Two persons, named man1 and man2, are going to a trip when suddenly came a man who sells present.

Then the conversation started by man1 saying "Please treat me one present, it's cheap anyway." (Let's assume one present of any kind is $0.25.

man2 replied, "It's cheap so why don't you buy it yourself."

Which is reasoning is more correct or ethical?

In my point of view, man1 should buy it himself because it's cheap anyway and it seems he is selfish.

 

It depends. I 'll give you two cases to display that.

If man1 is a 5 year old child and man2 is his mother, then it's ok for man1 to ask.
If man1 is your spoiled cousin and man2 is you, then I think your reaction was justified.

Context, context, context...

 

It depends. I 'll give you two cases to display that.

If man1 is a 5 year old child and man2 is his mother, then it's ok for man1 to ask.
If man1 is your spoiled cousin and man2 is you, then I think your reaction was justified.

Context, context, context...

That was also my thought.

EDIT: man2 cannot be his mother. By man2 saying It's cheap so why don't you buy it yourself., it is assumed that man1 has the ability to buy. Wherein in this man1 has none because he is a child.

 

It depends. I 'll give you two cases to display that.

If man1 is a 5 year old child and man2 is his mother, then it's ok for man1 to ask.
If man1 is your spoiled cousin and man2 is you, then I think your reaction was justified.

Context, context, context...

I disagree. It is wrong in both cases. While children are children and really can't be blamed for doing what they do, it still does not make it right.

The child should have asked the mother to please buy it and asked what they could do to earn the present.

Now of course you are not going to expect the child to say this in the real world unless they are beyond a certain age but still does not make it right.

 

That was also my thought.

EDIT: man2 cannot be his mother. By man2 saying It's cheap so why don't you buy it yourself., it is assumed that man1 has the ability to buy. Wherein in this man1 has none because he is a child.

Children do have the ability to buy. It was a rare occurrence that my parents would buy me any kind of special gift outside of a special occasion like a birthday or Christmas. I had money from birthday presents and from chores I would do around the house. I was permitted to use that money to buy something for myself. It taught me the value of money. But I really did not appreciate all that my parents did to provide me with food, clothing and a place to live till I started providing for myself.

 

Children do have the ability to buy. It was a rare occurrence that my parents would buy me any kind of special gift outside of a special occasion like a birthday or Christmas. I had money from birthday presents and from chores I would do around the house. I was permitted to use that money to buy something for myself. It taught me the value of money. But I really did not appreciate all that my parents did to provide me with food, clothing and a place to live till I started providing for myself.

Yes, that is correct. What I mean the ability to buy is that you cannot have money from any other else aside from your parents [Because of the law that prohibits children from working]. Of course, I would be wrong though. There are kids who work for others and they are doing something great because of that.

 

I disagree. It is wrong in both cases. While children are children and really can't be blamed for doing what they do, it still does not make it right.

The child should have asked the mother to please buy it and asked what they could do to earn the present.

Now of course you are not going to expect the child to say this in the real world unless they are beyond a certain age but still does not make it right.

I think it depends on the parent-child relationship you have built. When I was a kid I didn't have pocket money. I would ask and be given.
Of course I knew when I was entitled to something or not.

For example, when me and my mother were at the supermarket, I could ask "Mom, can you buy me a pack of gums?" - "Okay, sure".
Notice that I didn't use the "Can I have a..." phrase, because it's closest to the Greek one.

 

Okay. Let's assume man1 and man2 are both mature enough, can live with themselves [18 years old].

 

Yes, that is correct. What I mean the ability to buy is that you cannot have money from any other else aside from your parents [Because of the law that prohibits children from working]. Of course, I would be wrong though. There are kids who work for others and they are doing something great because of that.

It depends on the age. I have been working since I have been 9 years old. Delivering newspapers, cutting grass, painting, raking leaves, shoveling snow. Almost any odd job as a child. If I wanted something I would go by it but appreciate how hard it was to earn it.

 

Lightfire, Let me just say first "WOW!" Your English has improved immensely in the past year. I cannot believe I speaking to the same person.

In answer to your question, it is my opinion that the man should buy it himself if he is able. If he has zero money on his person, it would be OK to ask to borrow the money until he can get home or to wherever his money is. But to ask someone else to buy something for you, with no offer to repay, which you can already afford is selfish (to me).

Further, if the gift is only a pleasure item, like a soda or candy, then not OK. But for example if it is water and you are dying of dehydration, then yes.

