The 60-Story House For One Family

jackie100

O.G.
Jan 17, 2007
1,129
5
42
Personally I think it's very extravagant but absolotely NOT disgusting. People are entitled to do with their money as they please.

This may not be a politically correct thing to say or may not be a very popular view point to have but I don't think that any person is obligated to donate anything or give anything to anybody or give money to charity no matter how wealthy they are. Of course it would be nice if they did but no one should really be expected to.

It's a personal choice, NOT an obligation.

Spending over a thousand on a purse would probably also be considered very extravagant to the average american family. Some people pay less than that for a month's rent. Plus in some countries you could live on a couple of hundred dollars for a month. I bet that many people would consider buying designer bags also as extremely disgusting and wasteful.

It's all relative.

I feel like if it's your money you can be as wasteful as you want. I worked hard for my money and I'll be as wasteful as I want. I'm not going to change my lifestyle because other people in the world are poor.

As long as I know I have enough in savings and investments for myself I'll spend as I like. I'm just being honest when I say that I don't factor the state of world in when deciding what to buy.

The guy probably worked hard for his money. Why is it his problem if other people in the world are not as well off? Why should he not be extravagant just because of them? Why does it make him disgusting? I sure don't watch what I buy just because of other people's misfortune. As long as it's his money he can do with as he pleases.

I feel like everyone is responsible for themselves. He's should not be held accountable for other people's poverty or misfortune. That's not his problem. I don't believe in a socialist type world where everyone has to help someone out or watch what they spend because of other people's problems. He can spend as he likes.
 

jackie100

O.G.
Jan 17, 2007
1,129
5
42
I fail to see the humor in my comment.:confused1: Some people work and work and still can't afford a place to live, it doesn't make it their fault. Of course it's not his responsibility, but I personally find it ridiculous and selfish to buy a 60 story mansion while there are people and animals suffering out in the world and would just like to have something as little as a piece of bread or some water and here you have this man buying this extravagent house that no one in the world needs. He seems to be corrupt by money. I do buy higher-end bags, it's a hobby, but I still do my good deeds everyday, such as donating money to organizations, donating food to soup kithcens and animals shelters, donating clothes, etc. It wouldn't hurt this man to help one person or animal everday, and put this wasted money towards a better cause rather than splurging it on an unnecessary house like that. I mean, cmon. It saddens me that there are people like this man who wants to buy a ridiculous 60 story mansion, when there is living souls out there suffering and dying by the minute from various things such as inadequate doctor care or malnutritution.
It's not his problem though. As long as he earned his money he can do with it as he pleases. Do you think he should donate most of his fortune away to help the less fortunate?

Donating and helping others is a personal choice and not an obligation. No one is automatically entitled to help, or a handout, or a handful or whatever...

Of course it is commendable for someone to help others, I just don't like the notion of how people sort of expect it.

I could probably afford to donate quite a bit of money of money if I felt like it. But do I? Honestly, I don't. Just because someone has money doesn't mean they "have" to donate anything.
 

seedvila

Member
May 4, 2007
217
0
47
High in the Sierras
He seems to be corrupt by money. I do buy higher-end bags, it's a hobby, but I still do my good deeds everyday, such as donating money to organizations, donating food to soup kithcens and animals shelters, donating clothes, etc.
It wouldn't hurt this man to help one person or animal everday, and put this wasted money towards a better cause rather than splurging it on an unnecessary house like that.
Why should he have to try and save the world? Because he is wealthy? He's earned the right to waste his money if he so chooses. Besides, it's not wasted money if it buys something to enrich or enhance your life.
 

jackie100

O.G.
Jan 17, 2007
1,129
5
42
Let's just hope that people with so much money and so many advantages in life like this man can make a difference and can someday do so much good and come to their senses and open their eyes at the world suffering among people and animals that is taking place everyday instead of wasting money on a 60 story house.
Not everyone wants to save the world or be a Mother Theresa. Some people just want to enjoy the fruits of their labor and live the good life. I definitely don't see anything wrong with that.
 

