s/o "sense of entitlement"

[hornblower]

Why is this a bad thing, exactly? 


Should people really just feel glad they're small little cogs in some giant multinational system designed to rob them & keep them in their place? 


Why shouldn't people feel that they are more than that, they deserve more, and asserting their specialness? 


Why do we use that phrase to squash people down for asking for something more out of life or their circumstances, or just expressing their uniqueness? 



 

[Janeway]

Why is this a bad thing, exactly? 

 

 

Should people really just feel glad they're small little cogs in some giant multinational system designed to rob them & keep them in their place? 

 

 

Why shouldn't people feel that they are more than that, they deserve more, and asserting their specialness? 

 

 

Why do we use that phrase to squash people down for asking for something more out of life or their circumstances, or just expressing their uniqueness? 

 

 

 

 

You are talking about two extremes. A sense of entitlement refers to feeling entitled to things just because, like others should just give to them. The other, the person should feel awful and undeserving. There is an entire world between the two.

[Guest]

Because, for a large group of people to co-exist happily, there has to be norms. If everyone did whatever they felt they were entitled to do, there would be chaos.

[TammyS]

I don't believe that letting people know that they aren't entitled is quashing anyone.  We are entitled to what we are ACTUALLY entitled to.  For all of us, that's natural human rights and what's in the constitution of whatever nation they live in.  After that, the only thing you are entitled to is what you get by legitimate means.  If you earn or inherit it, it's yours.  If someone gifts it to you, it's yours.  If you legally trade for it, it's yours.  Nothing else.

 

We aren't all special.  That's just a fact.  Special means good in some way beyond the norm.  We can't all be beyond the norm, that would just be the norm.  If the norm is 5 and we're all 5s, no one is special.  You need to be a 6+ to be special.  Etc. 

[bettyandbob]

We are all special. In some way. Everyone has something for which they want more.

 

We also all have to get along if we are to live in close proximity to other people. Therefore, one needs to learn when it is and is not appropriate to assert ones unique specialness or getting along as a group will simply breakdown.

[TammyS]

Well, as my dh and I are both veterans, we are eligible for several vetetan entitlements. Since I feel we EARNED those entitlements, I'm not embarrassed or ashamed to admit that we use some of them.

 

But you ARE entitled to those things.  You wouldn't, I presume, feel the same way about someone using those veterans benefits who had not been in the service?

[Carol in Cal.]

When I hear 'sense of entitlement' used in a negative way, it always refers to someone who thinks that they shouldn't have to 'pay their dues' or prepare or strive in order to get something.

[marbel]

You are talking about two extremes. A sense of entitlement refers to feeling entitled to things just because, like others should just give to them. The other, the person should feel awful and undeserving. There is an entire world between the two.

 

Yes to this.  And to those who are talking about cultural norms vs. chaos.

 

Entitlements that are really earned benefits are not the kind of entitlement this is about.  

 

[Paige]

I don't think entitlement means wanting something better. I think it means expecting something that you have not earned or that shouldn't be expected.

 

I think of my kids when I think of entitlement...I have been getting frustrated because if I do something nice for them, they expect it all the time or get mad. For example, I may take them for ice cream after music lessons some days. It's a treat- I don't think they should feel entitled to it. One child, however, gets upset when we don't get ice cream. The conversation is simplified to, "Aren't we getting ice cream today?" 

"No, we can't do that every week."

"You jerk!"

 

That's entitlement. It's not entitlement to want ice cream, but it's entitlement to expect it and get mad about it because you had it in the past and now expect it every time.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Paige

[poppy]

Some politicians / political journalists have worked very, very hard to give the term "entitlements" a negative connotation. 

 

People feel entitled to healthcare.  Said with a sense of scorn.

 

(We all feel entitled to a working highway system but somehow that's different?)

[QueenCat]

Some politicians / political journalists have worked very, very hard to give the term "entitlements" a negative connotation. 

 

People feel entitled to healthcare.  Said with a sense of scorn.

 

(We all feel entitled to a working highway system but somehow that's different?)

 

Well said! I do think politicians and the news media contribute to this issue.

[hornblower]

Fwiw, I'm mostly just musing out loud here. I'm not arguing one way or another because I myself am all over the place....

It's just that I saw this phrase this morning & it's one of these phrases that's become so common & considered so instantly negative & it suddenly struck me - wait, why?  And here were are :D 


but there are interesting ideas about specialness here. I do think everyone is special. Each person has unique gifts, unique perspectives.  