I had a similar question a few months ago.

 

Okay. Let's assume man1 and man2 are both mature enough, can live with themselves [18 years old].

Then it would seems strange to me for man1 to ask such a thing. If he can afford it, then he should buy it. Asking such a question would seem childish in my society.

There are exceptions, however, and this is a common one: I go to the kiosk to buy whatever and a friend of mine asks "Since you will go, can you buy me a pack of gum (or tobacco or w/e)?". Then I would buy the item for them, knowing that they would refund me, but I may refuse the refund when I return, not wanting to make a fuss over 50c and knowing that they would do the same for me.

 

Thank you strantor.

I have heard that people in the United States, when they turned 18, should live their life themselves and should no longer ask anything from their parents. Would that mean that you should have a saved money [or if you do not have, work] in order to get in to the university?

It shows independency, which is great.

 

Thank you strantor.

I have heard that people in the United States, when they turned 18, should live their life themselves and should no longer ask anything from their parents. Would that mean that you should have a saved money [or if you do not have, work] in order to get in to the university?

That is correct Lightfire, though it depends on the person. Some young adults have a good relationship with their parents, and vice versa, and they are allowed to stay at home, though their responsibilities in the household are greater. Others, however, grow tired of their parents and can't wait to get out of the house. They tend to rent an apartment, or live with friends for a while.

Paying for schooling is a difficult one. A lot of young adults are unable to afford classes at their university. In that case, they may ask to borrow money, wait a year or two before starting and get a job, or they might even decide not to go to the uni at all. It varies widely.

I feel that 18 is the age at which "teens" (young adults) are welcome to leave home, but are not required to. It is completely up to them and their parents. However, any earlier is generally frowned upon because it is assumed the teenager would be unable to care for him/herself.

 

Thank you strantor.

I have heard that people in the United States, when they turned 18, should live their life themselves and should no longer ask anything from their parents. Would that mean that you should have a saved money [or if you do not have, work] in order to get in to the university?

It shows independency, which is great.

Maybe that is the way it used to be when I was growing up but not so much anymore. The youth of the US are spoiled today. Everything is given to them by their parents. There are some living with their parents well into their thirties. Not doing much of anything other than playing with their Xbox or whatever.

We now have a new law that says you can be covered by your parents insurance till age 26. 26! You should be working by then and providing for yourself not living off of your parents. This of course excludes anyone with severe mental or physical disabilities.

I have a cousin that has a severe metal disability. She can't really live on her own but she does go to work every day. She takes great pride her work and the money she earns from her job.

But as Derstorm said there are children that accept responsibility for themseleves once they become of age so with people like that and people with the work ethic like my cousin's then maybe there is hop. I go to a local farmers market that has young people working there. They are the most helpful and polite young people anywhere. Going there makes me feel good about my country's future.

 

So meaning after you turned 26 years old [i.e. 27+], you are no longer allowed to ask help from your parents?

 

So meaning after you turned 26 years old [i.e. 27+], you are no longer allowed to ask help from your parents?

You are no longer allowed under their insurance, at least.

 

If you are given something, when to accept it and when not to accept it?

 

If you are given something, when to accept it and when not to accept it?

Because it is called personal responsibility. It is not healthy to always be given something by someone. What happens to that 30 year old when the parents are not there to provide for them? No job, no education, all they know is how to play xbox. A thirty something teenager.

 

Because it is called personal responsibility. It is not healthy to always be given something by someone. What happens to that 30 year old when the parents are not there to provide for them? No job, no education, all they know is how to play xbox. A thirty something teenager.

I don't think that's what he was asking. He's asking if someone offers you something, when should you accept the gift and when shouldn't you? For example, if you and your friend are walking through a mall and you say "Hmm, I really like that item, but it's expensive", and he says "I'll buy it for you, as a gift". Should you accept, or should you tell your friend that he shouldn't do that because it's too generous?

 

That comes back to an evaluation of the costs vs the available resources.

If you friend has tons of money and offers to buy you the $1 item because you don't have $1 on you, that seems ok to me. Logically his resources are very high and the cost is very low. Like your friend giving you 1 beer from his case of 24 beers, or accepting a peanut from his bowl full of peanuts. All those examples also assume the possibility of payback or reciprocation too, don't forget. I'm sure you would give him one of your beers...

Then I guess it heads into a sliding scale based on his resources vs the cost of the item. A broke or in-debt friend offering to buy you an expensive item may well be "too generous".