Lvbabydoll

O.G.
Mar 2, 2006
44,836
47
California
Wow. I'm not going to comment either way on whether this is or isn't "right" since it's become the whole point of the topic now, but I think it'd be interesting to see.
 

thithi

::pretty:tough::
O.G.
I still think it's commendable that he's giving 600 people jobs, although I have no idea what 600 people would be doing to maintain one family. Then again, maybe one family means the entire family including extended relatives? friends too? who knows...

What somebody does with their own money is their own business. I wouldn't want somebody telling me that I was required to donate money simply because I made a lot.
 

purplekitty

Certified bag addict
Mar 31, 2006
4,294
2
You are making assumptions, unless you have facts to support your posts. You have no idea why he built a building that size, "just for his family". You don't see greed when you spend $900 on a bag, when other people are suffering?It sounds like it is okay for you to spend what you perceive as justified spending , but don't you think someone that is in poverty, would look at you just the same. Also, you have no clue if this man is giving back to society, just making assumptions based on your opinions. You aren't supplying the facts.So, how do you know he isn't helping the homeless and making sure he can help those that are less fortunate? Employing 600 people is definitely not hurting them, but giving them jobs, how is that a bad thing? You seem to be quick to judge when you don't know what is going on behind closed doors.
Please be respectful in the way you present your thoughts to other members.
 

purplekitty

Certified bag addict
Mar 31, 2006
4,294
2
I have said my point of view, which is I see this man as greedy as not needing all of that. That obviously hasn't went well even though other members feel the same way I do. I have no idea why when I give my humble opinion like other members' have, members seem to get upset. I am sorry if my comments hit close to home with some members, if that is what happened.If I knew I was going to be lectured and have my comments picked apart, then really wouldn't have ventured in here. :sad:
 

Aslan

rainy
Nov 12, 2006
3,992
1
New York City
You are making assumptions, unless you have facts to support your posts. You have no idea why he built a building that size, "just for his family". You don't see greed when you spend $900 on a bag, when other people are suffering?It sounds like it is okay for you to spend what you perceive as justified spending , but don't you think someone that is in poverty, would look at you just the same. Also, you have no clue if this man is giving back to society, just making assumptions based on your opinions. You aren't supplying the facts.So, how do you know he isn't helping the homeless and making sure he can help those that are less fortunate? Employing 600 people is definitely not hurting them, but giving them jobs, how is that a bad thing? You seem to be quick to judge when you don't know what is going on behind closed doors.
I agree, well said.
 

purplekitty

Certified bag addict
Mar 31, 2006
4,294
2
sigh. As I have stated a few times in this thread, I have never spent more than $900 on a bag.
I personally found the comments disrespectful to me because others have said the exact same thing I said yet I am the one being "lectured" so to say. Assumptions, wrong at that, were made about me. Once again, haven't spent $900 on a bag. Even though I have spent a couple hundred on bags here and there, I still do good deeds each day(see my other posts.) I was said I wasn't supplying the facts. I am working off of everything that was given to me(just like everyother member in this thread), what I am supposed to do, look up this man's criminal and medical backgrouds and learn enough to write a book about him? I don't get it. I am just saying that, In My Honest Humble Opinion, 600 people to take care of a family of four is greedy. And here I am accused of being "quick to judge when I don't know what's going on behind closed doors". That is a large, false, assumption as no one on here knows me well enough to accuse me of such a condescending remark of my personal character. So yes, I find it disrespectful that I give my opinion(same as others on here too) and yet I get all this thrown at me. I feel as if I have hit a "soft spot" on some members, and there they know this man personally, hey sorry if you felt offended, but once again, this is my humble opinion.
 

Aslan

rainy
Nov 12, 2006
3,992
1
New York City
You don't get the point. To some people, more than 50 dollars spent on a bag is greedy and wasteful. It's about perspective, not dollar amount.