.

I would go back to school...become a elementary school teacher.

I would buy a big-ass top of the line grill. (you did say be totally selfish, right?) I would also buy myself a new car....

MY GOD I AM BORING AND PREDICTABLE.

And my vocabulary is nowhere near that of Die Fledermaus.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

i would like to save the dolphins and promote world peace and end hunger.

wait-

i mean, i'd pay off debt, quit my job, and go to grad school, then move to europe. i'd take the husband along for the ride.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

Die Fledermaus

Die Fledermaus

Actually, I am a she, and Die Fledermaus is actually an Strauss opera, a Tick character, and an SCA group. I am affiliated with none of these, although I think the Tick (and his lovely moth, Arthur) are hilarious.

Thank you all for letting me join in.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

Die Fledermaus Tries Again!

pamie swoops in and edits Die Fledermaus! She closes tags! She fixes code! She's all over the place, yo!

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

center off

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

I knew I had heard the name before...I love The Tick! I try to catch it when I can, but I usually just end up seeing reruns of the El Seed episode. I often say, "Film...strip.......losing...consciousness..." whenever I'm bored, as a little tribute to the Tickster.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

Totally so! What a shame The Tick and Red Dwarf never caught on in my region of the planet.

Did you ever see the Tick where they introduced all of the secondary "good guys"? Where "The Maid" and Die Fledermaus were breaking up from a romantic relationship (on the roof of a building, in front of The Tick)? At one point (in the background, you can hear Die Fledermaus going, "Lalalalala...I'm not listening", as The Maid drones on and on about why he is an inadequate boyfriend. That was hilarious!

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

Pay off all my bills and adopt a half dozen unwanted girl children from China.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

Whew, Cathy, are you sure you could afford six? Check out these statistics on how much it will cost the average person/couple/village to raise a child.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

Interesting DF....now are those lies, damn lies or statistics? Regardless, if I round it off to 200K for 20 years, at 10K/year/child that would be affordable if I won a million dollars. Better here with me, comfortable although not rich, then in an orphanage right?

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

Don't'cha love Mark Twain?

I'm not getting your math. You say, "Regardless, if I round it off to 200K for 20 years, at 10K/year/child that would be affordable if I won a million dollars."

Okay, at 10k/year/child for 18 years is $1,080,000, right? You only have $530,000, because I'm assuming you live in North America and you lawfully pay taxes, right? With $530,000, you have $4907 to spend on each child each year from birth through age 18. That wouldn't even cover the child care expenses you would incur while at work to earn the balance of what it would cost to raise these kids.

Where does the $200k come in? I'll admit, I'm confused on that point.

As far as the orphanages go, you could have a point there...

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

The problem the rich have is that it is a moral imperative (okay, that's subjective, but let's assume I'm correct) to assist the less fortunate and to attempt to raise the standard of living for society as a whole

Less fortunate in what way? The lowest strata of the American population on welfare in all likelihood have a higher standard of living than French Sun King, Louis XIV, by virtue of indoor plumbing, and cable TV alone. I think if you exercise and bathe regularly, and can manage for the most part to lay off cigarretes, booze, red meat, and hydrogenated oils, your life is as good as its going to get. The less fortunate are only less fortunate in the sense that they have less than everyone else.

If I did stumble upon a huge fortune of $1,000,000, any moral imperative to raise the standard of of living for the bottom strata would be in the form of executing as many wealthy people as possible. They only know they are the bottom strata because of all of the rich people around.

If you buy into the bigger fish theory (that big fish grow disproportionately larger than its competing fish, because in being a bigger fish in the first place, it is a better competitor for food), any attempts to redistribute money will only send more money to the rich. (Which explains why, to paraphrase Confucius, the goody-goodies are the thieves of virtue.)

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

Well, Dennis never said you had to win the million dollars. The question was what would you do if you *were* a millionaire. And to be such, you'd have to have at least a million dollars.

Nitpicking done, I'd do the typical pay off of bills. I'd also make sure that my sister is set, pay off what I can of family members' bills, buy the home of my dreams, and get a dog or three. Not necessarily in that order.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

There are many more ways to be less fortunate than just economically, Mikeleung. I would consider it fortunate that I have seen the ocean. I consider it fortunate that I know how to read, and that I can attend college. I am more fortunate in one way (at least) than someone who has never been to the zoo, or someone who doesn't understand how not washing their hands after using the bathroom can spread germs.