 

& of course there is a constant  delicate balancing act between the needs of the individual and the needs of the collective.   


& I wonder if poppy isn't on to something. For example, above someone said "expecting something that you have not earned or that shouldn't be expected"

I think it's interesting to consider the things we tell people they shouldn't expect.  The phrase then is signalling what the people should & shouldn't expect & that anyone wanting 'more' is unreasonable - which is sort of what I was musing about in my original question. 


 

[TammyS]

  The phrase then is signalling what the people should & shouldn't expect & that anyone wanting 'more' is unreasonable

 

 

 

 

Wanting more is not unreasonable.  Expecting others to give it to you is unreasonable.  Just taking it when it doesn't belong to you is unreasonable.  If you want more, great, earn or trade for it in some way, and then enjoy.

 

[Haiku]

Why is this a bad thing, exactly? 

 

To me, a sense of entitlement is a bad thing when people expect others to put the entitled person's interests above their own and get angry/can't understand when others don't prioritize the entitled person's "needs" and desires over everything else.

 

Basically, it's "I deserve to have what I want/need more than you deserve to have what you want/need."

[SKL]

I think children and disabled adults should absolutely have a sense of entitlement.  But a non-disabled person normally outgrows that.

 

I think everyone should feel entitled to a fair shot at life and to equal justice under the law.

 

I don't see what's wrong with the idea that you are responsible to work for everything else.  Someone has to do the work to provide.  If I don't do it, someone else has to do it for me, and how is that fair?

 

We are evolved humans, so we've figured out how to change up the timing and value different kinds of inputs to make the world a more interesting and compassionate place.  We don't require accountants to grow the wheat, or farmers to produce their clothes.  We tax people during their prime working years so they can take it easy when they are old.  Yes, I think when I'm old, I'm entitled to my share because I've paid in a lot while working.  We have arranged for people who are trying to get work to be sustained in their efforts.  Trying to get work / preparing for a career is work; it's just a timing issue.  Within families, we value the contributions of a parent whose work is mostly focused on the home.  I don't consider any of that to be "entitlement."

 

But no, I don't think otherwise capable people are entitled to demand that other people bear the burden of their upkeep.  What if everyone did that?

Edited May 10, 2016 by SKL

[Katy]

Oh dear.  That was probably in response to my post in a previous thread.

 

To be clear, I am not saying people don't have a right to seek happiness and prosperity (I think that is a basic human right), or that we shouldn't have a safety net for the poor (I would argue that more people should qualify with higher levels of assets, but there should be stringent requirements, and they should be structured to encourage people to get off benefits as soon as possible).

 

What I meant was a sense of being owed something by the rest of society solely because you think you deserve it, without empathy for the consequences to others.  You don't deserve to be given everything you want without having to work for any of it. You absolutely have the right (and I would argue, the moral obligation) to seek for betterment in your life.

 

As parents, the easiest example to go to there is (neuro-typical) children throwing a tantrum because they didn't get every single thing they wanted at the exact moment they wanted it.  You could call such tantrums a sense of entitlement. No, we can't give you 15 kinds of sugary treats and overpriced candy. Even if it was healthy, it's not in the budget, and we're not going to sacrifice what is right for the whole family to spoil one child.

 

Similarly, someone stealing something just because they see it and want it and don't want to have to work to earn it is entitled.

 

I personally have an NPD MIL who thinks she is entitled to everything.  She steals. She manipulates.  She commits all manner of evil to get what she wants exactly when she wants it.  She thinks she deserves it so she just takes, with no regard to the consequences or feelings of others. With no regard to what is right or fair.  Entitled.

 

You could even go back to biblical examples.  Adam and Eve felt entitled to have the same knowledge God has.  Entitled.

 

The stories of the fall of Satan - Satan felt entitled to be treated with more honor than mankind.  Entitled.

[Audrey]

Well, as my dh and I are both veterans, we are eligible for several veteran entitlements. Since I feel we EARNED those entitlements, I'm not embarrassed or ashamed to admit that we use some of them.

 

 

I think that's an important distinction.  There are things to which one is entitled by merit, by birth, by work, by citizenship, etc.  I don't think there is anything wrong with those things, per se.

