Dan Jr. - 12 July 2007 03:52 AM
“......................we should aid those less fortunate, but to do so, (and this was not obvious to me, but a Reverend Dr. Scott (step-father of one of the Monkees, by the way), pointed out once, in a sermon,
“The first step in helping the poor is to not be one.”
Pretty obvious after it is pointed out, you know?
And we have to behave with a rational self-interest, or we will not survive, and we cannot raise our young.
I guess the contentious part of all that is, ‘what is rational self-interest?’
Dan, admiring Huli for sticking to her own very-advanced feelings
Thank you Dan for believing I have ‘advanced’ feelings. I think that should be rephrased as 
feelings?
My own little opinion views that ‘rational self-interest’ 
begins with discerning responsibility to both self and to others, where that border begins and ends, and according to self ability.
To suppose that the best way to helping the poor is to not be one yourself branches beyond just simple self-security to what you might then be able to do to help others have what you have too….that way, you no longer have to worry about them.
But to believe that a baby born HIV positive has selected negative thoughts prior to birth and therefore is solely responsible for his illness is ludicrous.
On one hand though, looking positively at being poor, one might also consider:
1. It’s less likely anyone will steal anything from you
2. You may actually (depending on the degree of poverty) have fewer bills to worry about paying
a. no car note
b. no utility bills
c. no taxes to pay
d. you have fewer ‘things’ to worry about dusting or moving when you’re evicted
e. etc.
On the flip side, looking negatively at being even mildly well off you:
a. have to take measures to protect what you have, both materially and in liquid assets
b. have to spread income through various banks and stock options (nice little complicated game)
c. have to be VERY sure all accounts are paid on time to protect credit records
d. have to figure out how to hide some income so you don’t have to pay taxes on it (like making investments or moving accounts into another name
e. have to be sure you keep your job or you’ll lose everything and become poor
f. etc. 
Then there are the natural 
catastrophes that certainly cannot be blamed on the common negativity of an entire group like Katrina’s event, earthquakes, tornadoes, floods etc. These, of course, don’t care about positive OR negative thought patterns, they don’t discriminate.
On a positive note: yes, I had fun with the Smileys
