Is it moral to do up your house?

ceadaoin.

Charley Enough Thesis wrote: »

Whether or not it's "tasteful" is a secondary concern. Taxpayers are forking over €160 a year, allegedly to fund "public service broadcasting," and this kind of tripe is what they get in return. RTE should be fulfilling its public service remit and leaving property porn shows to commercial channels.

Or they should provide a range of programming that their audience and license payers actually want to watch? Plenty of people like property shows like this

HorrorScope

HorrorScope wrote: »

Twitter only works because like minded clowns retweet this idiotic **** and then some “journalist”...

Look will you hold still there a moment, man? You're hopping mad all over the shop, neglecting your original point. I only disagreed about his acting "entitled". Maybe it's the opposite. He's saying there should be limits on what is socially acceptable, that we are in danger of letting "entitlement" run away with itself again, as it did during the Tiger years.

A reasonable statement, no ?

Society has unwritten social conventions about how resources are used. Burning a fiver in front of a homeless person would be described to use the scientific expression, as "being a cnut".

Is burning a fiver in front of a homeless person any worse than broadcasting, on a state broadcaster, the act of spending 15k on a bath that looks like an ashtray?

Danzy

Bullocks wrote: »

Notice box. He's like a lad that's stuck renting or got turned down for a mortgage!
Of all the things to run RTÉ down over he picked that and Fair City on 4 nights a frigging week????

Ex RTE, he'll have had no problems with getting a mortgage.

I fear it is immoral for others to end up having a house like his.

AllForIt

Disgusting socialist opinion.

Snotty

This is the problem, some nobody writes on social media and it becomes a newspaper article and a debate on here, its not even worth the effort for these couple of lines never mind what it actually got.

Pauliedragon

So people should stop renovating their homes as it's offensive? How many construction jobs would that cost I wonder? Are they not entitled to jobs? Idiot.

Pauliedragon

Pauliedragon wrote: »

So people should stop renovating their homes as it's offensive? How many construction jobs would that cost I wonder? Are they not entitled to jobs? Idiot.

(A meme)
The point: (that place)
You: (that place but beneath it)

You surely know that the point you're arguing is not the point at all. Nobody is against home improvement. Even the most ardent Stalinist Tankie isn't averse to a south-facing conservatory.

But there are limits to what is socially acceptable. We are a rules-based species. I actually thought the gold island in a fairly minimalist kitchen looked great, but that's not the point either.

Was the behaviour of the homeowners desirable in a society? I think that's the root question.

Leg End Reject

Tyrant, I'm not sure you're serious at this stage, but why the hell would anyone worry about how their spending habits are perceived?

lola85

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

(A meme)
The point: (that place)
You: (that place but beneath it)

You surely know that the point you're arguing is not the point at all. Nobody is against home improvement. Even the most ardent Stalinist Tankie isn't averse to a south-facing conservatory.

But there are limits to what is socially acceptable. We are a rules-based species. I actually thought the gold island in a fairly minimalist kitchen looked great, but that's not the point either.

Was the behaviour of the homeowners desirable in a society? I think that's the root question.

Ah here what is the point in working and having ambition anymore?

lola85

lola85 wrote: »

Ah here what is the point in working and having ambition anymore?

Nobody is proposing the abolition of profit, Lola nor the undermining of market forces.

You know how it's a bit frowned upon to put golden effigies of calves on your front lawn? Well maybe we should just extend that to other ostentatious displays of wealth? Maybe that should be a bit of a faux pas.

Maybe, that way, society would be more equal and we wouldn't land ourselves in economic crises every 15-20 years.

I think that's all that's being suggested. Nobody wants to appropriate anyone's property or install another Stalin.

Just tone it back a bit. Be chill. That's all.

Leg End Reject

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Tyrant, I'm not sure you're serious at this stage, but why the hell would anyone worry about how their spending habits are perceived?

Would you burn a fiver in front of a homeless man? I'm not asking if you'd desire to do so, I'm asking whether you'd even dare seem such a cnut in public?

I wouldn't. Maybe that answers the question but maybe it doesn't.

Leave aside the stupidity of burning money, I think most people would mortified to be seen doing such a thing.

Leg End Reject

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Would you burn a fiver in front of a homeless man? I'm not asking if you'd desire to do so, I'm asking whether you'd even dare seem such a cnut in public?

I wouldn't. Maybe that answers the question but maybe it doesn't.

Leave aside the stupidity of burning money, I think most people would mortified to be seen doing such a thing.

Renovating your house, or spending money, isn't the same as burning money in front of a homeless person.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Ostentatious houses aren't necessarily a sign of wealth. All too often those who live in them are drowning in debt. Put your money into good investments, not home improvement.

Leg End Reject

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Renovating your house, or spending money, isn't the same as burning money in front of a homeless person.

Putting a golden calf on your lawn isn't the same as adding a third bedroom for your fifth child, so renovation doesn't always mean burning money, of course not

We're speaking at sixes and sevens here. Can we just clarify a couple of points...

Do you not agree that some displays of wealth (like burning a fiver) can seem over the top, ostentatious, or even insulting?

