Lactivism

[Gob]

Twenty past.

[Gob]

Oh well, time for me to go home.

TTFN People.

have a nice day!

[Lord Jim]

My, this thread certainly got quite a workout last night.....

[The Hen]

Yes. It was indeed an incredibly unnecessary reopening of the thread for a pointless diversion from the topic.

[BoSoxGal]

In my biz - and many others - time IS money; I'm not sure how it doesn't rate as a commodity which falls under 'goods'.

In my mind, to be affluent in terms of time is better than to be affluent in terms of stuff.

If I didn't have massive student loan debt, I'd happily live a minimalist lifestyle that allowed me to hardly work and have loads of free time to travel & create.

Think outside the box, folks.

[Scooter]

To say that time is money, however, is to presume that the former is being used to create the latter, which hardly makes it "free time", which in turn pretty much demolishes basing the definition of "affluence" on the amount of free time one has.

Not that there was ever a question that affluence had to do with anything but wealth; otherwise, as someone else noted, we could well describe an unemployed person with barely enough food to eat as "affluent", which we clearly do not.

[BoSoxGal]

Main Entry: af·flu·ence
Pronunciation: \ˈa-(ˌ)flü-ən(t)s also a-ˈflü- or ə-\
Function: noun
Date: 14th century
1 a : an abundant flow or supply : profusion b : abundance of property : wealth
2 : a flowing to or toward a point : influx

The first definition doesn't reference property or wealth. Does it?

eta: I want to clarify that I'm not strictly speaking sticking up for rubato; however, one can have an affluence of time, which can be purchased by a affluence of wealth. One can also have an affluence of time absent an affluence of wealth - so yes, a homeless person can still experience affluence.

[Gob]

I must say that no matter how you define it, a bunch of breastfeeding women going for a coffee cannot be defined as "excessive affluence", can it?>

[Scooter]

homeless person can still experience affluence.

And can you point to even a single example of a homeless person being described as affluent? Or any example of someone speaking of an "affluence of time"?

This was another one of those threads where a comment was made based on a misread of the OP, and then an attempt was made to cover up for that. I don't think it deserves dignifying any more than that.

[BoSoxGal]

I know working class women who advocate for breastfeeding rights, so I'm not sure of a relationship, no.

[BoSoxGal]

Prior post was in response to Gob's.

Scooter, if you do a bit of research you'll find that time affluence is a huge subject discussed by a range of folk, from minimalists like me to social scientists. Yes, lots of folks are referred to as time affluent.

[Lord Jim]

And can you point to even a single example of a homeless person being described as affluent? Or any example of someone speaking of an "affluence of time"?

This was another one of those threads where a comment was made based on a misread of the OP, and then an attempt was made to cover up for that. I don't think it deserves dignifying any more than that.

Several attempts, actually....

And the effort to cover it up involved completely misusing a common word, and then attempting to defend that misuse of that common word, until the evidence of the person's ignorance regarding the meaning of that common word was so overwhelming that he finally slithered away from the discussion....

And now what we apparently have going on (for reasons that I cannot fathom) is a revival of this discussion for the purpose of carrying out a spirited attempt to somehow justify and rationalize rube's comments and to try and present them as something other than what they clearly and obviously were; an ignorant misuse of a common term, which he then followed up with an equally ignorant defense...

Until, as I said, the evidence of his fuck up was so overwhelming, that he did what he always does when that happens...(which is frequently) he slithered away from the discussion, never having had the grace to admit his error. (Which he never does)

[Lord Jim]

And BTW, just to remind everyone of what rube actually said....

He never said anything about this imaginative" time affluence" concept that has recently been forward...

You won't find him using that term anywhere....

What rube first did was use the phrase "excessive affluence" to characterize the reason behind a group of women breast feeding at a coffee shop....

Then, when challenged on this bit of nonsense, he defended it by ignorantly claiming that "free time" was the "defining characteristic of affluence".....

Which it manifestly is not....

It takes some really strenuous and creative rubeslating to somehow get from what rube actually said to the concept of "time affluence"....