 

The derogatory of "entitlement" is usually directed at people who express that everything is theirs to be had regardless of any input on their part.  I have a problem with this when it comes from people who don't have naivete as an excuse.  For the naïve, I figure that reality will come and bite them in the butt sooner or later.

[Ravin]

Where I often see it applied in a judgmental way is to those the speaker perceives as having not earned something--in a context of disregarding the idea that there should be a basic floor or safety net below which we do not let people fall, based upon nothing more than their dignity as human beings. Or, because they earned the entitlement for different specific reasons than the speaker. In particular, my father will complain to no end about how they cut his VA benefits because his heart function was 1% higher than the cut-off, but look down on my sister who receives VA benefits because of PTSD--all because he earned his benefits in Vietnam and "toughed through" his PTSD, but Agent Orange health effects are more worthy of compensation, versus my sister's experience with trauma aboard a Navy ship during peacetime from her fellow sailors and command.

 

They both served, but he considers disability for PTSD an invalid entitlement, while disability for Agent Orange exposure is a legitimate entitlement.

 

I have seen the same logic applied to social security disability for disabled adults who have never been able to work (vs. those for retirees who "earned it" because they paid in over the years), to food stamps (see the video in the other thread), to medicaid (why poor childless adults in some states can't get it, while those with children, and children, do--you aren't worth the money if you aren't still a child or responsible for one).

 

I think there SHOULD be a sense of entitlement to the basics of human dignity--aka human rights. Healthy food, medical care, and adequate shelter should be available to everyone in a society as wealthy as ours.  

[poppy]

Here is another example of an entitlement people expect even if they don't work or pay much / anything in taxes:

Free universal public schooling

 

Even on a homeschooling board I think most of us would agree that proving all children access to free education is a good thing.

[SKL]

Healthy food, medical care, and adequate shelter should be available to everyone in a society as wealthy as ours.  

 

Yes, but at the same time, IMO capable adults should feel responsible to contribute a fair amount of work in exchange for those goods and services.

 

[Liza Q]

I find this tricky.

 

My husband is a cop. His contract entitles him to a certain salary and certain benefits. When he retires, he will be entitled to a certain pension. These things are all spelled out in the contract. He'll be retiring soon and we feel no shame in planning how we should manage his pension.

 

When I was a kid, we were on food stamps for a few years. This is an "entitlement program" that made a difference in our lives. Eventually, my Dad got another job and we were no longer eligible.

 

I am an urban minority - a Puerto Rican in Brooklyn. Most of my relatives work hard and only one branch of our family is on any kind of public assistance. These cousins, however, absolutely have an attitude that the government owes them everything they get - project apartments, food stamps, Medicaid, etc. And they also have the attitude that my Dad and his siblings should be willing to supply extras because my Dad is "lucky", at 78, to still have a part-time job and a pension and SS. This attitude, over the years, drove my mother CRAZY. Even when things were tight for us, my Dad would share our extra with his sister and her kids.

 

I would say that my husband and my parents did not have a sense of entitlement. My aunt is old now and she has had a hard life and I feel for her. But her children and grandchildren are still bitter that "we" have more than "they" do. I think they do have a sense of entitlement.

[SKL]

I think children are entitled by definition.  Whether it's food, shelter, education or health care.  Nobody can reasonably argue that they need to be responsible for contributing something in exchange for their care.  I don't think the negative connotation of "entitlements" is generally applied to kids.

[SparklyUnicorn]

Why is this a bad thing, exactly? 

 

 

Should people really just feel glad they're small little cogs in some giant multinational system designed to rob them & keep them in their place? 

 

 

Why shouldn't people feel that they are more than that, they deserve more, and asserting their specialness? 

 

 

Why do we use that phrase to squash people down for asking for something more out of life or their circumstances, or just expressing their uniqueness? 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm with you.  I do not understand this even after reading the various explanations here. 

 

And I suspect this gets applied to the havenots much more frequently than the haves.  Kinda like people get a lot more bent out of shape when some poor person steals a pot roast from the grocery store than some business exec commits some sort of white collar crime that actually affects a heck of a lot more people than the stolen roast.

[Ravin]

Yes, but at the same time, IMO capable adults should feel responsible to contribute a fair amount of work in exchange for those goods and services.

 

 

That's just the thing: why?