This is what I mean by raising the bar. 500 years ago, most people were illiterate and unhygenic. This is unneccessary today. Travel, running water and knowledge are much easier to come by, due, in a large part, by people giving back to a community that allowed them to get ahead in the first place. Many generations of the most philanthropic raising the bar for the rest of society has resulted in the "rich" citizenry you see before you today. That is why I think it is a moral imperative to die penniless, amassing a huge fortune and then giving it all away to philanthropic pursuits as you age. In this way one contributes to raising the bar for all of society.

FWIW: if the "bottom strata" does not like where it is, it should go to college, vote, use birth control, and become part of a different strata.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

DF,

Rockefeller made his fortune through sleazy Microsoft-like business tactics that drove his competitors out fo business. People lost their jobs because of him. And J.K. Rowling did more for literacy, and had more fun, as a welfare mother writing the Harry Potter books, than SUN Microsystems will ever do. (I hope no one objects to an alternative interpretation of these events.)

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

OK...I took the 200K your stats said it would cost to raise a child for 18 years and rounded it up to 20 years because math never was my best subject...so that gives me a cost figure of 10K for each child for each year. Multiply that by 6 children and these girls are costing me 60K per year correct? Well I work, I am still going to work (I am self employed work essentially part time now [therefore time for these forums] and love my profession, I wouldn't retire if I won 100 million dollars), all my bills have been paid with the original million (even after taxes, but I think the Canuck lottery tax is significantly lower then what it is in the USA) and I can easily afford to spend 60K (which I think is an inflated figure to raise 6 children...I know quite a few families with 4-6 children and they spend no where near 10K annually on each child...some of them don't make that much per annum!) of my income on my kids. Was that a clearer explanation?

NB. I just noticed the totally selfish part of the question so... I would blow it all on a really good racehorse and nevermind the orphans!

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

There are many more ways to be less fortunate than just economically, Mikeleung.

That is why I think it is a moral imperative to die penniless, amassing a huge fortune and then giving it all away to philanthropic pursuits as you age.

Why is it more morally correct to give it away to spend it? The business that your spending generates will help people keep there jobs (mostly). If you die with a full bank account, someone will spend it after you die. If it goes to Make-a Wish, that's fine, but working people have kids they are responsible for, too.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

As for what I would do with a million dollars: sushi every day! It's as good as sex, only without the guilt (which, I'm sure, takes most of the fun out of it for the majority of us). I would learn how to make my own sushi, and just do that every day. (Not much different than professional masturbator, I guess. Maybe someone should start a sushi escort service. Was the Hamachi good for you?)

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

Ooh, I'm rich! I've always wanted to be rich! Screw philanthropical contributions to society, I'm gonna get shit for me!! Let's start out with new clothes...So that I have more than three pairs of pants, you know? Hm...Oh, enough money to get groceries so that I don't have to eat cafeteria food all the time. That would be good. The rest of it, I'll probably (I can't believe I'm saying this...) invest so that I can get other incidental stuff as it comes up, you know? Like, a new car, a trip to Europe...
-Meghan

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

I would buy a Ferarri and then have that station wagon fake wood panelling put on the sides. I've always wanted to do that.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

Well, if it was being offered I wouldn't sat no...

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

All right Paul! I'll take a ride in that fake wood panelled car! I torment all of my friends and my husband with my wood panelling dreams.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2000

Codemaster: You rule! Thank you.

Cathy, nice figuring. You win. If you can put that much thought (and have that many outside resources, I say - go for it anyway, even without the million!

Mikeleung: Old money corrupts. Look at Ted Kennedy and disagree with that statement. One should never do their children or the uninspired workingman the disservice of handing them a fish. Fund the institutions that teach them to fish, and you are a much greater man, as well as he, in the end. (Tell me the stereo you bought with your own money as a teenager means less to you as the one that someone gave to you). Just my opinion. Thank you for the discourse.

-- Anonymous, January 29, 2000

I'd buy Matt Damon for a week and make him my naked little love slave.

-- Anonymous, January 29, 2000

I think Matt Damon would cost you only a fraction of that, although you'd have to hurry now that Talented Mr. Ripley (bastards stole my nickname) is so huge and all..

