It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Secret Santa Pays $46k in Layaways at PA Wal Mart

page: 2
14
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: eluryh22

You got some reasoned argument to explain why I shouldn't hold an opinion on the act of blowing 46 grand on consumer goods as opposed to other more needy groups or individuals?
You after an echo chamber or something?



Maybe a bunch of homeless drug addicts doesn't pull at my heartstrings.




posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

That's cool, that is your opinion.
I'm not butt hurt that our opinions differ, I expected it when I first posted.

Yeah, poor little Johnny's new X box...



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand




posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Unfortunately for whatever reason I'm unable to view the YouTube.
But seeing as this is a discussion forum, if you have an opinion to express in your own words please feel free and I shall respond similarly.
edit on 10.12.2016 by grainofsand because: typo



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Nice good to see something positive for a change. Now go watch the Little House on the Prairie marathon on COZI. a reply to: reldra



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

I've managed to watch the video now and really I'm surprised at the immature lack of debate from your good self.

Hardly Grinch-like to be of the mindset that 46 grand could be better spent on needy people in Everett PA.
I've just done a quick search and there are many foodbanks/pantries in that area which indicates poverty

Explain exactly how I'm a Grinch because I'd choose to feed the hungry before paying people's consumer item bills?
Yep, I think priorities are misguided in this story, but if you disagree please debate like a reasoned adult instead of posting a video as a pre-teen would on facebook.
You are better than that.

*edit*
To reiterate, I would prefer the equivalent of 4600 people getting $10 worth of food at a food bank compared to 194 people getting their flat screen or x-box
edit on 10.12.2016 by grainofsand because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

You're not debating.
You're bitching from your high horse.
All you have done is find flaw in someone's generosity.

Every food bank cries poverty by the way.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

No bitching, and my you seem particularly emotional about this.
Perhaps explain why you disagree with me minus the ad hominem and emotion.
edit on 10.12.2016 by grainofsand because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

I think that criticism of someones generosity is in bad taste.
You say food banks are suffering.
Are you saying people in new York are in greater need of food than people starving in Africa?
I doubt you are.
Giving is giving. I'm not going to question anyone's motivation for giving freely.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

That is your choice, and I'll judge and question whatever I like as my choice.
You are absolutely correct of course though, there are many more starving people around the world more needy than the poor in the US.

If you suggested 4600 people getting ten dollars worth of food in a famine condition did more good than 194 US citizens getting flat screens and game consoles, I would agree.

I mentioned foodbanks in PA as it was geographically appropriate.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

I think Bluntone has a point, but so do you.

Ideally, all charity would be put into a pool that was directed toward the most extreme, dire situation first and only moved onto the next lesser need once that second need became the most dire one.

But that's pretty impractical of course and if it were so, we really couldn't justify things like 'make a wish' and such because really, a child who is not going to live long anyway is pretty low down on the list when compared to, say, a child who will live a long and productive life if only they don't starve today.

But people feel strongly about different things. I obviously have no idea about this guy's motivations, but maybe he had a poor childhood that somehow involved walmart layaway? Or somehow something involving specifically walmart layaway really emotionally moved him?

I don't know of course but if it's a really specific and repetitive thing that this guy is doing, I think it's fair to assume he's thought it through.

That's my argument for why it seems fine to me, and that it's nice. I definitely do agree that more utility could have been gotten out of those specific donation dollars. But eventually that leads back to the original point of cutting off every charity work that isn't THE MOST dire one... Idk.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Oh and to anyone crying tears that I'm daring to debate an alternative view to the OP, ask the mods to move it from ATS Current Events to BTS General Chat.

I'll ignore it then and leave y'all to your group love-in to feel warm and fuzzy that poor lil Johnny got his x-box.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: TheBlackTiger

I understand your sentiments absolutely.
And of course the benefactor is free to use their money as they wish.
I am also free to perceive such use on consumer goods as a waste of 46 grand while that area has hungry people using food banks.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: grainofsand

You're not debating.
You're bitching from your high horse.
All you have done is find flaw in someone's generosity.

Every food bank cries poverty by the way.



It's his typical m.o, look at his history, any time a nice story hits ats he has got to come in and try to grinch it.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: thesaneone

Do you wish to debate the topic as I am or do you wish to debate me?
I'm easy but I wouldn't want to stray off topic for obvious T&C's reasons.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

I was talking with bluntone not you.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: thesaneone

Yes I know.
Talking about a member (me) instead of discussing the topic.
I chose to respond as I am free to do so.
Unfortunately ATS is not your website.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 01:09 PM
link   
People give, people don't give.

People care, people don't care.

It's nice to see people voluntarily doing things for others.

Now everyone lets do an awkward group hug.






posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Lol, and nowhere have I said what the benefactor did was anything but kind hearted.
I just think it was a waste of 46 grand buying lil Johnny his x-box when there are better ways that money could have helped many more people who just want food.

I am free to rationally question and judge whatever I like if I have a reasoned argument.
And yes, I think 194 people getting their consumer goods paid for is a waste of 46k.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy



This guy doesn't get to deduct the gift on his taxes either.
That's a big chunk.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join