collecting different colour vinyl (aka the 'what's wrong with our world and how to fix it' thread)

extract from Brian's blog, 27 April 2010:

"[O]riginal Les Pauls of the 1958-1960 breed can sell for upwards of $300,000! I don't know about you, but to me that is an absolutely inconceivable amount of money. [...] I'm reading this book [which] goes into great detail about how these guys buy one of these old guitars, and then they want another, and another, and another, because the flame of the wood, or the sunbursts are a bit different on each one... WHAT!? There are people starving to death down the street from me, and people are blowing hundreds of thousands of dollars on a guitar!?! Get serious about your whole life right now."

Different-colour-vinyl collectors ... are you listening?

Slight difference in vinyl prices and guitar prices though, Gaslight themselves (or with the label) release difference colour vinyl so would be a bit hypocritical for Brian to say anything about collecting vinyl.

First off, I love this argument. Let me lay out some info before I get into this so you guys can understand my point of view.

1. I believe I own the most expensive or second most expensive TGA vinyl collection. I have spent over $500 dollars on Sink or Swim vinyl alone! (TP $350, Black $100, White w/ Splatter $50, Clear $15 and one other that I can't remember what color it is $15)

2. I run my own Non-Profit Organization "Volunteering Rocks" that is all about helping the homeless https://thegaslightanthem.forumotion.com/news-f4/contest-the-coffeehouse-sessions-t1500.htm

So, I spend a lot of money on vinyl and do a lot to help the homeless too. The problem with Brian's argument is when you take it past just Gibson Guitars or Colored Vinyl, really his argument is how can we justify spending money on items when people are starving just down the street? The answer is in two parts:

1. People give what they feel comfortable giving... in one of my Volunteering Rocks contest people could have won an autographed Record from their favorite band with minimal effort by helping the homeless.. guess how many people entered? 8. That's it. People love to say that they do help out but the truth of it is that they don't even when given great motivation and requiring minimal effort.

2. We are not a socialist/communist society (universal health care does not make us a socialist nation). There is no requirement on the average citizens part to make things better for anyone other than themselves.

I really think the problem with the argument is usually the cause... I bet Brian saw a guitar he wanted and learned that it was out of his price range, it was so ridiculously high that it made him feel like money was being wasted. If someone really believed in this argument then they would not own any frivolous items. SO, until I find someone that is making this argument and really doesn't own any frivolous items I will continue to by my colored vinyl.

oh... and just to answer this in Fox News style...

OMG!!! TGA are a bunch of Socialists trying to take my hard earned money, give it to druggie welfare recipients and ruin America! Don't Tread On Me!


(heavy heavy sarcasm there)

I have a pretty decent TGA vinyl collection as well! Have pretty much everything but US SOS (Clear), SATQ 7" (White), and AS (Black). Have both those colored boots and all those expensive Gunner pressings too... 12 diff SOS pressings alone! Should have picked up that white SATQ when I had the chance tho..but didn't wanna pay more than $100 for it!


Anyways everyone spends money on things they want rather than need. Some people like to go to the bar, some like to go out to eat, some like expensive cars or clothes. Others do all those things. I go to work to make money to afford things I enjoy! In most cases there's no right and wrong on how you spend your money unless you have a problem with it! I like to buy ALK3 and TGA stuff. It makes me happy and it's a hobby of sorts!

Just for the record. You added the vinyl stuff yourself right?

Also, the people dropping 300,000 on a guitar probably donate just as much to charity. Or at the very least pay that much in taxes a year aka The American Charity.

PFREEZY wrote:

Just for the record. You added the vinyl stuff yourself right?

Yes, I just wondered if the argument could be used to wind up different-colour-vinyl collectors...