Which is worse, spending 10k on a bathtub that looks like an ashtray, or burning a fiver in front of a homeless person? I know that there are worse and better options along the whole scale of human choices, but just humour me, please.

JupiterKid

There are horrendous inequalities in the housing system in Ireland and the housing crisis is impacting on our economy and society in many very negative ways but I just cannot see how people wanting to refurbish and upgrade their homes and spending their hard earned money to achieve that aim is something to be open to criticism.

This journalist does, however, have a point with respect to overly crass and ostentatious home “improvements” that seem to indicate more money by the homeowners than sense. I think it’s more the proliferation of TV shows about property and aspects of property and not home renovations per se that are the focus of his attack.

And the trend towards more and more property porn TV shows where the objective is to use housing as an investment vehicle to enrich their owners in the property market “game/ladder” rather than seeing dwellings as a basic social necessity must surely grate with those in temporary emergency accommodation, paying more than half their incomes on exorbitant rents or living in their parental home long after they should have moved out - and priced out of the housing market.

A game where there are “winners” and “losers.” Housing should never be left to the whims of market forces alone - a proper society ensures all households are adequately housed.

Wayne Jarvis

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Do you not agree that some displays of wealth (like burning a fiver) can seem over the top, ostentatious, or even insulting?

Which is worse, spending 10k on a bathtub that looks like an ashtray, or burning a fiver in front of a homeless person? I know that there are worse and better options along the whole scale of human choices, but just humour me, please.

I haven't seen this show, I don't know any of the people involved and didn't even read the article which as far as I am concerned makes me uniquely qualified to give my expert take on things.


Burning money in front of a homeless person would of course be a horrible thing to do as you acknowledge yourself. Agreeing to be on a tv show in which you spend 10k on a bath is not a horrible thing to do in my opinion. It's about intent. Is it over the top and ostentatious? Yes probably it is. Were they intending to be insulting? Do you think they were doing that on camera purposefully to rub it in to people with less money than them? It would take some level of sociopath to behave that way I think, the same kind of sociopath who would stand in front of a homeless person and burn money.
Variations of shows like these have been on TV for decades now, poor or working class people don't go on them, probably because it's not glamourous enough in the eyes of TV executives. There has always been homeless people, it's very likely there always will be too and it's very likely shows like this will always be on TV.

Leg End Reject

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Putting a golden calf on your lawn isn't the same as adding a third bedroom for your fifth child, so renovation doesn't always mean burning money, of course not

We're speaking at sixes and sevens here. Can we just clarify a couple of points...

Do you not agree that some displays of wealth (like burning a fiver) can seem over the top, ostentatious, or even insulting?

Which is worse, spending 10k on a bathtub that looks like an ashtray, or burning a fiver in front of a homeless person? I know that there are worse and better options along the whole scale of human choices, but just humour me, please.

If I want something, and can afford it, I really don't care how it looks. I work so I can buy things.

um7y1h83ge06nx

These good old left leaning liberal types, turning out to be the most miserable thought police imaginable, the Soviets would be proud of them.

nkl12xtw5goz70

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Or they should provide a range of programming that their audience and license payers actually want to watch? Plenty of people like property shows like this

Well, it all depends on how you see the purpose of RTE. Is it there to create public service broadcasting that commercial channels won't provide, or to produce fluffy popular entertainment to bring in advertising?

There are plenty of these shows on other channels already, so using taxpayers' money to produce more of the same is wasteful, in my view.

Charley Enough Thesis

Charley Enough Thesis wrote: »

Well, it all depends on how you see the purpose of RTE. Is it there to create public service broadcasting that commercial channels won't provide, or to produce fluffy popular entertainment to bring in advertising?

There are plenty of these shows on other channels already, so using taxpayers' money to produce more of the same is wasteful, in my view.

It’s one of the best shows on rte and is very very popular so it is using a lot of tax payers money the way they want it myself included.

What sort of program would you suggest instead?

Feisar

I done up our house recently. Had bought a rented house that had never got a face lift. So now it's trible glazed, Smeg cooker, quartz worktops and sexsay timber floors. Now I took time off work and worked 14 hour days, my Dad and brother-in-law burst there bollox with me to.
However I'm reminded of this scene:

Leg End Reject

Leg End Reject wrote: »

If I want something, and can afford it, I really don't care how it looks. I work so I can buy things.

I think I'm already labouring the fiver analogy; but I will plough on, one last time. If it gave you genuine, real enjoyment to burn fivers in front of a large crowd of homeless people (lets assume, for dramatic effect, they are pleading with you not to do it), would you do it anyway?

Surely at some point you'd think "I do actually care that this looks awful" or "I see how this display of inequality might be upsetting". Maybe such a needless display of wealth might cause policymakers to reflect that there needs to be a greater redistribution of resources, and it would be worthwhile not to burn your fiver for that reason alone.

Guy Person wrote: »

I haven't seen this show, I don't know any of the people involved and didn't even read the article which as far as I am concerned makes me uniquely qualified to give my expert take on things.

