Givers vs Takers: Are you a "Giver" or a "Taker" ?

One website suggests that we learn to be either a "giver" or a "taker" when we are children.

"Very young children do what they need to survive. That’s when they learn to be givers or takers. Givers are not necessarily good and takers are not necessarily bad.

Givers need to be with takers. Two takers don’t work just as two givers don’t either. Strange but true."

[link to www.thekayway.com]

a little from column A, a little from column B

is that seriously how you view the world?

I don't think people should be pigeonholed as one type or another - most of us are a little of both, depending on the situation and the people involved.

at the results of your poll(~)...

I give and take(~) 50/50 = balance, at least I try to(~)

to all the givers: Can I have $20 from you...????
I will give you something back in return.

Yes or No

(lets see how many givers are really givers)

I work and save my money, I dont ask anythign from anyone but I dont feel im forced to give either. I am against socialism. I do lend money to friends and give to the poor when I can.

Anatomically speaking, I'm a "giver" !

So that website says... "Givers need to be with takers. Two takers don’t work just as two givers don’t either. Strange but true."

Why do I always feel like I'm being "took"?

An example would be the guy that works and owns the Thrift store in town. His prices for junk is already high, so generally I leave the place feeling like I paid too much for what I got.

Last week, I went to get some Christmas decorations, took them home, but they didn't work out, so I took them back, which he said I could.

So, I take them back, and he hands me a $20. back, but he should have gave me $28. He hesitates to see if I would say something, instead of just being honest and giving me what I paid for them.

Every time I leave that store, I swear I'll never go back, but strangely I always do, and then regret it again.

He's a "taker."

i think you should shove that poll up your arse

Thanks for the input. That was very "giving" of you.

I've been thinking about this, and why can't givers live with givers? What she says doesn't make sense that it has to be givers and takers.

A good example would be my neighbors. 2 of them are "givers," and the other 2 are "leave me alone's"

We share stuff with each other, and help each other out. We have no problem getting along.

Obviously, the automatic test should be if you are on the government dole, or pay them taxes.

On a more personal level, I am a giver. I donate to local charities, including thrift stores. I tip the waitress generously. I spend my money in my community.

The ultimate taker is big government. Look around your room and find one thing that big government produced. Takers.

I did answer "leave me alone" because that is how I feel when it comes to interacting with the Taker government.

If you are taking a poll on this site, you're question should be changed to...Are you a "Bottom" or a "Top"?

First I want to thank you for bringing up the topic.

But what if there was another option ?
Just think if we taught children that "givers" are good
and "takers" are bad.
So some people would end up giving and giving and giving
and feel bad about themselves when they took.
And the takers would justify their behavior by pointing
out that the "givers" were ultimately self destructive.

The "givers" would get tired of always being only responsible
ones and begin to withdraw.

So, why not begin to look at it a little more contextually.
Actually everyone needs to do both.
Givers need to realize that if they don't take as well, it is basically a destructive act.
Irresponsible to ones self.

And actually a lot of people who look like "takers" are incredibly caring and responsible on many, many levels.

Some are used as tools/pawns to always see themselves as victims.

I have seen some of the most superficial "givers"
crap all over people.

So, I think that brings us to....can we figure out a way to realistically gauge social and personal responsibility.

I think the world is divided between two types and has nothing to do with race or class etc.