[loCAtek]

I dunno, I can see his comment stipulating 'excessive [time] affluence', which would be an over-aboundance of free time, which later he tried to clarify, as such;

The defining characteristic of affluence is free time.
yrs,
rubato

There were others who tried to say affluence only applied to wealth, but that's not entirely accurate, or least not how Rubato used it.

[Joe Guy]

If affluence is defined by free time, then those who post here the most often are affluent.

[dales]

Or unemployed.

[BoSoxGal]

As I said, I didn't chime in to defend rubato - loCA makes the point of how one might, and I did also.

BUT, my reason for chiming in - after reading the thread all at once, having been too busy to check it the past day or so - was to point out the errors of assumption about language.

Yes, the most common usage of affluence is meaning wealth (i.e., property), but as I showed, it means a profusion of ANYTHING - and as I already indicated, a simple Google search will prove that 'time affluence' and 'affluence of time' are widely used concepts/terms.

I love the English language. I dare say I have a vocabulary and comprehension of English language usage as extensive, if not moreso, as anybody else who posts on this board. I saw a wrong and acted to rectify it; nothing more.

However, I still don't despise rubato.

[Sean]

As you said BSG, 'affluence' is most commonly associated with wealth. That is why the expression 'time affluence' has the word 'time' attached to it... to show that it is defining something other than the usual definition. I'm sure that somebody as intelligent as ol' Rubey would have us believe he is would be aware of that distinction and would have used the expression 'time affluence' if he was in fact referring to 'time affluence'.

If...

[Lord Jim]

As you said BSG, 'affluence' is most commonly associated with wealth. That is why the expression 'time affluence' has the word 'time' attached to it... to show that it is defining something other than the usual definition. I'm sure that somebody as intelligent as ol' Rubey would have us believe he is would be aware of that distinction and would have used the expression 'time affluence' if he was in fact referring to 'time affluence'.

If...

Correctamundo...

(The rest of that "If" of course, being "if he is in fact intelligent"...)

I find this kind of fascinating....

Apparently we have a couple of folks here who, for some reason, (and what that reason might be is what I find to be a fascinating question) simply cannot bring themselves to accept the most obvious and straight forward explanation for why rube said what he said; ie, that he simply is so ignorant that he did not know what the meaning of the word affluence is so he used it improperly, and then when challenged on it, defined it improperly.

So rather than accept this, they are attempting to concoct some sort of creative "re-imagining" of what rube said and meant, that bears no relationship to what he actually said.

[It's the sort of thing Gwen used to frequently do for Steve...Steve would say something boneheadedly stupid and then Gwen would dive in to try and come up with some sort of tortured rationale and imaginative explanation (substituting her words and phrases for his) to try to make the stupid statement sound like some some sort of clever insight... Always amusing, but never effective...]

Apparently, they simply cannot believe that rube is so ignorant that he just simply wouldn't know the meaning of a common term that the average 7th grader would be familiar with, so they try to imagine some other explanation.

To me, this is totally bewildering. Having been exposed to the vast the breadth and depth of this man's ignorance on nearly a daily basis for more than a decade, I have absolutely no problem at all accepting the obvious fact that he didn't know what the word affluence meant. His not knowing the meaning of a simple term like that fits perfectly with my understanding of him.

I have never seen the slightest evidence that the man is particularly bright or has any knowledge at all beyond an extremely narrow subject range....On the other hand, the evidence to the contrary is copious and ubiquitous....(Two more words I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn rube doesn't know the meaning of.)

[Econoline]

In defense of bsg, I'd like to point out what she has already said twice: she's not defending rubato's derailing this thread so much as going along with the derailment, because she apparently finds a discussion of the meaning of "affluence" more interesting than the original topic and way more interesting than yet another discussion of "what's wrong with rubato." (And comparing her to Gwenhwyvar was just downright mean. )

As for the "affluence" of homeless people...I've noticed that most of them have to spend most of their supposed "free time" panhandling, scrounging for money, scrounging for food, scrounging for a place to sleep (usually not very comfortably) without getting robbed of their few material possessions, or even of their lives. It's a hard sort of life, without an abundance of "free time" or "liesure" in the way we think of those concepts.

But there are indeed people of modest means with an affluent lifestyle, and wealthy people with lives so hectic and constrained by others that I wouldn't consider them affluent. Perhaps another ingredient, besides time, might be contentment?