 

Should people who are able work? Of course. Do they generally? Yes. Even in societies with much stronger entitlement systems than ours. Why? Because people generally want more than the minimum for themselves. Money to go eat out, a car, fancy clothes, a bigger/nicer house, booze, whatever...all that consumer crap, or free time and the ability to travel places you can't get to on your own two feet.

 

At the level I'm talking about, a basic roof over one's head, health care, and healthy food--and I should add basic education and access to justice to that list--you shouldn't have to "earn" those. The society as a whole should be able to provide them, whether the person is a child, elder, disabled, or simply out of work because their employer no longer required their services and they haven't found a new job yet--or for that matter because the work they do isn't valued in the cash economy,  (SAHM), or for sufficient compensation relative to education (clergy, many artists and musicians, fast food workers, etc.).

 

No one should be left to starve in the streets or to die of (or be disabled by) entirely preventable health problems when there's more than enough for everyone and so much wealth is held by entities that aren't even actual human beings.

[Liza Q]

I have another thought about disability and being entitled. My Dad is a double-amputee (train accident when I was little). Except for when he was in the hospital for the first year, he has always worked. He spent 8 years getting a degree in accounting at night so he could have a better job. He has never felt entitled to anything...and was surprised when he qualified for Social Security disability because he had always been able to work.

 

I am not saying that all disabled persons are able to work. But...my experience shows me that hard work, personal responsibility, frugality, etc. go a very long way.

 

 

[Anne in CA]

I think that a sense of entitlement to basic human rights is great. I also think that anyone should not have to feel less than anyone else at all. No one should be expected to be a tiny cog in a huge machine and suck it up.

 

But... with entitlement to human rights should be the expectation that you treat others well yourself. I get annoyed with so many people who feel "entitled" to treat others poorly. I've worked with people and had employees who felt entitled to steal because someone had something they didn't. No one ever feels guilty for stealing, everyone I've ever known who steals feels completely entitled to what they took, from whomever they took it from. That sort of sense of entitlement is not good for anyone.

 

Also, some of the wealthiest people in the world feel entitled to use others for their gain (Walmart) and no, they are not entitled to do that.

 

I just don't like the word entitlement. Everyone should have basic rights, and after that you should have what you are willing to work for, risk for, sacrifice for.

 

My youngest just got some heavenly PSAT scores. She is not really "entitled" to the college money they will help her get. She earned those scores. I helped by home schooling her and I made deep sacrifices for her education. So did her father. It is "fair" that since even as a small child she understood that education is important she is doing well. It isn't fair that lots of equally smart kids didn't get a good education, but that isn't her problem. As a matter of fact she does tutoring to help other kids and is thinking of starting a free tutoring program to help our community for a senior project.

 

I don't know if I'm making sense. Life isn't equal, but it should be more fair... but no one is entitled to what someone else has earned.

[Liza Q]

Ravin, are you talking about a guaranteed minimum income or a stronger safety net so no one is starving in the street?

[Crimson Wife]

When I hear 'sense of entitlement' used in a negative way, it always refers to someone who thinks that they shouldn't have to 'pay their dues' or prepare or strive in order to get something.

 

Yes, this. People in past generations were okay with starting at the bottom and working their way up. They didn't waltz in the door on day 1 with zero experience and few skills, expecting to be handed a cushy position on a silver platter like many Milennials do. Sorry, kid, you're not a "special snowflake" no matter how many participation trophies you received simply for showing up. :rolleyes:

 

[Farrar]

I think there SHOULD be a sense of entitlement to the basics of human dignity--aka human rights. Healthy food, medical care, and adequate shelter should be available to everyone in a society as wealthy as ours.  

 

Hear hear.

 

And this is where it annoys me when people use sense of entitlement as a pejorative. Asking that the government ensure that your food is safe or that you not be abused by your employer or that you have the same access to bathrooms or hospitals as other people is not a bad thing.

 

Sure, sometimes you meet a lazy kid who's like, gee, why can't mom do my chores. Or a person who thinks they should have the right to take their dog into a restaurant or something. But I feel like I see it as a sort of coded language thing quite often - just blanket young people bashing or blanket poor people bashing.

[SKL]

That's just the thing: why?

 

Should people who are able work? Of course. Do they generally? Yes. Even in societies with much stronger entitlement systems than ours. Why? Because people generally want more than the minimum for themselves. Money to go eat out, a car, fancy clothes, a bigger/nicer house, booze, whatever...all that consumer crap, or free time and the ability to travel places you can't get to on your own two feet.