-trouble

-- Anonymous, January 29, 2000

Mikeleung: Old money corrupts. Look at Ted Kennedy and disagree with that statement. One should never do their children or the uninspired workingman the disservice of handing them a fish. Fund the institutions that teach them to fish, and you are a much greater man, as well as he, in the end. (Tell me the stereo you bought with your own money as a teenager means less to you as the one that someone gave to you). Just my opinion. Thank you for the discourse. Diefledermaus: What if Ted Kennedy invested his money to start a successful big business that created tens of thousands of jobs for people; the kind of jobs people could quit their jobs at Taco Bell for? Would he still be more corrupt than if he gave all of his money away? Are you saying he would be teaching less people to fish with on-the-job training, and a solid work history on their resume, than by training people, but giving them no jobs?

No one's ever given me a stereo.

Thank you for your opinion.

-- Anonymous, January 30, 2000

I didn't mean that sarcastically. I'm not very good at this.

-- Anonymous, January 30, 2000

"that's easy, two girls at once..." -- Office Space

Me? I'd take all that money and turn my big old barn into a great big library with double decker shelves and a ladder you can ride around on and a zillion couches to sleep on and a place to park my new blimp out back.

-- Anonymous, January 30, 2000

The first thing I would do would be never to speak to anyone I knew ever again. What's the point in being rich if you have to hang out with the same common folk as before?

-- Anonymous, January 30, 2000

High Five, Mike!

Sushi is the best!! I had forgotten until I read your post that whenever I'm at the sushi bar I vow aloud to eat it every day for the rest of my life if I should ever become rich. I think I would have to hire my very own sushi chef, though, and he could be my sidekick as I travel the world. Since eating raw fish is sort of Russian Roulette for me (I equate vomiting with dying), I prefer to leave the preparation in the hands of a professional.

I don't smoke, rarely drink, and am not a drug user. Sushi is my addiction, and I will spend money I don't have to get my fix. Do they have sushi rehabs?

-- Anonymous, January 31, 2000

Secret aside to Mikeleung: Guilt from sex? What could you be doing that causes you to feel guilty about sex?

-- Anonymous, January 31, 2000

So you're saying being pulled towards guilt is less of a distraction than desire for sex (and the acting upon it) itself? Would it not be wiser (from a long-term standpoint) to alleviate the feelings of guilt instead of the feelings of lust, which are more natural?

(BTW, I feel compelled to explain what I meant by "libertarianism". I was defining it in its purest form-that our actions are our own, and our fault alone. That we have the capacity to act upon our desires in any way we chose. I was simply explaining that you should not taint the pure joy of sex with feelings of guilt. Ideals and ethics do not neccessarily require pleasing a higher power. Practical caution would probably be better with regards to sex.

The whole religious aspect of guilt about sex was put into place because most people cannot handle the responsibility of caring for themselves and being responsible for their own actions without fear of outside heavenly repercussions.

(Interesting to note at this point, Catholic priests are dying of AIDS at 4 times the rate of the general public. HIV tests are now required of all who wish to enter the priesthood. Apparently intense repression of sexual desires is not the answer.

I always figured a scenario at the end of the world as something like this for the priests: God says, "Nooo, nooo! I said celebrate!!")

If you are able, I suggest a more practical approach to running your life. God is for weak moments, whch we all have. A constant clinging to a god would indicate someone who does not feel comfortable "walking" for themselves at any time.

As far as being no less free than you, you are wrong. I have the ability to walk out of my cell. You may or may not.

-- Anonymous, January 31, 2000

So you're saying being pulled towards guilt is less of a distraction than desire for sex (and the acting upon it) itself? Would it not be wiser (from a long-term standpoint) to alleviate the feelings of guilt instead of the feelings of lust, which are more natural?

Of course, I can only speak for myself.

My undrestanding is, yes, sexual frustration is more tolerable than guilt. It's been documented that married men masturbate more than celebate men ("losers"). In terms of sexual frustration, men are just plain stuck.

Marcus Aurelius said that virtuous men live above misfortune, above poverty, above despair, because they live their lives deliberately. I can live with most of the mistakes in my life, because I know why I do most of the things I do.

