There was an interesting conversation going the Ann of Green Gables thread from the Programs and Info and Reviews board, but since it was going off the Anne topic I decided to move that portion to The Pub board so it could continue.

I don't do this very often so who knows what will happen. Hopefully I'll get it right the first time. If not bear with me....I'll get it eventually.





Aw, I adore well loved old books and never minded my kids having them.

No, Emily of New Moon was about the little girl whose being raised by her father. Her mother had passed a few years before and her mother's family never approved of her father. After his death she must live with her mother's family at their home (New Moon). Emily is a writer (recurring theme for Montgomery! ) and we hear Emily's stories as they correlate with the episode story. It was a three season series.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 0112 Apr 05 2012 by Janaru.

I think my cousin has issues with hand me downs but I don't get why. My mom sent them everything they asked for, we being "state side" and all. If anyone should have issues, it's me. My cousins never had to ask my mom twice for something from here, but I understood a bit I had a much easier time of it here than they had at the time. I never had to live under marshal law and they did.

Yeah, Marshal Law isn't conducive to a good time.

I only had three months of it when we went back there for my dad's funeral. Sounds like a crazy decision at the time, but my mom actually thought of staying there instead of coming back here. Being widowed and everything, I guess she wasn't really thinking straight. When she finally got around to asking me whether it was a good idea to stay there or not, I told her I didn't want to stay there. I'd had a number of years living in the US and I couldn't see how I could live under marshal law conditions. And after seeing the line of people wrap around the American embassy for just a chance to come to the US, I think my mom saw sense too.

Yikes, Mars! Glad she came with you!

My daughter-in-law would like for her parents to come here from Hungary. They aren't under Marshal Law or anything, but Nazism is on the rise, aside from other things, and she'd feel more comfortable with them here. She said they'd never would though. It's their home and it's hard to leave.

Leaving aside Martial Law, I think people in "underdeveloped" (financially poorer) countries get carried away by the American Dream (as they used to be by the street of London being paved with gold) and expect everything to be fresh and sparkling , forgetting the values of tradition and old things.

Growing up in post war Britain, most of my toys and clothes were "hand my downs" from cousins , though I was fortunate in a mother and grandmother good with their needles and an imaginative engineer father. As an adult I wanted everything new - though even so I was l8 before I had my first new bicycle and 40 my first brand new car.

Now in my second childhood I am back to combing second hand shops and Charity Shops for clothes and books - not only because of cost but because they are better quality and suit my tastes better than the modern trashy stuff

The thing about the American dream is it is true. I know immigrants who work three or more jobs and no weekends off save up enough money to purchase a house. A house is always the first priority. I've had work colleagues who pool their savings to purchase a condo and when they build up enough equity they buy a house and rent out the condo.

I have clear memories of the my immigrant community in Ohio, the first priority was securing a home, buying a house. At that time it more important to buy the house--you have the house, but it's barely furnished. Rarely is there a dining room set (all the homes I've seen in Ohio had eat in kitchens). For many months I slept on boxes when we bought our first house. My parents were very proud they could purchase a custom built home, I still have the photos somewhere of every step of the process. I didn't care I slept in a sleeping bag on boxes, I HAD MY OWN ROOM! That's all that mattered at the time. Even people who came here with nothing have in a few years of hard work, money and property. I was involved with an agency who placed Russian emigres in the Bay Area. A lot of those people only had what they could carry and what they wore on their backs. Most became entrepreneurs, others went to school and went to work in Silicon Valley and in biotech. I am still in touch with a lot of the people I personally had contact with and they are concerned about the country they now call their home. Things are becoming too familiar, if you get my drift.

The long and short of it is this is the land of opportunity, not the land of guaranteed happiness. Luck is opportunity plus timing.

I think the house thing is a separate issue, Mars, it has more to do with security and the nesting instinct. Also I think (I found this) that if one owns a bt of land (even if there is only a mud hut on it) one has a stake in the country.

It is when the acquisition of consumer goods and "keeping up with the Jones" comes into play that the human race loses its sense of values . If you start with nothing is it easy to be seduced , but sometimes if you manage to acquire too much there is a sense of release in letting go.