 

At the level I'm talking about, a basic roof over one's head, health care, and healthy food--and I should add basic education and access to justice to that list--you shouldn't have to "earn" those. The society as a whole should be able to provide them, whether the person is a child, elder, disabled, or simply out of work because their employer no longer required their services and they haven't found a new job yet--or for that matter because the work they do isn't valued in the cash economy,  (SAHM), or for sufficient compensation relative to education (clergy, many artists and musicians, fast food workers, etc.).

 

No one should be left to starve in the streets or to die of (or be disabled by) entirely preventable health problems when there's more than enough for everyone and so much wealth is held by entities that aren't even actual human beings.

 

Where we disagre is that I don't agree that you shouldn't have to "earn" basic goods and services if you have the ability, regardless of whether you live in a rich or poor country.  People who think that do have an excess sense of entitlement IMO.  We all should feel a compulsion to contribute, not only to our own upkeep but to the upkeep of those who cannot contribute.  IMO it's part of being human.

 

Right now this is a fairly "rich" country, sort of, unless you consider what it's going to cost to pay down our debts and fix our ageing infrastructure and a few other things.  When our kids grow up, who knows whether our country will be able to sustain people with a "sense of entitlement"?  I think it is dangerous to teach people they are entitled to material benefits just because they breathe.  I think it's very likely to catch up with us someday.

 

Also, why is it OK for an American to feel "entitled" but a person in most other countries should feel they have to work?

 

[Ravin]

Ravin, are you talking about a guaranteed minimum income or a stronger safety net so no one is starving in the street?

 

Yes. SKL argued that anyone "capable" should have to work for those things. Since jobs that will provide those things are not, in fact, always handed out on street corners or merely for the asking, a sense of entitlement to the basic necessities of life is a good thing.

[SKL]

I have another thought about disability and being entitled. My Dad is a double-amputee (train accident when I was little). Except for when he was in the hospital for the first year, he has always worked. He spent 8 years getting a degree in accounting at night so he could have a better job. He has never felt entitled to anything...and was surprised when he qualified for Social Security disability because he had always been able to work.

 

I am not saying that all disabled persons are able to work. But...my experience shows me that hard work, personal responsibility, frugality, etc. go a very long way.

 

It depends on how you define "disabled."  A person who can work is not disabled.

 

[Crimson Wife]

At the level I'm talking about, a basic roof over one's head, health care, and healthy food--and I should add basic education and access to justice to that list--you shouldn't have to "earn" those.

 

"we gave you this rule: 'The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.'" 2 Thessalonians 3:10

 

Our society should absolutely provide a safety net to those who through no fault of their own are unable to support themselves through FT work. Those who are disabled, sick, elderly, caring for young children or disabled/elderly relatives, preparing for a new/better career, or legitimately unable to find FT work despite making efforts to do so.

 

But we as a society do not have an obligation to support those who COULD work but who choose not to, especially when doing so requires forced confiscation of the wages of hardworking individuals. Voluntary charity towards them is fine, but it has to be truly voluntary.

[SKL]

Yes. SKL argued that anyone "capable" should have to work for those things. Since jobs that will provide those things are not, in fact, always handed out on street corners or merely for the asking, a sense of entitlement to the basic necessities of life is a good thing.

 

I said they should *feel responsible* to work for those things.

 

I also said that trying to get a job / preparing for a career / caring for a home *is* work.

 

I never said or implied that people should be left starving on the street.  I'm talking about a "sense of entitlement," I'm not talking about whether or not a person has food in his belly.

Edited May 10, 2016 by SKL

[redsquirrel]

When I hear those words attached to the actions of people, as opposed to words used for government programs, it really depends on the feelings of the speaker towards the person being described.

 

For example, if I like you, I might describe you as confident, not afraid to go after what you want, someone who is able to get your needs met, a person who can charm others into doing what you want. 

 

If I don't like you I might call you entitled, spoiled, having a high opinion of yourself, presumptuous, demanding.

 

 

I don't attach any negative meaning to entitlement programs, because I know they are talking about something else entirely. I don't jumble the two up.

Edited May 10, 2016 by redsquirrel

[Crimson Wife]

It depends on how you define "disabled."  A person who can work is not disabled.

 

 

My daughter will always be disabled, regardless of whether or not she can work. We are providing intensive rehabilitation so that her disabilities will hopefully not interfere with her ability to hold down a job as an adult. But even if she can successfully compensate for those disabilities, they will always be with her.