By contrast, I've seen documentation to suggest, as Chaz Palmantero said in A Bronx Tale, you can only have three great love affairs in your life. For women who have had large families of children, from multiple marriages, at the end of their teens failed, almost without exceptoin to form new lasting relationships. We can only form so many deep relationships in a lifetime. Maybe 3 relationships is not the limit, but however many relationships we try, we can only make so many.

It's mean streets for the people who follow a stereotype, do what they're supposed to do, get married to who they're supposed to, get the job and the house and the kids and the dog they're supposed to, and still live in despair.

(BTW, I feel compelled to explain what I meant by "libertarianism". I was defining it in its purest form-that our actions are our own, and our fault alone. That we have the capacity to act upon our desires in any way we chose. I was simply explaining that you should not taint the pure joy of sex with feelings of guilt.

Hey, me too...

Ideals and ethics do not neccessarily require pleasing a higher power.

I'm pretty much sure that they necessarily do. Otherwise, there is only the self to please. If there is only the self to please, how is that different than living your life as anything you can get away with is fair game?

Practical caution would probably be better with regards to sex. The whole religious aspect of guilt about sex was put into place because most people cannot handle the responsibility of caring for themselves and being responsible for their own actions without fear of outside heavenly repercussions.

I wouldn't disagree.

(Interesting to note at this point, Catholic priests are dying of AIDS at 4 times the rate of the general public. HIV tests are now required of all who wish to enter the priesthood. Apparently intense repression of sexual desires is not the answer.

Do you think no Doctors smoke? How many doctors need to smoke before it's ok?

I always figured a scenario at the end of the world as something like this for the priests: God says, "Nooo, nooo! I said celebrate!!")

If you are able, I suggest a more practical approach to running your life. God is for weak moments, which we all have. A constant clinging to a god would indicate someone who does not feel comfortable "walking" for themselves at any time.

How is my life any more impractical than anyone else's? You accuse me of making suppositions, but I know a champion when I read one.

As far as being no less free than you, you are wrong. I have the ability to walk out of my cell. You may or may not.

Were you compelled to tell me how free you are, like when you were compelled to explain pure libertarianism, or will I suddenly find myself overwhelmed by the compulsion to declare my lack of freedom? Funny how your definition of libertarianism is the same as the definition of the word karma. (But you already knew that, following through with your skepticism of Western religion, of course...)

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

Only two points, and then I am done, as my Midwestern sensibilities tell me that perhaps you are beginning to take my argument as a personal attack (something I do not intend).

1)(Referencing priests dying of AIDS) "Do you think no Doctors smoke? How many doctors need to smoke before it's ok?"

I do not consider smoking to be a natural drive like sex is. If I repressed the drive to smoke from the beginning of my life, I would not miss it. However, I would miss sex should I never try it in my lifetime. Scratching an itch is not the same as developing an addiction. That part of your argument is invalid.

2)(Referencing ideals and ethics, and whom they are meant to please)

I'm pretty much sure that they necessarily do (require a God). Otherwise, there is only the self to please.

So? Haven't you ever heard of Nihlism? You're not convinced that all atheists are as soulless, have you? Do you think that Beth might rob you in a dark alley just because she has no God to please? What makes you think that Nihlists cannot live practical, decent lives without an etheral Master waiting to discipline him/her? Do you really believe the absence of a paternal overlord causes one to live an unreflective life?

If the way you live your ethical life works well for you, by all means, please continue. But I would not follow in your footsteps of unneccessary suppression and guilt of urges that I consider to be completely normal. The general public needs a constant external authority to keep them out of trouble. I am happy that you like yours. Good for you.

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

Not to stop all the philosophy, but I have one previously unwanted girl child from China and she doesn't cost nearly that much. Although her preschool tuition is $250 per month... Anyway, you could handle at least three with money to spare. They can get scholarships and financial aid to college.

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

I saw an expose on the Marinos and their adopted Chinese orphan (female) on Sunday. Very touching. I don't have anything against adoption, but I think all costs must be carefully thought over. Plenty of my female friends will be cashiers and waitresses forever because they had that one baby.

Your child's tuition costs $3,000 a year. This leaves $1,900 for food and clothes (or $36.53 per week), referencing the above figure of 4,907 per child/year. Out of that $36.53, you'll want to take her to the doctor's office, the zoo, the movies, and probably even buy her an occasional toy or two.