I'm pleased to find though, that it has turned into an interesting discussion. I too have a large TGA collection, though I focus on CDs (promos, etc.) mainly, as well as magazine covers. I also buy original art, for which I pay much more than the material cost of the paper and pen. Caring for others does indeed not mean having to neglect oneself. A sense of one's own needs is perhaps key to appreciating the needs of others (as in 'treationg other people the way you would like them to treat you'). But everything needs to be in proportion. So, yes, $300,000 on a guitar is obscene.

e7c wrote:

First off, I love this argument. Let me lay out some info before I get into this so you guys can understand my point of view.

1. I believe I own the most expensive or second most expensive TGA vinyl collection. I have spent over $500 dollars on Sink or Swim vinyl alone! (TP $350, Black $100, White w/ Splatter $50, Clear $15 and one other that I can't remember what color it is $15)

2. I run my own Non-Profit Organization "Volunteering Rocks" that is all about helping the homeless https://thegaslightanthem.forumotion.com/news-f4/contest-the-coffeehouse-sessions-t1500.htm

So, I spend a lot of money on vinyl and do a lot to help the homeless too. The problem with Brian's argument is when you take it past just Gibson Guitars or Colored Vinyl, really his argument is how can we justify spending money on items when people are starving just down the street? The answer is in two parts:

1. People give what they feel comfortable giving... in one of my Volunteering Rocks contest people could have won an autographed Record from their favorite band with minimal effort by helping the homeless.. guess how many people entered? 8. That's it. People love to say that they do help out but the truth of it is that they don't even when given great motivation and requiring minimal effort.

2. We are not a socialist/communist society (universal health care does not make us a socialist nation). There is no requirement on the average citizens part to make things better for anyone other than themselves.

I really think the problem with the argument is usually the cause... I bet Brian saw a guitar he wanted and learned that it was out of his price range, it was so ridiculously high that it made him feel like money was being wasted. If someone really believed in this argument then they would not own any frivolous items. SO, until I find someone that is making this argument and really doesn't own any frivolous items I will continue to by my colored vinyl.

oh... and just to answer this in Fox News style...

OMG!!! TGA are a bunch of Socialists trying to take my hard earned money, give it to druggie welfare recipients and ruin America! Don't Tread On Me!


(heavy heavy sarcasm there)

Pretty much agree except I think I told you why I disagree with giving people such incentives to give to charity. I respect you for having the heart to try and do something though as most people wouldn't do what you do its just a difference of opinion. Not that I dont do my bit ln christmas eve I went round the homeless people in Portsmouth and gave out all the chocolate we had been give for Christmas and didnt want.

Anyway that aside I agree people dont give two shits when they are able to live out a comfortable lifestyle themselves why worry about those that dont have. Surely its there own fault they are down and out an unable to afford such things? (note I dont agree with this worldview) At the end of the day thats capitalism and it fucking sucks.

If you think those guitar prices are obscene just look at footballers wages its insane.

kieran wrote:

If you think those guitar prices are obscene just look at footballers wages its insane.

on a side not does anyone else find it odd that during this current economic slowdown that just about everyone has been affected... except athletes.

It's starting to catch up in football/soccer terms.

So many teams over here are in real trouble, spending in the transfer market had rapidly declined (although still too much probably).

Unfortunatly there's a few billionaires who will not lose out in this economy who just plant everything they have into the clubs.

Formula one is my main sport but a returning Michael Schumacher is being paid over £20mil a year, not including sponsorship, pure salary, and doing an awful job. It's ridiculous.

Palmer89 wrote:

It's starting to catch up in football/soccer terms.

So many teams over here are in real trouble, spending in the transfer market had rapidly declined (although still too much probably).

Aye just look at Pompey we cant even afford to pay half our team on time. Exec has really fucked us up by giving Redknap to big a budget. That said 15th is going to be gooooddd

Not to turn this into a football debate, but my team has the biggest game in my time supporting them on wednesday (Tottenham), bricking it, I'd like to believe we took pity on you lot in the semi and now the Gods are taking pity on us...

Anywho,

It is ridiculous how much waste is being spent, whilst we may all have our hobbies and like to collect certain items, yes we could be doing more, but what kind of show is it when all you see in the papers and on the pitch/wherever is multi-millionaires act like spoilt children. Not only should they be spending less due to economic restraints or charity etc., money in general ruins most sports.