 

[redsquirrel]

I am pretty sure the OP wasn't referring to 'entitlement programs' in her post. That is a different discussion entirely.

[Katy]

Wow, I had no idea there were so many different interpretations of the word.  I'll try to be more mindful of choosing different verbiage in the future.

[SKL]

My daughter will always be disabled, regardless of whether or not she can work. We are providing intensive rehabilitation so that her disabilities will hopefully not interfere with her ability to hold down a job as an adult. But even if she can successfully compensate for those disabilities, they will always be with her.

 

 

Or she has disabilities, or she's differently abled.  That's how they talk about it nowadays anyway.  :)  Some people get offended by the term "disabled."

 

I don't know your daughter, but I know people who are unable to hold a typical job, but they have jobs that are subsidized.  The jobs often cost the community more than it would cost to have the person sit at home, but there are many good reasons for these people to work.  Creating jobs for them is part of their care, and IMO they are entitled to that.

 

Edited May 10, 2016 by SKL

[Crimson Wife]

I think children are entitled by definition.  Whether it's food, shelter, education or health care.  Nobody can reasonably argue that they need to be responsible for contributing something in exchange for their care.  I don't think the negative connotation of "entitlements" is generally applied to kids.

 

Actually, I do. Babies and toddlers obviously cannot help out their families, but preschoolers and up can. Obviously a 3 y.o. has to have very simple chores, but they can do things like putting the silverware on the table or taking dirty clothes out of the hamper and throwing them into the washing machine. Parents should teach their children responsibility and a work ethic.

[Liza Q]

Yes. SKL argued that anyone "capable" should have to work for those things. Since jobs that will provide those things are not, in fact, always handed out on street corners or merely for the asking, a sense of entitlement to the basic necessities of life is a good thing.

 

I don't know what I think about this.

 

Part of me feels that a civilized society should look out for the poor and sick, especially children and the elderly. Realistically, not all families are willing or able to take care of their own.

 

But I don't see how this sort of plan is sustainable in the long run. given human nature.

 

ETA: This sort of plan meaning a minimum income, not a safety net.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Liza Q

[SKL]

Actually, I do. Babies and toddlers obviously cannot help out their families, but preschoolers and up can. Obviously a 3 y.o. has to have very simple chores, but they can do things like putting the silverware on the table or taking dirty clothes out of the hamper and throwing them into the washing machine. Parents should teach their children responsibility and a work ethic.

 

Sure, but that's different from saying they have to do these things in exchange for their care / basic needs.  You would feed your child and let him sleep under your roof whether or not he helped with the laundry.

 

As they get into the teen years, some families may have a different give-and-take system, but it's within the family.  Society doesn't expect school-aged kids to work on a payroll for food money (though I know some do).

[Liza Q]

It depends on how you define "disabled."  A person who can work is not disabled.

 

 

True. I have met people who are genuinely surprised that my Dad's physical disability did not stop him from working. And my aunt's alcoholism and....life choices, like having 8 children with many different men and then being dependent on the government, the church, and her family to care for them and her, were more debilitating than my Dad's artificial legs and crutches.

[J-rap]

Those are interesting questions.  Many people live their whole lives in a bubble, and if they believe they're a big fish in that bubble and it makes their lives feel more worthwhile and that they are entitled to certain things as a result, so be it.

 

The other extreme is the person who lives waaaay outside the bubble, sees the tiny dot that they are in the history of mankind, and entitlement seems almost silly.  

 

In the end, though I lean heavily toward the second, I also think it makes for a harder life.

 

I think for the here and now, either can work.

[hornblower]

Oh dear.  That was probably in response to my post in a previous thread.

 

My turn to Oh dear. It wasn't. It was about the dogs in grocery stores thing :) 

 

[Pawz4me]

I also don't think Hornblower was referring to government entitlements.  When I think of the phrase "sense of entitlement" this sums it up exactly --

 

 

 

What I meant was a sense of being owed something by the rest of society solely because you think you deserve it, without empathy for the consequences to others.

 

"Without empathy for the consequences to others" is key for me.

 

So borrowing from another thread -- the person who brings her dog into a grocery store just because she wants to w/o considering the hygiene issues, that there might be other shoppers who are allergic to or terrified of dogs -- that's demonstrating a sense of entitlement.

