[beloveds]

I have nothing but respect for our veterans and fail to see where anyone has been disrespectful to the man. So just because he was a vet we are supposed to be all "Boo at the bad electric company, they hate veterans!" His veteran status is inconsequential to the situation.

[hernkingAnank]

I have nothing but respect for our veterans and fail to see where anyone has been disrespectful to the man. So just because he was a vet we are supposed to be all "Boo at the bad electric company, they hate veterans!" His veteran status is inconsequential to the situation.

It's more of an indirect lack of respect.

[jokiruss]

Anyone who thinks Free-Riders on a utility is ok should be slapped. Everything costs money, pay your bills or you lose service, end of story, nothing else matters.

[xyznicks]

Anyone who thinks Free-Riders on a utility is ok should be slapped. Everything costs money, pay your bills or you lose service, end of story, nothing else matters.

Not even an old man's life?

[jokiruss]

Not even an old man's life?

Nope. Too bad..should have paid your bill.

There is a huge problem here with the water Free-Riders in Detroit and instead of cutting them off, they bill everyone else a higher amount.

[uranbigis]

im sure old people get some kind of heating allowance. this is what its for. just because they shut his fuel off doesn't really mean they're killing him does it.

personally i think old peiople should be homed if they cant afford to run a house or remember to pay a bill.

[hernkingAnank]

Anyone who thinks Free-Riders on a utility is ok should be slapped. Everything costs money, pay your bills or you lose service, end of story, nothing else matters.

I wonder if you were standing face to face with a WW2 vet, on the soil he fought for you to be standing on, if you would have the guts to say that. It's that sterile, cosmeticised and cold black and white approach you exemplified and that modern society exerts which signifies the distinct lack of respect I am talking about.

I agree that there are rules in which people must obey, and I also understand how this man broke the rules and the appropriate action was taken... but your lack of sensitivity towards the situation is testament to my point. Has society moulded everyone so well that people don't question things like this anymore? Are there no exceptions to the rule? And are people so self-centered they they would rather prove their point instead of stopping to think about the life that this man led before it was taken away from him? Is it somehow cool to show a lack of sensitivity towards any form of tragedy becuase it makes one seem worldly (despite never actually experiencing life and death to the extent of the man in question)?

So many people have become de-sensitised to such things that the only time they could every imagine showing compassion would be if it happened to someone close to them... your own grandfather perhaps?

A lot of you are also missing the point, I (nor the orignal poster) are not supporting his actions.... we are simply expressing our disgust for the lack of sympathy towards the situation, and how people can be so blasay about the death of a man who risked his life to save his country, and lost it becuase of a black and white descision which exemplifies the modern lack of understanding of what these men and women actually fought for.

It's like if anyone here devoted their life to curing cancer, and then when they got older they were refused treatment for the exact same thing they spent their life curing, and died becuase they did not fill in the form correctly. Yes there are rules... but sometimes it is just plain ignorant to assume that all consequences are equal.

[jokiruss]

Him being a Vet has nothing to do with paying his bills

[hernkingAnank]

Him being a Vet has nothing to do with paying his bills

I never disagreed with that. It's the lack of understanding or respect for the passing of the person in question that I disagree with, within such cold and unrelenting circumstances. you may want to read my previous post again to grasp this idea a little better.

[beloveds]

I never disagreed with that.

Then why are you even talking about the rest, because that was the topic of discussion, whether or not the electric company could be help responsible or at fault for his death, not oh lets feel sad for the veteran. His veteran status is completely irrelevant to the situation. I really don't know what the hell you are expecting. Do you want everyone to talk about how depressed and sad they are and wave a flag for him? It's off topic and not important to the discussion, get off it.

[hernkingAnank]

Then why are you even talking about the rest, because that was the topic of discussion, whether or not the electric company could be help responsible or at fault for his death, not oh lets feel sad for the veteran. His veteran status is completely irrelevant to the situation. I really don't know what the hell you are expecting. Do you want everyone to talk about how depressed and sad they are and wave a flag for him? It's off topic and not important to the discussion, get off it.

Oh well sorry then, that once again you have proven how smypathy should be omitted from certain conventions (such as this thread) becuase it is against the rules, or not considered 'relevant'. Good to know people aren't stopping to think these days... it must be efficient to do so.

