jump to navigation

How much are you worth? April 25, 2008

Posted by Visionary in Life, Philosphy, ethics, morality, politics, religion.
Tags: , , , ,
trackback

If something has no monetary value, society today regards it as being without inherent value, so the value of something is considered to be proportional to its monetary value. Since the distribution of money is far from even, the value of an item to an individual will be proportional to their personal wealth. If we adopt this value system, which sadly most of us have without being aware of it, the calculation of something’s value to an individual can be summarised like this

1 / (Value to individual = Individual Wealth – Monetary Value)

Or simply stated, the poorer you are and the more something costs, the more you will value it. Conversely, the richer you are and the less something costs, the less you will value it. The effect of this is that the wealthy live in a world where everything has less value and poorer people live in a world where the simplest things can have immense value. Each outlook will shape your existence accordingly. This wisdom was once summarised as,

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God

Money has become the yardstick by which we measure the value of everything. An arm, a leg or an eye, even a life has a monetary value according to compensation law and injury lawyers. Buying a new one with your compensation may still prove tricky though. That said, progress never stands still and I’ve heard that kidneys and corneas can now be purchased very affordably as the commodity price of poor people has plummeted due to a world surplus.

Even language is changing to encourage us in this way thinking. For example a child killed by sanctioned military action is now termed  ‘collateral damage’. Using words in this way gently massages our minds into accepting that a life has a monetary value. Once this concept has been slipped into our value system its a small step to claim that if the monetary savings made by ‘accidentally’ killing a few children in pursuit of a bone-fide military target are greater than the assigned monetary value of the lives, the deaths are justified and therefore acceptable.

Interestingly, not all lives are of equal value. Like everything in life today there’s a formula. The monetary value of a life is based on how much a person could be expected to earn in their projected life span. So the life of a child in a western country is considered to be worth much more than children in say Africa or Asia. Sending a cruise missile into a highly populated area to kill 1 person would never even be sanctioned in a western city due to the prohibitively high cost of the ‘collateral damage’. It is however, deemed ‘reasonable’ in an Arab country because, lets face it, Arabs are ten-a-penny and we can afford the bill for the ‘collateral damage’.

If you think I’m joking go and take a quick peek at these links here & here

He, who lives by the sword dies by the sword

If you’re tempted to say who cares, beware. There’s a price to pay for this way of thinking. If we have consciously or subconsciously accepted that the value of life can be calculated based on monetary value, our own self worth will also be influenced by how much we have.

I wonder how God would feel about this if he were watching? 

How do you feel about it?

Comments»

1. angryafrican - April 26, 2008

Great insight. We are so easy to judge people by their money and ownership. I often wonder – who would Jesus be in this life? I doubt whether he would be the person who just gathers more good. More money. But we do. Because we somehow think it makes us better. But when you go? The old saying – you can’t take it with you. You can only take what is in your heart.

Keep it up my man.

2. amberfireinus - April 27, 2008

Interesting. Do you know how it came to be that a woman was given away by her father in marriage? And the origins truly of a best man?
It wasn’t at all what you think.

Originally this was to show worth of the woman. That the men were willing to stand up and show that this woman was worthy and that they were there to give her support and protection, warning her husband not to mistreat her.

Men were paid doweries to take women as wives…. women were given value in monitary terms!!!!! How sad is that???? What are we cattle?

Now a woman’s value it seems = her looks and age. How sad is that. I can’t tell you how many men I hear say point blank that if a woman dares to be overweight or over the age of 40, she is useless to a man… Nice huh? She might as well just kill herself….?

Of course these days the reverse is applied to men sadly. They are only worth what the amount is on their paychecks to women. Pathetic thinking. Doesn’t seem to matter the quality of father, husband and partner they make… just the money they provide. Sickening!!!!!!

Wouldnt it be nice to be valued by our souls? To be cherished by all for who we are, and the energy we bring to the world around us? Now that has my vote.

Great post :)

3. Visionary - April 27, 2008

Amber, thanks for your comment. Again you have educated me and for that I thank you.

Your explanation doesn’t surprise me one bit though. It still goes on today in some cultures. The fundamental issue is that men are jealous and frightened by women. The stock reaction to something feared is violence and control.

I myself have just recently escaped the trap of value judgements based on cash. I realised that beyond my paycheck and belongings I had no idea who I was. The last 5 years have been spent deconstructing my illusions so I can start again on a different path.

I look forward to walking it with kindred souls beside me

4. amberfireinus - April 27, 2008

One of the things I love in life is Jewelry. Its my one badness. I love diamonds. Im not a costume jewelry girl. I have jewelry worth alot of money and would be valued by many.