 

When there's road construction up ahead and signs have been telling drivers to merge right for the last two miles but some bozo ignores the signs, speedily zooming along bypassing the backup of cars in the right lane until cones or barriers prevent him from going any further and then he tries to force someone to let him over -- that's a sense of entitlement.

 

When someone parks in a fire zone (no parking zone) in front of a store because "I'll only be a few minutes!" -- that's a sense of entitlement.

 

Those are simple examples.  There are certainly plenty more that are much more egregious.

[PinkyandtheBrains.]

 

 

Entitlement is such a politically loaded word now.

 

 

Entitlements are earned. Some by just being human, other are benefits/perks to being a contributing member of society.

[Miss Mousie]

 

What I meant was a sense of being owed something by the rest of society solely because you think you deserve it, without empathy for the consequences to others.  You don't deserve to be given everything you want without having to work for any of it. You absolutely have the right (and I would argue, the moral obligation) to seek for betterment in your life.

 

 

I think this comes closest to my view.  I'll try an example:

 

The city I work in has major traffic congestion problems.  Every rush period results in expressway entrance ramps that are backed up a mile or more.  The "entitled" people are the ones who continue driving in the next lane until they are almost at the ramp, then cut into traffic (often cutting people off, and backing up traffic behind them in the through-lane).  These drivers seem to think they shouldn't have to wait in line like everyone else, and they don't care one whit about the inconvenience (and potential danger) they cause others to suffer. 

 

"Entitled" people, in the pejorative, are just selfish and self-important.  I think that's really all there is to it.

[Ravin]

Where we disagre is that I don't agree that you shouldn't have to "earn" basic goods and services if you have the ability, regardless of whether you live in a rich or poor country.  People who think that do have an excess sense of entitlement IMO.  We all should feel a compulsion to contribute, not only to our own upkeep but to the upkeep of those who cannot contribute.  IMO it's part of being human.

 

Right now this is a fairly "rich" country, sort of, unless you consider what it's going to cost to pay down our debts and fix our ageing infrastructure and a few other things.  When our kids grow up, who knows whether our country will be able to sustain people with a "sense of entitlement"?  I think it is dangerous to teach people they are entitled to material benefits just because they breathe.  I think it's very likely to catch up with us someday.

 

Also, why is it OK for an American to feel "entitled" but a person in most other countries should feel they have to work?

 

 

 

I am not advocating the idea that people should not be responsible. I am advocating collective responsibility. Part of why our infrastructure is in such poor shape is the mentality that government is good for nothing, lowering taxes is the most virtuous thing a politician can do, and the benefit is to those at the top who line their pockets. Infrastructure maintenance is a collective responsibility. It is the "every man for himself" mentality that leads to its crumbling. We would not have gotten to where we are today if that mentality had persisted throughout the 20th century.

 

Economics is not a zero sum game.

 

As I said before, the entitlement should be for things like basic health care, food, and shelter. Add functioning infrastructure to the list. Things like clean drinking water, roads, and bridges are part of the same package.

 

People are still going to largely feel like they have to work, because most people want more than the minimum in life.

 

I never said it was okay for an American to feel "entitled" but not people in most other countries. Frankly, most countries do a better job than the U.S. in at least some areas, even when they are poorer. On a global stage, there should also be a push to secure the floor beneath people.  

Edited May 10, 2016 by Ravin

[Miss Mousie]

I also don't think Hornblower was referring to government entitlements.  When I think of the phrase "sense of entitlement" this sums it up exactly --

 

 

 

"Without empathy for the consequences to others" is key for me.

 

So borrowing from another thread -- the person who brings her dog into a grocery store just because she wants to w/o considering the hygiene issues, that there might be other shoppers who are allergic to or terrified of dogs -- that's demonstrating a sense of entitlement.

 

When there's road construction up ahead and signs have been telling drivers to merge right for the last two miles but some bozo ignores the signs, speedily zooming along bypassing the backup of cars in the right lane until cones or barriers prevent him from going any further and then he tries to force someone to let him over -- that's a sense of entitlement.

 

When someone parks in a fire zone (no parking zone) in front of a store because "I'll only be a few minutes!" -- that's a sense of entitlement.

 

Those are simple examples.  There are certainly plenty more that are much more egregious.

 

Well said, and with perfect examples.  You posted while I was typing my response - had I seen your post first, I needn't have finished mine.