I say my input is very relevant, becuase it is the lack of people's ability think outside the static conventions that make the situation in the OPs thread a huge shame. I agreed with the points raised, but disagreed with the attitudes in which such points were made... how is that off topic? It may not be a simple black and white "yes" or "no" like you wanted... but that last time I checked this was a 'discussion board' and not a voting committee.

Other members of this topic chose to interact with my posts which makes my input very valid, thank you.

Lets try this on for size... if the man was a relative of yours, would you simply sit back and not flinch becuase the status of the man's relationship to you is "not relevant"? His vet status is simply a signifier of the magnitude of the sad shame involved in the situation. It may not be enough to change the rules... but it sure as hell should've at least aroused more sympathy than it did. Especially considering that if the same thing happened to anyone else, it might not have resulted in such grave consequences, which makes this tragedy both unlucky, and a shame.

That was my point... and I guess I should thank you becuase you have aided in solidifying this point even further; these days if something cannot be boxed and filed for within static conventions (the term 'blind sheep' immediately springs to mind), it should be omitted from any emotional attachment whatsoever. Why? Because people like you don't really care for thinking beyond what is expected of you.

[Zenthachall]

Oh well sorry then, that once again you have proven how smypathy should be omitted from certain conventions (such as this thread) becuase it is against the rules, or not considered 'relevant'. Good to know people aren't stopping to think these days... it must be efficient to do so.

I say my input is very relevant, becuase it is the lack of people's ability think outside the static conventions that make the situation in the OPs thread a huge shame. I agreed with the points raised, but disagreed with the attitudes in which such points were made... how is that off topic? It may not be a simple black and white "yes" or "no" like you wanted... but that last time I checked this was a 'discussion board' and not a voting committee.

Other members of this topic chose to interact with my posts which makes my input very valid, thank you.

Lets try this on for size... if the man was a relative of yours, would you simply sit back and not flinch becuase the status of the man's relationship to you is "not relevant"? His vet status is simply a signifier of the magnitude of the sad shame involved in the situation. It may not be enough to change the rules... but it sure as hell should've at least aroused more sympathy than it did. Especially considering that if the same thing happened to anyone else, it might not have resulted in such grave consequences, which makes this tragedy both unlucky, and a shame.

That was my point... and I guess I should thank you becuase you have aided in solidifying this point even further; these days if something cannot be boxed and filed for within static conventions (the term 'blind sheep' immediately springs to mind), it should be omitted from any emotional attachment whatsoever. Why? Because people like you don't really care for thinking beyond what is expected of you.

Why does it matter? You didn't know the guy personally. Thousands of people die every single day. Are you going to write sympathy cards for every single one of them?

It's common for people to feign sympathy when they hear that a random person has passed, but it's mostly because they feel some sort of cultural and/or moral obligation to feel that way. They somehow feel guilty if they don't outwardly express their concern to others, but they don't really feel any loss or sadness. I say it's silly and absolutely pointless. Do I feel sad if some random person to whom I have no connection dies? No. And why should I? They have no impact on my life at all. And they have no impact on your life, either.

Two more points I'd like to make:
A) Maybe he didn't want to live any longer. If his house was getting cold, he could have called someone for help instead of sitting there until he froze to death.
B) He was in his mid 90s. How much life did he have left in him...two, three years, tops? A few weeks? It's not like his life was cut short in some sort of horribly tragic event.

Ultimately, a person is responsible for his or her own life. Not a power company.

[beloveds]

I didn't say sympathy shouldn't be given. I do feel for the man and he has my respect for what he has done. What I don't appreciate is your attitude, lambasting everyone for being insensitive and insinuating that we are somehow terrible people because we didn't spend half the thread crying over him.

Because people like you don't really care for thinking beyond what is expected of you. This right here is the exactly kind of bullshit I'm talking about. You know nothing about me, and I do not appreciate attacks on my character.

if the man was a relative of yours, would you simply sit back and not flinch becuase the status of the man's relationship to you is "not relevant"? Of course not, but I wouldn't get mad at anyone for not crying over him when discussing whether or not the electric company was to blame for his death.