I think that maybe part of the draw of these LM Montgomery's stories. The settings are fairly austere, and most of them revolve around relationships. I think we crave that as a society. We are social animals and no amount of stuff is gonna change that.

I dont agree Jan. People may feel nostalgic about the simple life when they read or see something like the Anne saga - but when it comes to real life too many are far too busy chasing things of material value and lose a sense of proportion - this is why we are in the financial mess we are now. Its easy to blame America (and may the effect of an affluent society on a financially impoverished immigrant population has something to do with it) but the rest of the world didnt exactly have to be forced to jump on the bandwagon.

The term here the US is hold a gun to their head, Pen.

Everyone has a free will to be what they want to be. The trouble begins when you take short cuts. A lot of the financial troubles people found themselves in was caused by taking short cuts and if I may say so, greed.

People knew how to be more practical back then and people had more patience. Now everyone wants everything, instant gratification. Going not too far back in years, maybe 30 years or so, people were more wise with their money. Did it have to do with credit cards and not feeling what you spend? Going back to that time 30 years back, if you had a house and you weren't only eating mac and cheese and tuna you were either foolish or fortunate. You had to cut back on unnecessary spending so you can whittle down your mortgage, a lot of them paid down their mortgage by paying both at the start and at the middle of the month, the second payment going to reducing the principle.

I think my generation and later generations were too pampered by our parents and some of us can't handle real life because of it. We have no one to blame for our financial troubles but ourselves. Why sign something you don't understand? Why buy something you can't afford. You can tell the bank no and walk away from buying the house you can't afford.

I agree with you about greed , Mars. People were greedy and the banks and finance companies were even greedier and battened on the greed of the individual.

I don't know about the generation thing. Every generation thinks it is wiser than the one before. In England I would say rationing had a lot to do about it - I dont know if Americans realise but not only during the war but for - what? - l0 years or so after a lot of luxuries and even essentials were rationed. Of course there was a black market, but apart from that people were on a level footing - it didn't matter how much money you had the goods just weren't there to be had. My parents generation learned to make do with what they could get and passed it on to mine.and I was brought up with the idea of making do and also (because while far from wealthy we were not poor either) of buying good quality when you could and making it last. I think then from the sixties onwards when rationing was discontinued and consumer goods were ready available there was a reaction which doesnt seem to have stopped.

But that presumably only applies to the UK and some other European countries. Its trite that Germany , now one of the most affluent lost the War but won the Peace.

What about the US? Is it perhaps a backlash from the pioneer days when life was tough and basic and people still feel the need to make up for lost time with luxuries?

btw did "The Good Life" ever make it to American TV? That was an example , although humorous, of a feeling of people of an instinct to get "back to basics" to coin a phrase

The thing about Germany, Japan and South Korea, just to name a few countries, the US built these countries from the ground up. From infrastructure to brand spanking new factories, that was the backbone on which these countries built their success. I have just been reading recently how there was a lot of resentment towards Americans on the part of the Brits because they weren't helped after the war like Germany and to a certain extent Italy. Wasn't that the point of The Mouse that Roared? Lose a war to America and they will pay for your recovery.

I would say the problem in the US is based on our obsession for celebrities, whether they are famous for being famous, sports stars or entertainers, people just want to be as rich and as comfortable as the celebs they watch on tv. Maybe 40 years ago it could all be called backlash, but nowadays everyone is on the same playing field technologically except for high speed internet and satellite tv. Everyone can afford the most basic technologies (cell phones, dvd players). And even if you can't afford a cell phone, you can still get one. Just the other day I saw an ad for government subsidised cell phones for people who can't afford cell phones. I don't even understand why this is necessary. You can buy a $10 or $20 phone with a $100 phone card and you will spend as little as 10 bucks a year for that T-Mobile or Verizon telephone (I just recently priced prepaid cell phone service because my mom was asking me about it and thought the one they were advertising for seniors/OAPs on tv was too expensive).