However, the thing I value most in this world, the thing I could not part with, is a statue of an angel that I gave to my grandmother right before she died. I gave it to her so that she would have an angel with her, so she would have that vision as her last. I couldn’t be with her when she died. But that angel was. And now it is with me always. And that single item means more to me than any other thing I own.

5. Visionary - April 30, 2008

Have you heard the new green figure being used in politics. It’s called “the social cost of carbon”. It’s a calulation being used by governments to decide if it’s worth spending money on combating global warming or not, the current social cost of carbon emissions in the UK is estimated at £25 a ton. This figure was used to calculate the cost benefit case for the third terminal at Heathrow. Did you know that each and every one of our lives has been assigned a value which is included in the caluculation of the social cost of carbon? Someone actually sat down and worked out if your death was ecconomically viable. If you think I’m joking go and take a quick peek & here

Also if you want to see the formula being used by an Australian insurance company to vlaue human life check here

6. bosskitty - April 30, 2008

I enjoyed your article. I had an experience years ago that appalled me at the time. A corporate safety device salesman told me that worker safety was “incidental to the cost of production”. You can imagine the long discussion that followed …
The discussion entered into the cost of loosing production vs the loss or impairment of an employee. Basically, corporations answer to their stock holders first and morality (or God) second. The reasoning, I was told, is that if the company stops production the employees loose their jobs … they don’t burden them selves thinking about “individuals”. My take is that if that is their philosophy, their consumers are at risk, too.

7. Visionary - April 30, 2008

Thanks bosskitty. I wonder if that salesman realizes that as a member of the species he has condemned himself and his kids as worthless along with the rest of us?

If we use extrapolation to look ahead, where is this way of thinking taking us?

8. amberfireinus - April 30, 2008

I used to live realitively close to Heathrow. Anyone who sees the houses close by or under the flight path can SEE for themselves the cost of the damn carbon, and the jet fuel, and whatever else the junk. Beautiful ancient villages scarred forever.

Are you surprised that we are starting to put a cost to our air in monitary terms? I mean… we already charge for good drinking water… hell there are all of these new “Water Bars”. The latest thing in health is getting treatments of oxygen to speed the healing process.

Sadly, Sci-Fi isn’t so far off is it, with the idea that air will someday be rationed and charged for….

9. Visionary - April 30, 2008

Cost on air is one thing Amber but these people are actually putting a cost on lives – literally!

The way they calculate the Social Cost Of Carbon is to work out how much demand would go down if carbon levels go up and then work out how much that drop in demand would cost the economy in cash.

So if the first effect of high carbon levels was the flooding of Bangladesh, the effect on world demand for goods would be low because they are poor and don’t contribute much to the world economy anyway. However, if it resulted the flooding of London or New York, it would have a big impact on the world demand. So if you’re poor we can afford to kill you through increased carbon levels and their affect on the environment.

This means all our of lives in the eyes of politicians and economists already have a monetary value dependant on how much we earn. It’s only a mater of time before they start seriously considering euthanasia of the poor based on economic justifications.

You need to reed the report to believe it :(

10. amberfireinus - May 1, 2008

Sickening indeed. But you know, there is always some bright spark who turns that around to their advantage… finds a way to make profit on their side for it.

Did you read about that guy in India who ia taking old computer parts and taking the hazardous scrap from them.. recycling them and making a fortune? This was stuff that was creating pollution before… now the guy is really rich!

11. amberfireinus - May 1, 2008

Mother necessisty is the mother of invention…. sad sad sad but oh so true!

12. Visionary - May 1, 2008

Your right Amber, people are ingenious and will always find creative ways to make a profit. I haven’t heard of the guy in India but I know a guy locally in the UK whos doing hte same thing.

The question I find myself asking is, does playing the system constitute the most productive use of our ingenuity and if not what couold we do to encourage more productive use of humanities creative spark?

13. amberfireinus - May 1, 2008

Isn’t that sad. But it seems how we invent the best… out of NEED and survival.

At some point, there will be a filtration system that will collect the carbons and use them for recycle. Im sure the technology already exists. Funding and people caring enough about it to make it happen is all that is needed.

Its a long story as to who. But I am intimately connected with the Uber rich here in the US who are trying to race to find clean burning recyclable fuel sources. Is their motive the environment? Hell no. Its profit… thats all. These same people drive the worst gas guzzling vehicles… because they can. They joke about buying hybrids, but never will. It makes me feel sick to be honest. But I at least get to whisper in their ears and hear what is happening in the world that few do know about….

