Never ceases to amaze me….play the vid.
And is it just me, or does anyone else catch the significance of shoes for a barefoot man, this time of year?
…For some reason…Actually it’s spiritual to me…People are softened in their heart this time of the year, and see disturbing sights…and go the extra step to do something about it. What we should do, is have that vision all year long.
“Touching, Hugh!” as I relive the glory years of 20/20.
Definitely a nice story. The amazing thing is that very similar stories are repeated across this country many times on a daily basis. The big difference is this one received news coverage.
Jay
That’s why he joined the NYPD, to help the helpless, punish the guilty, and see justice done. That young man’s going places, God bless him!
I may be a dreamer but I sort of expect this type of behaviour from my fellow man, the Policeman just thought he was behaving like most of us should and never gave his endeavor another thought till the next time, think about this gesture this coming Christmas (and all year) I’m sure you will.
On one of the news channels today there was an update saying that the homeless guy in the video is shoeless again. Stated that he has hid the shoes because they are too valuable. The homeless guy is also wanting a “piece of the pie” from the video’s popularity. Said that he was not asked to be videoed.
I believe in kindness to your fellow man but am also a realist that no good deed goes unpunished.
Jay
I’m perhaps a bit too cynical, but this is a classic example of how in the richest of interactions, everybody comes away with something they want or need. It just takes a few days for it to get sorted out. [sigh]
What matters here is the original act of kindness. If the guys wants to make money off the video, or hide the shoes, it doesn’t take away from the original good Samaritan.
The cop did a good thing, no question.
I’m half surprised the homeless guy didn’t get mugged for the boots. That’s undoubtedly why he hid them.
And you can call me a cynic, but his wanting a piece of the “action” kinda says to me that he’s homeless in part because he wants to be.
When the 2008 flood occurred in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, there were many families that lost everything but the clothing on their backs.
I gave money to some families to buy food. Some of the families bought non-perisable food and spent the money very wisely and I felt really good about it and donated money to more families. One family (with THREE little kids, 6 months 2 and 4 years) bought cigarettes and beer ONLY. I didn’t really feel so good about that.
I gave money to some families to buy clothing and some of them spent the money very wisely and returned the unused cash to me for others! WOW, Did I ever feel good about that!.. another family bought a big screen TV, instead of winter coats for their 2 kids (8 and 10 years old). I feel really bad for those kids.
Granted, I GAVE them the money and that completed my “obligation” to my fellow citizens here. What they did with my gift is their problem… but I still don’t feel like I did any good with my generosity toward a few of the children involved, and it makes it hard to do it again.
The cop did a good thing… what the homeless man did was squander the charity.
I saw a quote from the man’s brother saying that the man had chosen to be homeless (and shoeless).
Semper,
Well said. As always, you can not control the character of other people. Most will do the proper actions when given the opportunity however the ones who don’t tarnish the image of the others.
I believe that if all the wealth in our nation was confiscated tomorrow yet the free market economy remained, the same people who are wealthy today would be wealthy again within a couple of years. It is the characteristics of individuals that put them where they are, not fortune or luck. Sure there are always exceptions such as health, lotteries, or natural disasters that affect this, but time reveals the true character even in these cases.
Jay
The skeptic in me wonders if he really “wanted a piece of the action” , or if that was simply internet embellishment. It seems like internet news sites thrive on trying to find the ultimate ugly in everything, or at the very least, trying to tear down anything not ugly. Take Yahoo for example. Their news homepage reads like the National Enquirer. [xx(]
I disagree with your blanket statement. While it is true that many of the wealthy could rebuild their lost wealth, I have seen too many successful family owned businesses run into the ground by the next generation. A good example is what Brian France is doing to NASCAR. People who build a business from nothing recognize the value of each customer or client. People who inherit a thriving business usually see it as an asset from which they can extract as much personal income as possible. Incidentally, that is exactly what venture capitalists do. They buy a big enough piece of a company to gain organizational control, drain as much money from it as they can, make it look more valuable than it is with short sighted cuts, then sell their interest.
Phoebe Vet,
There are always exceptions. Read my last sentence. The reason that statement is broadly true is that people generally keep doing the same things, the rich keep doing what got them there(or keeps them there) and the poor keep doing the what got them there(or keeps them there).
Jay
And my point is that a great many people are rich only because they inherited it or because their rich parents gave them an advantage over others with a very expensive education and a hand up getting started by opening doors that would not otherwise be available to them…
Cartoon in a well-known men’s magazine some years ago:
“I credit my success to some advice my father gave me. ‘Here’s a million dollars. Don’t lose it.’”
Dave,
The vast majority, as in 84%, of the rich are classified as “nouveau rich, having reached the top without benefit of inheritance”. This percent has been fairly consistent from as far back as the late 1800s.
Being able to accumulate wealth in one generation is one of the strong arguments for the free enterprise, capitalist system we have. Also, one of the weakness is the chance of failure.
As far as higher education, if one is driven, there has been ways to fund it other than parents for decades. Scholarships, work-study, grants, loans.
True, there are people who have inherited wealth and squandered it. As well, people have been born in to poverty and overcome it. Both illustrate my original point of character being the driving force of where they will end up in the lot of life.
Jay
Yes. I had to do that. But there’s only so much one can reasonably get unless they are top tier academic or athletically. I know my life would have been different if I was given a blank check to go to a college of my choice - not what I could reasonably afford.
Such is life. Yes some people are able to make great fortunes out of nothing - but it’s almost always easier to succeed with a little seed money, I’m sure. Not that I fault people for that - if they have the advantage, it would be foolish not to accept it.
Zugmann,
You are absolutely right. However, almost everyone who attended higher education except the ones who were Rhodes Scholars or attended their perceived top tier school(Harvard, Columbia, U of ?) can make the same argument of money limitations whether family money was involved or not. That is assuming the academic standards for their dream school would have been able to be met too(even athletes have this limitation).
My point is that the beauty of the economic freedom we have in this country is that anyone can overcome the conditions that they were born in to. The individuals character is a big factor in how their life will turn out, not their “inheritance” of poverty or wealth. Sometimes it just takes a spark from a teacher, boss, family member, or stranger offering a hand to ignite it in a person. However it is up to the individual to take it and run.
In turn, inheriting a fortune or being born in to it is no guarantee of success either. As Dave pointed out, there are people who squander what has been given to them. I again say that is a result of the individuals character. Just because one is born rich or poor does not mean the success traits are present or not.
Jay
I agree that life in America is what you make of it. My disagreement was with the blanket statement that all the same people would rise to the top and all the same people would sink to the bottom if the economy was totally reset.
In my family business example, many people in high positions of such a business would not have even been hired if they were not related.
If you change it to MANY of the same people, I would agree.