And as far as scholarships and grants - don't count on the scholarships. I am a high school dropout with a 160 IQ. My folks thought I would probably get a scholarship too, but they were incorrect. Grants are fine, but your income counts for three years after you stop claiming them on your tax return (unless you're dead). Anything over minimum wage from your end and she won't be seeing any grants. Loans are good, though. Make her pay her own way through school. Kids love it, and it will mean more to her, too. (g)

All debate aside, I think it's great that you adopted a child. Should I ever decide to have a child (I'm 30 now), I will probably adopt, as well.

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

I do not consider smoking to be a natural drive like sex is. If I repressed the drive to smoke from the beginning of my life, I would not miss it. However, I would miss sex should I never try it in my lifetime. Scratching an itch is not the same as developing an addiction.

Is that all sex is? Medicine? An itch to be scratched?

So if I don't look for sex now, I'm condemned to never try[ing] it in my lifetime? As a natural drive, is it on an equal basis with hunger? I would have had no idea. That must be why we see all of the infomercials asking for money to feed all of those starving children. The peoples of the starving nations must not know that they should be having more sex.

And it's so terrible to miss something? Anything? My understanding was that the difference between the very young child, and the adult, is that the child clings onto a sensibility of unconditional me and mine, that the adult is able to let go of. I envy you. You apparently live a life where nothing has to be sacrificed. You're not convinced that all atheists are as soulless, have you?

No, that conviction is the atheists' dilema.

[Again] Alan Watts asked, "Who has more faith than the person with no religion?" It seems as if you are under the mistaken impression that atheism falls within this grace. Atheism isn't the religion of no religion. That's classic Buddhism. Atheism is the religion of there is no God, and it's disturbing, because atheism deifies the self (which you stipulate), making the self's relationship to society paramount. That's why I've been picking on Beth's atheism on occasion. Atheism sees man as a unit of society, sacrificing the individual.

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

Is that all sex is? Medicine? An itch to be scratched?

Pretty much, yes.

As a natural drive, is it on an equal basis with hunger?

Smoking is not a natural function of the body. Sexual release is. If you do not have sex, and you do not masturbate, what happens to you (on occasion) at night? I'll bet it is not smoking.

And it's so terrible to miss something?

Hmmm... perhaps you're right. I'm going to cancel my trip to Spain and go watch some reruns on TV, or maybe sit in a corner and stare at the wall.

This whole debate started over your statement of guilty feelings towards sex. I do not feel that one should feel guilty about sex. You apparently do. Okay. Mea culpa on my part for attempting to construct a logical argument to help you deal with those feelings and receive more pleasure from life. (g)

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

Is that all sex is? Medicine? An itch to be scratched?

Pretty much, yes.

I'm sorry to hear this. I was looking for, to mix Jungian metaphors, sex and love to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being. I guess I was wrong. I'll have the hookers arranged immediately.

Smoking is not a natural function of the body. Sexual release is. If you do not have sex, and you do not masturbate, what happens to you (on occasion) at night? I'll bet it is not smoking.

I masturbate. I make a distinction between masturbation and sex, as, apparently, do you.

And it's so terrible to miss something?

Hmmm... perhaps you're right. I'm going to cancel my trip to Spain and go watch some reruns on TV, or maybe sit in a corner and stare at the wall.

I haven't been telling you not to travel. I'm the one who has been saying you should squander your money, remember?

This whole debate started over your statement of guilty feelings towards sex. I do not feel that one should feel guilty about sex. You apparently do. Okay. Mea culpa on my part for attempting to construct a logical argument to help you deal with those feelings and receive more pleasure from life. (g)

#1 To paraphrase Blaise pascal, logic and reason are inadequate for easing pain. #2 what you've been saying hasn't seemed exceptionally logical. That's why I've been quoting you when I address what you've written. You've accused me of making suppositions, but suppositions about me is pretty much all you've been basing this whole discussion on. You accused me of being a slave to my upbringing, implying that you are less so. You've accused me of being more Christian-centered than you, when you've demonstrated no understanding of other religions. You also freely lifted inconsistant atheistic and theistic perspectives, while I have remained consistant.

And I never said people should feel guilty about having sex. But I do make the one supposition that people do feel guilty about sex, and I've been explaining why I make the supposition. If you don't like what I've been saying, changing my mind won't change the evidence I address.