The biggest problem is wanting to be Kim Khardasian but lacking the rich parent to make it possible. People want to be rich, but don't want to work for it. Get rich quick schemes are all the place and the housing bubble to a certain degree was caused by get rich quick schemes. Are you familiar with the term flipping a house? It's when you buy a very cheap home, repair it and then sell it for a higher price and profit. Banks allowed loans to people who flipped homes so easily, people took out loans on up to 6 homes at a time on so called ninja loans ("no income, no job" applications). The housing market was hot and homes sold for twice their appraised value or more. People bought in because they thought they could sell their homes at a profit in a few years. But the prices couldn't go up forever and people over extended buying homes they couldn't realistically afford. When the bubble burst, banks, homeowners and investors took it in the chin. I can't blame the banks completely, those people who took on the loans weren't forced to and if they neglected to read and understand what they are signing, it's their problem, correct? No one else is going to look out for you, you take care of yourself. The banks couldn't refuse giving loans to people they saw couldn't afford the homes they were borrowing for by law so what are they supposed to do? As it is certain labor unions and community activists were picketing and intimidating banks to make loans to minorities whether those people could afford to pay them back or not.

Locally The Good Life was popular locally, not sure about the rest of the country. A similar show which predated The Good Life on American prime time was Green Acres. I don't remember how long that series ran, I only caught it on reruns, but that was about a "big city" lawyer who decided to give it all up to buy a farm. The show was by the same people who did Petticoat Junction and The Beverly Hillbillies. Actually Green Acres was probably a juxtoposition of the Beverly Hillbillies, a fish out of water tale where rich country folk move to Beverly Hills but don't try to fit in. GA was rich folks moving to the country and trying to fit in. Unfortunately for their furniture, a farmhouse is just not as roomy as a NYC penthouse.

I just want a life that is not complicated. I think I am managing it, I don't have charge cards any more, I try to pay cash for most things. If I don't have the cash for something, I don't buy it. I saved up for a year to buy my 160 gig ipod and paid for it through Pay Pal at amazon. It might not be practical for other people, but it works for me. I have a prepaid phone and I cut off cable 6 months ago. I only buy items when they are on sale. Compulsive buying has been reduced a great deal without the plastic. I don't get tempted as much as I used to.

Since we are in the one place on this board where we try to stay on topic somewhat, I think we should probably relate this to Anne of Green Gables or start a new thread. Would you like me to move this over to The Pub so you can continue?

Move it to the Pub by all means if you see fit Jan. I am finding it fascinating, particularly getting the American viewpoint. But seems to be just me and Mars - though I am expecting you to come back in Jan particularly since I may well relate to ykw. Do you want us to move onto PMs or are others interested and lurking or just waiting to get a word in edgeways! Mars - dont go away I have a busy couple of days but you raise a coupleof things I want to respond to.

Yeah, I think I will move it over to The Pub. I haven't had a chance to really digest all the posts yet. I've been pretty busy. I will take a closer look at it as soon as things slow down a bit, hopefully in a day or two.

Okay....stand back! I'm going to try Moderatory things and you never know what will happen!

Okay. I think I have it right now. Carry on!

Going to have to take your post in stages, Mars.

You are right about the resentment of the US financial support of Germany in the UK andother European countries. We suffered so much in the War that it is hard to watch the losers benefiting. Not entirely fair as I know decent Germans who suffer severely from guilt complexes as a result of what was done in their name.

There is a programme on Greece currently on R4. I have refrained from reviewing it as it contains incorrect matter that would have my on my hobby horse util I got saddle sore! But although it is supposed to cover the 20th century, it actually starts withWW2 to which a lot of the programme is devoted. It did strike me that in view of Greece's sufferings in the war(albeit the programme admits some was self inflicted) and the current respective financial positions of Greece and Germany, it was bound to stir up resentments against Germans.

Interested in your comments about housing, Mars.