14. Visionary - May 1, 2008

Whilst need might drive invention, being driven by need gives us no choice over our direction. Who in their right minds would get in a Formula 1 racing car with no steering wheel?

Your rich chums may come up with some wonderful answers to the questions they are asking but are they even asking the right questions yet?

Currently it is the rich that get to decide if the future of the species is worth gambling for their enrichment, the poor have no say. But how would any of us feel if we discovered our neighbour had found a way to put our house up as collateral against a risky loan and if the investment went wrong we would lose our home?

Here’s a moral question for us all to ponder, who are the shareholders in planet Earth? Should the size of our share holding be related to our income?

It is right now!

15. amberfireinus - May 1, 2008

Alas, I am only able to whisper sense into these people who have no social or moral consence. Asking the right questions… doubtful. Their motivation only being greed and not really anyone else. Still, it will have some benefit. As I said, I am lucky that I have the opportunity to be on the “inside” and to remind them of loftier and more worthwhile goals.

No one cares about the other guy in this world of the Uber rich. Its all about Me mentality. How sad.

I do what I can… and maybe just maybe those whispers make a little difference?

16. Visionary - May 1, 2008

There might be more you can do, there may be a reason we’ve met

17. Chinky - May 10, 2008

How much are you worth is depend on how much you value yourself and fellow human beings……..

I was told at the very young age; by my parents and mainly by all my teachers from school, to love, repect and treat others like they are my brothers and sisters.
I’ve been living in UK now for almost 15 years and noticed that they are so many levels of value which base on materials, social status, religions and family; to go on….. the list is endless.

I heard the advertise on the local radio few days ago about “race for life”; how people who took part were emotionally moves to see so many people has come together for one reason. It makes me wonder; why are we waiting for something bad to be reason for us to come together….. I don’t know if you can make sense of what I’m trying to say……

It makes me sad to see that we want and doing things according to our own conveniece and it becomes apparent that we are loosing our own value, specially a family value. Based on what I see from the news and daily life makes me appreciate my own and realised that more and more of us; are driven unaware by materials value and loosing who we are…..Yet, all of this will no longer matter to us when something terrible happen.

All is well

18. Sue Ann Edwards - May 16, 2008

(winking) Now I have! THANK YOU!!!

I just ~know~ you will enjoy this….

http://sueannedwards.wordpress.com/understanding/

Here is a little snippet it of it:

” I admit, my concepts have to do with my choice of values, what I find of value and what I qualify as valuable. To Value means to Love. Here’s a good question: What’s the Value of a value system founded on lack of value? Absolutely nothing. Yet, that’s the value system most of us believe in and are trying to live.”

“A Value system founded on lack of Value?”

“Yes. The World’s Value system is founded on lack of Value. Denial. Specifically, self denial. Denying Loving ourselves Unconditionally. The less Loving it is, the more valuable it is to the majority of Us, since that majority believes in Love only upon condition. This isn’t ‘Love’ in the first place. It’s the lack of it…it’s ‘need’. Us that don’t have, seek to ‘get’, through barter, through trade. And any other means necessary: force, coercion, subversion, extortion, etc. We’ve created a global economy based on emotional insecurity. Loving the lack of Love. See what I mean by crazy? A Value system with no Valuing in it.

And as for this value system’s ‘moral code’, it is essentially a code of conduct for the amoral.”

“A moral code for the amoral?”

“Yes. ‘Moral’ means that which is chosen. What with all the conditions placed on being loved and accepted, freedom of choice is negated. If I take choice out of the picture, then no ‘morals’ are possible. It becomes a code, not of morality but of a-morality. A code of conduct for the amoral.

Any moral code impossible to live, can’t Be lived. But we can try. That’s all we’ve been doing. Trying to make the impossible possible instead of realizing the impracticality and futility of it. Any code that only promises rewards upon death isn’t a code that supports Life. The only way to actually live the code is to die, for Death is the purpose and goal of the code. But it’s important to realize that not just any death will do. The greater the suffering, the supposedly greater the rewards gained from the freedom of the grave. It’s not only Death that is worshiped, it’s death by slow torture that is the pinnacle of this codes moral achievement. And forget about living in Integrity with the code. It’s impossible to both live and die at the same time and place in the same dimension. So long as we live, we live in conflict with this code.

Just as soon as I came to this realization myself, I changed my code. Most of us don’t even realize it’s a code of death we really believe in. We think we Love Life. But Fear of Death is not a Love for Life nor does it bring to Us the Wisdom to support it.”

19. ship - November 28, 2008

Hey, you think just like me!

R u Cancerian?