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

By gum, mikeleung, you're right! I assumed because you first said,

"It's as good as sex, only without the guilt (which, I'm sure, takes most of the fun out of it for the majority of us)."

and then,

"Our ideals serve as much a biological need to us as our lusts. The Fundamentalist Religious view deny us of one, as much as, more or less, the Madison Avenue Hedonistic view would deny us of the other."

and

" As far as I know, all enduring cultures have something analogous to the quest for the grail. In the traditional grail quest, competing for grail were the sterile, emasculated, Fisher King, who was blinded by the glory of the grail, against the paganistic Muhammeden King. In Buddhism, sex is one of the paths that lead you away from enlightenment, as well as intellectualization."

Leading to this,

"My undrestanding is, yes, sexual frustration is more tolerable than guilt. It's been documented that married men masturbate more than celebate men ("losers"). In terms of sexual frustration, men are just plain stuck."

I took it to mean that you were referring to yourself. I can see now that you were not. My apologies.

As far as your saying that, "You also freely lifted inconsistant atheistic and theistic perspectives, while I have remained consistant.", it may have been simply that I have used only those philosopies/ethics that I have gleaned based on my own experience, instead of speaking on levels of,

"...discount Rupert Sheldrake's work observing crossword puzzle publishing, Oliver Sacks's work in neurology, Heisenburg's uncertainty principle, and Einstein's theory of time as a function of velocity, then, maybe you're stuck with a lot of material science which explains the Universe without a God."

or paraphrasing Watts, Aurelius, and Pascal, I was simply basing what I said on personal experience and soul searching. Being educated might be wonderful - I'm sure it is (not that I would know, I went to a "factory" school for 10 years until I dropped out, and I am just now in the first college class (first class, period) that ever required extracurricular reading from me), but when it is not coupled with an attempt to see and reflect for oneself, I see the education and regurgitation as less valid, such as,

"My undrestanding is, yes, sexual frustration is more tolerable than guilt."

Do you know?

" By contrast, I've seen documentation to suggest, as Chaz Palmantero said in A Bronx Tale, you can only have three great love affairs in your life."

Perhaps not.

The reason I accuse you of making suppositions is that when one claims guilt, and explains his/her feelings subsequently, there is the assumption that one is attempting to explain himself I did not know you were trying to explain why most people felt guilt for sex. The question I posed was directed at you, and I assumed you were speaking for yourself. When you said,

" How is my life any more impractical than anyone else's? You accuse me of making suppositions, but I know a champion when I read one." (referring to God)

I figured you had accepted the Christian doctrine. Perhaps I misunderstood your reference?

Aside from that, I must admit that in a rundown/discussion of philosophical/ethical/religious history and all of its players and their theories, I am sorely outmatched, assuming you truly know all you say. I thought "the religion of no religion" was Nihlism, not Classic Buddhism.

But assuming you do, I shall bow out of this discussion, with my apologies.

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

As a natural drive, is it on an equal basis with hunger?

Smoking is not a natural function of the body. Sexual release is. If you do not have sex, and you do not masturbate, what happens to you (on occasion) at night? I'll bet it is not smoking.

Sex. Sex as a natural drive, is it on... never mind, the context of the question is lost...

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

My understanding is that Nihlism is that man is free in a Godless universe, however man as a unit of society finds refuge under such a belief, whereas the individual does not.

I'm sorry I put you in a position where you felt you needed to apologize. It's just a relief when people are honest to me, and you have been just that. My brother just visited me here for a business related function, and while he was telling me everything I was doing wrong with my life (and disagreeing with him), I was also relieved that he was being honest with me. (I had just left an enlistment in the military, where you see mostly delusional people. I've found the business/tech world equally frustrating.)

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

It's just a huge relief when people are honest, and fully capable of expressing themselves, because people behave in ways from motivations I would never consider. People do behave true to their experiences, but mostly we hide that, so you just see strangeness and alienation.

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

You're absolutely right, I believe (about the "emminence front" of most individuals). As much as I enjoy speaking on an intellectual level (believe me, until I entered the world of Internet forums, I rarely found someone that I could not blow away, as you did to me here), I find that it is also wonderful to speak on a personal level.