In England in (if memory saves the 80s ) the Gvt. decided to offer Council Houses (I think you call them social housing) at very advantaeous terms to their tenants. The purchasers are now reaching retirement age and find they can sell the houses for many times what they paid for them, and buy "cheap" houses somewhere in the sun with a cheaper cost of living. The trouble is they have no idea of how to purchase in the private market, get thoroughly stung by the locals, and dont realise that the cheaper cost of living is due to to a simpler lifestyle - they demand expensive cars, swimming pools, marble halls etc etc. Having corrupted the locals and the culture , overstretched the infra strucure ,ruined the ecology and environment and sent the cost of living sky high they run out of money and patience and return to the UK to live in the welfare state. Grrrrrr

But I think one of the major problems these days are the disincentives to save. Banks no longer give a decent rate of interest, and you can only make an investment (which I used to be able to do for as little as £50 on a phone call to my bank) you have to have a large sum to invest and even then a disproportinate amount goes to the various financial entities involved. And for the simplest financial transaction the hurdles you have to jump through to prove you are not a drug traffiker, terrorist or money launderer (even if you are dealing with a Bank you have used for years and knows your income is paid in regularly from a reputable source. And then you get scares about banks going bust etc.

Its now wonder people decide there is no point in saving and they might as well enjoy their money while they can! And responsible people who have saved for a comforable old age find their savings and pensions depreciating while they pay taxes to bail out the banks and support those who having bothered to save.

"The thing about Germany, Japan and South Korea, just to name a few countries, the US built these countries from the ground up. From infrastructure to brand spanking new factories, that was the backbone on which these countries built their success. I have just been reading recently how there was a lot of resentment towards Americans on the part of the Brits because they weren't helped after the war like Germany and to a certain extent Italy. Wasn't that the point of The Mouse that Roared? Lose a war to America and they will pay for your recovery."

Mars, Lady P, Jan, et al ... sorry to wade in late and only speed reading at that! (Confess to not having read the whole thread much at all.) But simply had to kick in w/my 2bits worth over what I grasp from the above seemingly (to me at least) mono-dimensional comment. A comment someone bolder might even describe as utter poppy-cock! Another take might be that the U.S. contribution to the war effort (minute as compared with, for example that of Russia) might just possibly have come superbly and opportunistically l - a - t - e!!!! The thinking behind the tardiness of the intervention being very, very shrewd ... from America's point of view! There is a remote possibility it may have had something to do with making absolutely certain the waning super-power (Great Britain) really was doing just that: waning! And then only to swoop in when a "winner" takes all framework was assured. Bolder minds yet might have connected the fact that certain advantageous post war deals clinched by America in certain industrial sectors, were designed to ensure total and absolute supremacy for a very very long time (film distribution, weapons (Krups) and an abundance of others ...)

And again others might tastelessly suggest the $12,500,000,000 sum invested over a 3 year period till 1951 was made to stave off the threat of Communism and guard and mark out their potential markets in Europe.

The joy of it all is the quantity of propagandist tosh inhabiting every orifice of the internet on the issue and the absence of objective historical analysis of what the situation really was?

Still, nothing to worry about there, you only have to take a look around you today to get the picture: think Iraq, Libya, Iran? Arab Spring (my eye!) and watch carefully to see who gets to "yank" the biggest chestnuts from the fire in such circumstances.

But it's late and my generally feeble/fuddled brain is in a state of "sloth" induced perhaps by listening to David Attenborough's latest ... which is a treat!) so feel free to attribute such seditious contentions as those just penned to a diminished state of mind. Or if you're feeling generous you might even allow poet's license?

Love ya really though Mars! (sorry about the pun!)


A commitment to Mod'nAdminlyness: I understand that ^{r-e-s-i-s-t-a-n-c-e} _{*i - s*} ^f-u-t-i-l-e.
I shall not be starchy, nit pic, patronize, commit misandry, be economical with the facts or be a pedant, neither shall I whine. I shall endeavour to abstain from gratuitous point-scoring off the comments of other Mods or Administrators and also from engendering a culture of BLAME, remembering too to give the benefit of the doubt. Everything in my power will be done to achieve a modest post count & share my smileys, sources & avatars,



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 0144 Apr 06 2012 by Truthyness.

None taken Tru. And what you say might not come to pass if Obama is re-elected in November. He seems to like having others take the lead. And barring another attack like 9/11, Obama wants us to stay on our side of the pond allowing others to take the world wide reins.

