Maybe, maybe not

[mightwin]

Years ago I was told I had a negative attitude.  Maybe, maybe not.  At my last job, the company lost money on a daily basis.  This loss was caused by human error, computer malfunction, or just plain laziness.  When I tried to help find the exact reason, I was labeled as having a negative attitude.   My outlook on life and "stuff" isn't as negative as I thought.  (Or actually was told.) I've decided that there's more unhappy people in the world today than ever before.  In stores, restaurants, banks, casinos, where ever, you interact with people working there that are not happy - which they should be happy - they're employed.   On any given website on comment sections or forums - there's always a difference of opinions.  I think that's a good thing most of the time.  It helps you see a variety of ideas and thoughts of people you will never meet.   If everyone would agree, that would make life boring.  People that think their point of view is the only "right" one, miss the opportunity to learn something new.  (Sure, the sky is a lovely shade of pink.) But I don't see why some people enjoy being a wet blanket, raining on people's parades, or only dewelling on the negative.   Lucky or unlucky, hot or cold machines or players, lousy paytables or great ones - let's all try to have one positive something today.  Whether it be smiling at someone you pass walking by, saying and meaning thank you for something done, or leaving a video poker machine with the same or more money than you sat down with.   Maybe if everyone tries one tiny positive thing a day - more positive things will follow.  Maybe not. I wish everyone has a great today.  If you go near a video poker machine - I hope you hit a royal flush.

[Frank Kneeland]

A few words on happiness.There was a fascinating episode of NOVA on happiness, that I saw many years ago that had some interesting statistics that changed my outlook on life. In almost all western countries when scientists asked people if they were happy, the ratio was almost exactly 50/50 of happy to unhappy people regardless of socioeconomic class and other factors that you'd expect would make a difference. Turns out, not so much. In almost 100% of the people surveyed that said they were happy, they discovered increased activity in the left frontal lobe and research suggested a genetic cause for this.And now for the really weird tid bit: In China when they posed the "are you happy?" question, 85% of the people asked answered, "gee I never thought about it." Of the 15% that had thought about it, the split between happy and unhappy people was again 50/50. Apparently, the simple concept in life that being happy is a goal, is itself a learned behavior.The conclusions were that happiness is largely genetic and what remains is environmental and subject to sociological programing. In other words HOW happy we can be is genetic, but what makes us happy is mostly learned behavior. Raise a child to believe a hard days work on the farm is what brings happiness and for him that will be true, unless he's exposed to alternative information and embraces that instead.It is therefore possible to be happy with nothing or everything, depending on your expectations learned throughout life...and of course your genetic predisposition towards increased left frontal lobe activity.I saw this show in the mid 80's, there is likely more current info on the subject.Just interesting stuff I thought some of you might like.

[faygo]

Frank, strange you should use farming as an example.  Having been raised on a farm I can attest to the fact that it does make one happy. Until one has  seen the fresh earth being turned over by a plow they will never know happiness.

[Frank Kneeland]

Frank, strange you should use farming as an example.  Having been raised on a farm I can attest to the fact that it does make one happy. Until one has  seen the fresh earth being turned over by a plow they will never know happiness. Glad you liked it. I've always loved growing things and then eating them.There's another dynamic related to happiness that I didn't mention. Most humans are duration insensitive to positive stimuli. Translated this means we tend to favor shorter duration events that have a higher threshold of excitement, over long duration events with less short term excitement. This creates a bias towards more fleeting and transiant forms of entertainment, but the net effect is reduced, not increased overall feelings of satisfaction.This is one of the primary factors in addiction. And as David Gilmore said, "why people trade hot ashes for dreams, hot air for a cool breeze, and a walk on part in a war for the lead role in a cage".In mightwin's original post he said, "But I don't see why some people enjoy being a wet blanket, raining on people's parades, or only dewelling on the negative."I can't speak for others, but for me my goal is exactly the opposite from this. I would like to increase people's satisfaction in life by directing them to more lasting sources of joy than mere jackpot hitting, which I have been told can be very fleeting. My ex-girlfriend in Tahoe said she only got a day's excitement out of getting a Royal, and that the next day it just made her feel she had to go out and get another one...like having a glass you could never fill.Of course this was just her, but I don't think the problem was unique.

[OKathyO]

Bravo Might Win!  Well stated my friend!