I must admit, I am somewhat jealous of your knowledge. I was well on my way to it as a child (because of parentage, not schooling) until my teen years, when my hormones took over (not what you think, I have never been pregnant) and I decided to strike out on my own at 16.

After 6 years in feral, unskilled America (hey, there were some nice people) and 6 more years in trucking (the 18 wheel kind), I went back to school. Part time college takes forever, but I should my B.S.CSIS in just under 3 years from now.

My consolation is that I learned a lot of hands-on stuff about independence and personal growth that most WASP girls never see. When I get my degree I will be ahead of the game (just an expression).

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

I must admit, I am somewhat jealous of your knowledge.

Keep in mind that I'm watching Pokémon right now as I type this. What you've witnessed is from the .03% of my brain that isn't running around, shouting Pikachu!

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

Um, I believe our Mike Leung has met his match...............

Selfish answers?

I would invest first. Somewhere down the road I would buy a house at the beach. I would buy hardcover, not paperback, and spend my days in the sand reading and drinking Absolute martinis. (shaken not stirred my darling Daniel) Daniel is my friend who attends to my needs and makes sure I have sunscreen in that hard to reach place on my back. He also is an expert at massaging feet and painting toenails. (Corvette Red today Danny, honey) I of course pay him out the ass, so he loves me to pieces and will accompany me to any movie I want to see, especially the sappy love ones. A few times a year I will fly Pamie and Eric over to my beach house where I will pay them to get drunk and play Cranium for my entertainment.(I pay well Pam). All the vacationing kids will walk buy my house and talk of the crazy rich lady. I would have huge parties.

I would buy one of everything at the MAC counter. I would buy 30 pairs of overalls, so I never had to wear anything else. I would never have roots. I would take up painting.

Oh and I guess I would let my husband buy every new playstation game on the market that his little heart desires.

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

You are all my matches! (sorry, i don't even know what that means...)

-- Anonymous, February 01, 2000

I would have someone come over every day and wash my hair (complete with that great scalp rub). Agree: hardcovers, not paperbacks. Real suitcases, not duffle bags. And then I would actually let the porters/bellboys carry them (and tip those boys well!) instead of lugging them around myself. I would throw out the tiny sliver of soap, and start a new tube of toothpaste before Every Last Drop was forced from the old tube.

I would buy lipstick and throw it away if I didn't like the color (instead of wearing something hideous just because I bought it). And I'd sign my Gramma up for those expensive Flower of the Month clubs.

And maybe, just maybe, I'd hire someone to explain just what the heck Mike and DF were talking about.

-- Anonymous, February 02, 2000

my oh my, how this forum has run astray. What happened to all the selfish materialists?

I have learned something very important today, and that is that I do not wish to ponder the great mysteries of the universe while surfing Pamie's forum from work - I'm much more interested in the instant gratification of a cool million delivered to me by Regis.

I'd spend it all on myself - selfishly, impulsively and on whatever I wanted - diamonds, caviar, dancing boys, gratuitous press releases - until it was all gone.

-- Anonymous, February 02, 2000

I'd buy a giant mechanical ant.

-- Anonymous, February 02, 2000

sure, i want to be a millionaire, i would what i wished (including doing the "witness protection thing)

-- Anonymous, February 03, 2000

totally selfish? well, okay, if you insist . . . first, i'd buy a great big-ass house on the beach, and hire a personal trainer. you know, the kind that come to your house and make you work out! i'll get skinny in spite of myself! then, i'd travel all over the world. basically, i'd get tickets to all the formula one races this year, and just go everywhere "the circus" goes! i'd get a really good computer system complete with colour printer and scanner, a top-of-the-line digital camera and video camera. and, i'd just keep buying toys: stereo systems, flat screen t.v.'s, satellite dishes, that sort-of stuff. i'd get my car repainted, and get her brand-new leather seats. then i'd buy a new miata, and let fiona have a well-deserved break! and, i'd go shopping: i'd buy lots and lots of clothes and shoes and make-up. i'd never colour my hair at home again! i'd get professional manicures and pedicures every week, and, i'd get laser resurfing on my face, neck, and the backs of my hands. then i'd get a cat, a dog, a toyota rav4, and go to a sperm bank to find the perfect specimen, and have twins: a boy named jake who will grow up to graduate from harvard with honours, and will cure cancer, and a girl named chrissy, who will be the first female formula one world champion. selfish enough for you? cheers!