I personally don't have an issue with people giving to chairty or not, at the end of the day it's a personal choice, I donated £10 the other day for a friend raising money, if they hadn't offered the chance I probably wouldn't have donated, likewise with the compeition on here for the Brian tape, if that wasn't offered, would I have donated?

Probably not. It's hard not to feel bad when some one pulls you up on it and asks why, but personally I hold no affiliation to any charity, no diseases have been in my family (thank god) and although it may be seen as selfish currently want to look after myself before looking after others, those around me I love and care for always of course, perhaps in another 10 years when I have a steady job and life I'll be in more of a position to not only give a little help to certain charities but more importantly want to.

To be fair palmer it was not a penalty and Crouch's goal should not have been disallowed. However thats football I was still chuffed that we got as far as the semis and would have been happy with that given the circumstances surrounding the club at the moment.

Anyway I dunno my problem is you shouldn't need an incentive to share and give. Its
annoying that people need such somewhat arguably selfish reasons to do
so imo. However we are all guilty of it whoever we are. I guess I get fustrated that as part of my degree course im learning about the massive global inequalities and it just seems frustrating that so little can be done to help bring about meaningful change. As long as everyone is happy with their comfortable lifestyles and accept the status quo then I guess nothing will change.

I could go on but I wont for fear of rambling and being boring etc etc.

kieran wrote:

As long as everyone is happy with their comfortable lifestyles and accept the status quo then I guess nothing will change.

Indeed. Part of the probolem is that the inequalities in this world can not simply be addressed by policies which hope to bring the whole world up to the material standard of the richest countries. Without major sacrifices on the part of the richest countries, and a fundamental overhaul of the world economic system, I don't see how even an approximation of equal living conditions can be achieved.

steady now steady now wrote:

kieran wrote:

As long as everyone is happy with their comfortable lifestyles and accept the status quo then I guess nothing will change.

Indeed. Part of the probolem is that the inequalities in this world can not simply be addressed by policies which hope to bring the whole world up to the material standard of the richest countries. Without major sacrifices on the part of the richest countries, and a fundamental overhaul of the world economic system, I don't see how even an approximation of equal living conditions can be achieved.

This is basically a big chunk of what I have had to learn development through western ideals has not worked from modernisation through to neo-liberalism. That said when Latin America delinked partially from the world economy it caused a massive debt crisis so there are no easy solutions if any.

kieran wrote:

Anyway I dunno my problem is you shouldn't need an incentive to share and give. Its
annoying that people need such somewhat arguably selfish reasons to do
so imo.

Aye, I agree with you, unfortunatly most of us, me very much included, don't really do much without incentives. I give to charities when friends ask or there's boxes up at point of sale, again though, thats usually either to help out a friend or the inconvenience of having a few pennies lying around in my pocket.

Unfortunatly those people on the streets on a busy saturday don't give charities a good name, I'm sure they probably get alot more business/donating doing it that way but it just puts a bad schema in the mind.

I will end up giving to charities hopefully when older, just for the time being I'm focussing on my life and career, I'm sure in a few years time I'll be in a position to do a little more and not just for the convenience.

I dunno personally I dont feel like I can judge homeless people there are usually very specific reasons for their situation and who are we to judge? For example I knew a heroin addict before he passed and I know for a fact he didnt start for fun.

I always make a point of buying the big issue which usually get me scorned at by my friends cause I end up chatting to the sellers its the little things like that help people imo.

I don't judge homeless people/big issue sellers at all. I was referring to those charity specific people with clipboards who harass you at every opporunity when you know they themselves probably don't give a crap about the charity. Although there is one or 2 specific big issuer sellers here in Bristol that are just damn annoying.

I have plenty of friends who see homeless people and scorn at them or tell them they deserve it etc. I'm sure for some thats true but as you say, there's a much bigger picture than that, it's annoying how some people stereotype the homeless as they badly as they usually are.