I never pretended to be like what some of you went through. Demo threw those words out there. I merely stated that I didn't have enough money to donate to people that I thought needed it. Again, you guys are right, I didn't have to go through college paycheck by paycheck, and I'm glad I didn't. I've heard too many horror stories about having to pay off student loans. Again, to make my point clear, I NEVER pretended to go through college paycheck to paycheck. I NEVER pretended anything of the sort. I stated:
Do you want to see a screenshot of my bank account... 88 bucks in savings and 100 in checking. I really don't think i'm at a point where I can donate to a lot of people, although thanks to you guys and many of your conservative views I did make a decent donation to Barack Obama's campaign, just to be sure to help.
There is no mention of college or anything otherwise. I'm merely talking about donating to people that need it. Again from my other post, I'm NOT going to give away my parents money. If they feel they need to donate, they can do it for themselves.
And it finally comes full circle. The money issue came up initially because you had the gall to question my decision to go to a different country to do missions work. I chose to help people in another country and you said that I should have spent my money here so that the government could get taxes from that money. (paraphrased because I don't feel like going digging)
You questioned what I did with my money and then stated that people who have
money should be willing to give more
. At that time you were "conveniently" leaving out the fact that you have plenty of money to spend on what you want
to spend it on. I blew you in on that, and frankly, I'm glad I did.
Also, I know it's been several (dozen) posts since you stated this, but I am really irked by your post about how you're aspiring to be a well-known photographer and therefore you needed the best equipment. Do you think Michelle is just aspiring to be a mediocre photographer? Of course not, no matter what you do you should aspire to be the best. However, most people have to work their way up to the best equipment - they start with what they can afford and save for better. So please don't insinuate that Michelle is not a good photographer or aspiring to be one (as she is extremely talented) just because her camera has noise in low light (and yes, I know what that means). It's condescending, and it annoys me as she is my friend. So I'll say something even if she doesn't.
Thank you Liz. Talent doesn't come from equipment, though some people would like to think it does.
And yes, I could have gotten worse equipment, but I worked the entire previous summer at a newspaper, building my portfolio and earning money to be able to buy what I did.
Summer is what? 3 months? You have a D3 ( http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon ... 34/D3.html
) You had a paid internship that allowed you to save $5,000 to spend on a camera? I think I need to get an internship where you were, since after taxes you can pay living expenses, car, gas, insurance, etc and still
have an extra $5,000 to spend on a camera. Why bother ever getting a job if an internship pays that well?
Your previous camera (you posted this earlier in this thread as well) was a D200 ( http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon ... /D200.html
) Which was introduced by Nikon November 1, 2005.
So, in under three years you purchased two cameras totaling over $6,500. That does not include memory cards, lenses, flashes, etc etc etc etc etc.
Look, there is a simple underlying theme here... you started your posts on this thread telling us that redistributing other people's wealth was part of being a member of an "enlightened" society and that Obama was the one to lead us down that path. What you were "forgetting" to mention was that you have plenty of your own money that you don't choose
to redistribute. You can couch that in the "need" to have ultra high end photography equipment, but that's a load of crap and you know it. There are PLENTY of professionals out there who do NOT have $5,000 cameras.
The point here is NOT the cameras. The point is that you seem to be sitting on quite the moral high horse talking about spreading the wealth... well, everyone's wealth but your own... you are quite happy to spend that on whatever you feel like it. And you are quite good at making excuses for that.