Ha! Chance would be a fine thing Dear LoM! It's all about the extortion perpetrated globally by a BANKRUPT "America"* to save its own very worn out socks ... at the expense of the rest of the planet!

Yer Honour, I rest my case!

*Both pre-WWII and today!


A commitment to Mod'nAdminlyness: I understand that ^{r-e-s-i-s-t-a-n-c-e} _{*i - s*} ^f-u-t-i-l-e.
I shall not be starchy, nit pic, patronize, commit misandry, be economical with the facts or be a pedant, neither shall I whine. I shall endeavour to abstain from gratuitous point-scoring off the comments of other Mods or Administrators and also from engendering a culture of BLAME, remembering too to give the benefit of the doubt. Everything in my power will be done to achieve a modest post count & share my smileys, sources & avatars,



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 1219 Apr 06 2012 by Truthyness.

Tru: I am not sure what point you are trying to make! I dont think anyone was trying to make an "objective historical analysis" of the USAs post war support of certain countries. My take from reading round the subject from various angles is that most of the countries involved were scrambling to take advantage of the muddle to gain political leverage, financial advantage or just land and what lies under it. Most of the troubles in Eastern Europe and the Middle East could be put down to this. Other countries (including the UK) were far from guiltless - the US was just the most successful. Maybe as you suggest because it came into the war late and was not as shell shocked and depleted as the others.

What I think we are trying to work out here is whether and to what extent the loss of traditional simple values and the current lifestyle based on consumer goods has contributed to the current financial crises. My own view is that is was US led but other countries have not been slow in following the example! I took Mars comment about the resentment of US financial support for Germany as illustrating the current imbalance of financial clout in Europe. IYou do make a good point, which I had temporarily forgotten, that preventing the spread of communism was one of the reasons for the US shoring up Germany , and at the time some people were very glad they did so!

Lady P:

Quite!


A commitment to Mod'nAdminlyness: I understand that ^{r-e-s-i-s-t-a-n-c-e} _{*i - s*} ^f-u-t-i-l-e.
I shall not be starchy, nit pic, patronize, commit misandry, be economical with the facts or be a pedant, neither shall I whine. I shall endeavour to abstain from gratuitous point-scoring off the comments of other Mods or Administrators and also from engendering a culture of BLAME, remembering too to give the benefit of the doubt. Everything in my power will be done to achieve a modest post count & share my smileys, sources & avatars,

I am only going by what I read in history and hear in programs about the time period, but the US was hit by the Great Depression (there is debate whether policies put up by FDR's administration prolonged the recession which hit the entire globe to create the Great Depression here) and when WWII began, the US was just digging itself out of the hole it had fallen in so it wasn't as if our economy was going gang busters to begin with. The war actually created a boom in American industry hence the free flowing money. And where some see this as "boasting" I see it as generosity. Most of the time when they shared their wealth, they expected nothing in return. America was a Christian country and the basis of Christianity and even Buddism if you think about it is kharma. What you give will return to you tenfold, and I think that is what drove American generosity for the most part.

As for the lack of values, it's going to be a very simplistic explanation I am going to give and I am sure I will be lambasted for it. For the US at least, the path to materialism in favor of moral values is the country moving perceptively away from Christianity. When you see the media mock and belittle religion (with the exception of Islam), you know there aren't too many people defending religion. I can't think of any other reason really for the lack of values other than less parental supervision. A lot of people I know now are perpetual teenagers, collecting gadgets and spending money like there's no tomorrow. Not caring if they run out of money because the government will take care of their needs. So no worries. So much for morality and values. The government will always be there to take care of you so why bother with God or religion?

Oh Mars! Now here I part company from you! I dont think you can argue that the US entered the war or supported Germany etc. financially afterwards because of generosity (Christian or otherwise). Having sat on the fence while Europe was torn to shreds, they entered the War when THEY were attacked (something called Pearl Harbour?) - previously they werent going to risk American lives in defence of Britain - let alone France, Belgium etc.
And they propped up Germany etc. to protect the American Way of Life against communism.