-- Anonymous, February 03, 2000

If I had a million dollars? Well there's a long laundry list but the very FIRST thing I would do is buy a new computer and get a cable modem so it wouldn't always be crashing like this piec

-- Anonymous, February 03, 2000

Hey, I'm totally with Paul on this one.

-- Anonymous, February 03, 2000

first off, i would have to share, i am the youngest in a large family and i have learned that if you don't share you get your ass kicked! so i would pay all of my friends and families rent/morgage for a month. then jump out of a airplane 12 times a day and any other calculated risk that appears insane. oh what fun! other than that i would not change my life until i get adjusted to my fortune. oh, but i would buy my very own comedy troupe of sexy young thangs to exploit as i wish. my life is good, money or not.

-- Anonymous, February 06, 2000

Okay, $530,000 after taxes.

My car got broken into, and the roof is toast, so I'd get a new car. Probably a gently used one, but one still under warranty. Say a black Ford Mustang convertible that coudl still go to the universal emissions places for a few years. Maybe a 1997 or newer. I don't need or want a Cobra, a plain LX is fine. My damaged car is a 93 convertible LX. It has not cup holders. I'd buy cup holders. I'd heavily insure it, and get a Lo-jack alarm system.

I think that would use up $30K easily.

I'd buy a house, though maybe not the one I'm in, because it, too, got broken into. Thursday. I was home. Scared the guy in the kitchen with a crowbar. I mean, HE had a crowbar, and was merely startled. I was scared and I had no crowbar. It sucked. He decided not to beat my head in or rape or kill me, and ran away, so it could be worse. All the same, if I buy this house, I buy it where it is, and it's in a neighborhood where the Universal Key is a crowbar or straight razor, and I'm tired of my property being stolen or barged into.

I have modest needs, so I figure $125,000 would be MORE than enough to buy something outright, or to out enough of a down payment on something that I don't have to worry for a while about payments.

So, that leaves...er, I suck at math...$375,000?

I would buy the most kick-ass laptop Macintosh in the world ($5K) and load it down with extras (throw in another $2-5K) like printers and modems and digicams and software and stuff.

That's $365,000 left.

I'd sock $200,000 of that into various savings plans and things, as I have no savings whatsoever. Hard times suck.

I'd pay my debts off (less than $5000 at the moment). I might sock some away in ATM-card-accessible savings.

I'd give my mother and grandmother each $10,000, which would more than clear up their debts.

With the remaining $130,000, I'd become a Usui-lineage reiki master ($10,000!) and I'd like to learn shiatsu massage and acupuncture. I'd buy hundreds of CDs and vinyl LPs, get a DVD player & some DVDs, buy toys, spoil the cat (might get another kitty, now that I'm so wealthy), travel a lot (I love London! Woo! Month-long sabbatical!), send several friends & family members in hard spots cash and I'd take lots of classes in things I like, like web design, writing, art, etc. I'd get a facial. Maybe I'd go back to school full-time. I'd get one or two REALLY NICE designer suits, a really nice pair of shoes, a really nice purse, a really nice briefcase, a good set of luggage, a nice fountain pen, a really nice winter coat, some pashmina wraps, and a cashmere sweater. I'm also a jewelry hound, so I'd probably buy one really nice personal piece, like a ring.

I most likely would not quit my job right away, and the better- quality business clothes would help me feel more professional than I do and those classes would probably point me towards things I liked to do more, so eventually I'd quit and start my own business or just be an artist and live frugally off the principal my $200K investments and day-trading yielded. After all, I'd have no debts and I'd have a house and lots of toys, so what would I need to buy?

My problems are primarily financial at the moment, so it would be a godsend if $530,000 landed in my lap. I wouldn't know what to do with myself.

My main problem [?] is that I can fritter away $20 in nanoseconds, because it doesn't feel like I'm spending a lot of cash. Ironically, when I have a huge pile of dough to spend, I always spend it extremely frugally and carefully. I haven't had that happen often, and, to me, $500 is a huge wad of cash, but that's my pattern. I also have no head for numbers and have probably overspent my imaginary allotment 3x over already. ;)

But that was fun, anyway.

-- Anonymous, February 09, 2000