[hernkingAnank]

This right here is the exactly kind of bullshit I'm talking about. You know nothing about me, and I do not appreciate attacks on my character.

You know nothing of the man in the article either. Yet you assumed he was the type of person who was deliberately refusing to pay the bill ("Do you think phoning the old man would have really solved anything? He still wouldn't have had it paid"), despite the article clearly stating that evidence indicated he intended on paying it almost immediately. A hone call on their part (esp with the company knowing his age) would've enabled him to advise that the bill was about to get paid, and perhaps leniency would of been arranged.

Of course not, but I wouldn't get mad at anyone for not crying over him when discussing whether or not the electric company was to blame for his death.

I can guarantee you would get upset if everyone assumed your relative "had it coming"... and on the flipside I can also guarantee you would feel a lot better to know there are some folks out there that are taking the time to stop and think about the situation, instead of coming off as dismissive as most folks here are.


Anyway, we should agree to disagree. I just had a connection to the person in the article which enabled me to get more emotionally involved than I should've within this thread. ...you just approach things differently, that's fair enough.

I apologise if anybody was personally offended by my input, but stand by my points and their relevancy within the topic. And might suggest are more sensitive apporach from everyone, becuase comments like "Anyone who thinks Free-Riders on a utility is ok should be slapped. Everything costs money, pay your bills or you lose service, end of story, nothing else matters" aren't really respecful when speaking of someone who lost a life as a result, regardless of the circumstances. I will accept indifference to the situation, but sometimes people can go too far in the other direction. Because I am sure we can all agree: it is one thing to say "It does not effect me"... and it is completely another thing to say "tough luck, he had it coming"... in so many words.

[Beragagnu]

You gotta love threads like this. It brings out all of the sociopaths who have no sympathy for their fellow man.

[wsbizwsa]

Why does it matter? You didn't know the guy personally. Thousands of people die every single day. Are you going to write sympathy cards for every single one of them?

It's common for people to feign sympathy when they hear that a random person has passed, but it's mostly because they feel some sort of cultural and/or moral obligation to feel that way. They somehow feel guilty if they don't outwardly express their concern to others, but they don't really feel any loss or sadness. I say it's silly and absolutely pointless. Do I feel sad if some random person to whom I have no connection dies? No. And why should I? They have no impact on my life at all. And they have no impact on your life, either.

Well then on the other end of the spectrum is it so hard to accept the fact that others are actually empathetic towards those who come across misfortune?

Now I don't think the power company should be responsible for this man's life if plenty of warnings were dispatched and he had ample time to act but to say the all too common catch phrase of, "people die all the time, are you going to care about all of them?" is childish and shows the complete lack empathy towards human life in general. I am not saying that people should sulk over every passing life by any means but at least acknowledge it in a way rather than simply seeing a statistic.

[xyznicks]

Nope. Too bad..should have paid your bill.

There is a huge problem here with the water Free-Riders in Detroit and instead of cutting them off, they bill everyone else a higher amount.

I'm quite sure you wouldn't have that attitude if it had been your grandfather.

personally i think old peiople should be homed if they cant afford to run a house or remember to pay a bill.

Most old people don't want to be put in a home.

B) He was in his mid 90s. How much life did he have left in him...two, three years, tops? A few weeks? It's not like his life was cut short in some sort of horribly tragic event.

So because he only had a short time to live it was ok that he froze to death?

I think there are a lot of cold hearted people in this thread.

[jokiruss]

I'm quite sure you wouldn't have that attitude if it had been your grandfather.


.

My grandfather should have paid his bill.

[hernkingAnank]

Oh lets forget about it... it's quite obvious there are people out there that choose not to allow themselves to feel any form compassion for certain situations, and a handful of people who just say blunt things to stir s**t (like the above post)... the latter being the most juvenile of both scenarios. Especially when nobody actually knows the exact circumstances which prevented the man from paying his bills in the first place... which I can almost guarantee would've been influenced by the man's age. Comments like those in the above post are direct signifies of the most basic forms of intolerance, and I would hate to be that person's grandfather or father if that is how they treat the generation who was responsible for their very existence .

[jokiruss]

Especially when nobody actually knows the exact circumstances which prevented the man from paying his bills in the first place...

If he can't pay his bills on his own, then he shouldn't be living alone