We could argue the movement away from Christian values for ever and I agree there is some merit in it. But one could also argue that this was because the various Churches did not truly reflect true Christianity and is values and people got fed up with the materialism and wealth on the one hand of the Catholic and |Orthodox churches, and the hypocrisy and repressive regimes of the Protestants on the other. Surely some of the materialism of the US is a reaction to the puritan ethic (which of course they imported from the UK) Please note here that I am not arguing against Christianity , just against the way it is interpreted and represented by its representatives on earth.

It anyone listening to "The Peoples' Passion" on R4? I am only part way through the second but they seem to be exploring whether "the Church" (in this case CoE) should be glorifying God with magnificent and expensive buildings etc and providing a place of peace and quiet for prayer for the faithful, or whether it should be providing help and sanctuary for the poor and downtrodden.

In answer to your question Lady P. "Tru: I am not sure what point you are trying to make!" meantime you may have picked up on the "opt out" comment: "sorry to wade in late and only speed reading at that! (Confess to not having read the whole thread much at all.)" and the fact I was simply responding to one highlighted paragraph.

and erm apols if I've set the cat among the pigeons here folks.


A commitment to Mod'nAdminlyness: I understand that ^{r-e-s-i-s-t-a-n-c-e} _{*i - s*} ^f-u-t-i-l-e.
I shall not be starchy, nit pic, patronize, commit misandry, be economical with the facts or be a pedant, neither shall I whine. I shall endeavour to abstain from gratuitous point-scoring off the comments of other Mods or Administrators and also from engendering a culture of BLAME, remembering too to give the benefit of the doubt. Everything in my power will be done to achieve a modest post count & share my smileys, sources & avatars,

I am not so naive that I don't know the undercurrent of bad feelings between the US and the EU and even the UK despite the "special relationship". I am not a Pollyanna either but what do you guys over there want from us? Blood?

It can be argued that the social benefits available in the UK and in the EU would not be possible without the US. What isn't spent on military protection goes into your social services. What else do you want from the US other than opening up the treasury and putting money into your individual accounts? I can tell you that will never happen, ever. Hope we can still be friends after this...

lifeonmarsfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am not so naive that I don't know the
> undercurrent of bad feelings between the US and
> the EU and even the UK despite the "special
> relationship". I am not a Pollyanna either but
> what do you guys over there want from us? Blood?
>
#Well - in l940 the answer would probably have been yes, exactly that, blood to add to that of British soldiers that stained the poppy fields of Flanders.Bur that is an emotive and emotional response. It is also a generation ago and while of course we should learn the lessons of history I am not sure that dwelling on old wrongs (and UK v US is a comparatively mild one) does much good. Actually I seem to have been reading and hearing a lot about the sufferings of Europe in WW2 -one of thos odd coincidence life is prone to , even things on different subjects seem to have flashbacks. Sometimes it has shocked me, and I wonder if I, as an Englishwoman with it as part of ancestral memory, didnt realise the full horror, the current generation of Americans really have the slightest idea of what Europeans went through to "make the world safe" from facism.
>
> It can be argued that the social benefits
> available in the UK and in the EU would not be
> possible without the US. What isn't spent on
> military protection goes into your social
> services.

Hang on a minute, Mars. Apart from the dubious benefits of allowing the US to use the UK as an convenient Aircraft Carrier and corrupt our population with your tawdry consumer products I dont know of any way the US has contributed to the UK economy, let alone its social services! Please explain.

Do you know what they used to say during the War - "The trouble with Americans is they are overpaid, oversexed, and over here"

What else do you want from the US other
> than opening up the treasury and putting money
> into your individual accounts?

Yes please. Its hard to struggle to pay taxes on my tiny pension so the stupid British politicians can fund contribution to wars started by the *****Americans!

I can tell you that
> will never happen, ever. Hope we can still be
> friends after this...

Of course, Mars, nothing wrong with a good meaty discussion to clear the air, and get it out of one's system. Same goes for Tru, and by the way it is nice to have you back - missed my old sparring partner!

But we are going rather OT - while maybe the repercussions from the two World Wars and still reverberating, we were really talking about consumerism and the financial crisis. Your take onthat Tru as the true European among us?

PS Happy Easter to both of you (and to all on the Phorum) - or Happy Holidays if you prefer.