Burning money in front of a homeless person would of course be a horrible thing to do as you acknowledge yourself. Agreeing to be on a tv show in which you spend 10k on a bath is not a horrible thing to do in my opinion. It's about intent. Is it over the top and ostentatious? Yes probably it is. Were they intending to be insulting? Do you think they were doing that on camera purposefully to rub it in to people with less money than them? It would take some level of sociopath to behave that way I think, the same kind of sociopath who would stand in front of a homeless person and burn money.

But the person on the other side of your lit fiver doesn't care whether you're burning it for principle or to be ostentatious. To them, the result is the same, regardless of what you meant. There is a finite quantity of resources, and you've just wasted some -- nobody cares whether it was for your amusement or as a political statement. People will inevitably be fairly pissed off.

Leg End Reject

I don't burn fivers, whether there's a homeless person to witness it or not.

Someone spending their own money on things they want is not comparable to burning fivers in front of a homeless person.

Wayne Jarvis

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

But the person on the other side of your lit fiver doesn't care whether you're burning it for principle or to be ostentatious. To them, the result is the same, regardless of what you meant. There is a finite quantity of resources, and you've just wasted some -- nobody cares whether it was for your amusement or as a political statement. People will inevitably be fairly pissed off.

Why did you add that last line into my post you quoted?


Anyway if we were all to think like that then who would do anything for fear of upsetting someone? If I bought a 2019 BMW tomorrow it wouldn't be for any other reasons than I wanted one and I work very hard in life and feel I should have what I want if I can do so. If you got pissed off at me for buying that car I wouldn't feel bad about it as that was not my intention, my intention was to treat myself to what I felt I deserved. Likewise if I bought a 2000 Micra for €1000 you might feel pissed off because you can't afford that and think I was showing off buying that too. There will always be people who have more than you do and there will always be people who have less than you, I consider neither of those things when I spend my money on whatever I please (mostly cake).

JupiterKid

This may be a little bit Off Topic but one thing I really like about Holland - where my sister lives with her family and has pretty much become a second home to me as I travel over and stay here a lot - is the culture of appearing modest.

There is of course plenty of wealth and money in Holland and has been for centuries - the Dutch built their country and economy on international trade in the 17th century - but flashing the cash in a vulgar and crass manner and being overly ostentatious with your wealth is a social faux pax in Holland. Wealthy Dutch tend to be more discreet in their wealth.

Ireland could learn a few things from this aspect of Dutch culture...

Wayne Jarvis

Leg End Reject wrote: »

I don't burn fivers, whether there's a homeless person to witness it or not.

You really should just once, it makes you feel like one of those rich people on TV who light cigars with burned money.






Obviously you will massively regret doing it and feel stupid afterwards but that 2 second feeling of literally having money to burn is almost worth it.

The chan chan man

A man who cleans his house, expects a visitor.

Stark

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I think I'm already labouring the fiver analogy; but I will plough on, one last time.

Yes you are.

It's a bull**** analogy. You're trying to equate standing in front of a homeless person and openly taunting them with spending your hard earned cash on whatever you fancy. The two are in no way morally equivalent.

Sorry comrade, but the world has long ago woken up to the deceptive ploy that was vilifying the ability to acquire wealth and spend wealth.

Likelihood was, the person who spent 10k on the bathtub already paid 50% tax on the money they earned to pay for the bathtub and a further 23% in VAT on the purchase. Tax that was redistributed in part on social welfare, emergency accommodation for homeless people and the like.

Seems the only remaining issue is most people wouldn't value a bathtub enough to spend 10k on it but obviously these people did and that's their prerogative. Same as some people will prefer to pay over the odds for a car, or others will prefer to pay over the odds for a nice coat or whatever. Things will have different value to different people.

Leg End Reject

Guy Person wrote: »

You really should just once, it makes you feel like one of those rich people on TV who light cigars with burned money.






Obviously you will massively regret doing it and feel stupid afterwards but that 2 second feeling of literally having money to burn is almost worth it.

I wipe my arse with fivers though ...

But I'm now reformed, I'm going to give my house to a homeless person and give them fivers to burn for heat.

Raconteuse

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

For me, the bottom line is that if someone treated animals the way we treat one another, that person would be in Portlaoise prison.

We don't even need to relate it to animal welfare -- most farmers would take your hand off for a wandering beast or sheep at the top of the road with nobody to claim it. It has economic value. As for vagrant humans, their personhood isn't cash-convertible, they're pretty much deemed worthless.

Every case of destitution and addiction and mental health disorder among the homeless is an individual emergency. It is a catastrophe for that person, but we are fairly blasé to have them endure conditions that we wouldn't leave a dog or a farm animal in. Nevermind. Nice gold taps, Dympna. I love your glass bath. A steal at twice the price.

Too many people end up with more money than they know what to do with. The way we've organised society is warped, but I think most people prefer not to think about it. If you think about it too much, it's really depressing.

On that cheery thought, I'm off for a fag. I'm a hypocrite too, spending 70 quid a week playing dice with lung cancer instead of putting my money where my mouth is. Again, most of us avoid examining our behaviour too closely.

Anyone else hate this "we" bollox?

It actually means "everyone else but me".