Make a Contribution to Remove NSFW Ads

A St. Lucia man refuses to sell land for $60 million

keone

keone

WORLD WAR K aka Sensei ALMONDZ
International Member
A St. Lucia man who lives in a corrugated home, without electricity or water, has turned down an offer of $60 million for his land.

Claudius Lousien sleeps on an old lounger and his dinner consists of the fish he catches cooked on left-over coals from his charcoal fire. He says his father was born on the Caribbean island and that he has never visited a doctor or a dentist.

Lousien's home sits atop a hill with views of all directions and he says it's "a nice place, cool and quiet, with all these beautiful trees."

The 70-year-old simply said he doesn't want to sell because he wants "to be buried here.
 
Last edited:
Fuck that.

I'm not a believer that money brings happiness but this dude can be content somewhere else. Donate the money to charity if you don't need it or want for material things. But it makes no sense to turn down that kind of money.
 
what will he do with 60 million dollars at that age? i hope he has someone to leave the land to or when he dies the people who wanted to buy it will just take it
 
That's cool. I bet it is nice to have a nice size of land that you can do what you please. At that age he's just waiting for his checkout date but living simple and peaceful. Nice.
 
clitsational said:
everyone on earth is not money hungry and materialistic like us

:smh:

:cool:
​
Click to expand...

Material
Main Entry: 1ma·te·ri·al
Pronunciation: \mə-ˈtir-ē-əl\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English materiel, from Middle French & Late Latin; Middle French, from Late Latin materialis, from Latin materia matter — more at matter
Date: 14th century

1 a (1) : relating to, derived from, or consisting of matter; especially : physical <the material world> (2) : bodily <material needs> b (1) : of or relating to matter rather than form <material cause> (2) : of or relating to the subject matter of reasoning; especially : empirical <material knowledge>
2 : having real importance or great consequences <facts material to the investigation>
3 a : being of a physical or worldly nature b : relating to or concerned with physical rather than spiritual or intellectual things <material progress>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/material

Material-- synonymous with substance-- anything made of matter, i.e. hydrogen, air and water are all examples of materials.

Hate to break it to you but land is a material good and his attachment to that land is materialistic.

doggish_098 said:
what will he do with 60 million dollars at that age? i hope he has someone to leave the land to or when he dies the people who wanted to buy it will just take it
Click to expand...

How many lives could he touch with $60 million dollars?
 
Costanza said:
Fuck that.

I'm not a believer that money brings happiness but this dude can be content somewhere else. Donate the money to charity if you don't need it or want for material things. But it makes no sense to turn down that kind of money.
Click to expand...

What would that kind of money mean to a man, that never needed it. Your comment is reminiscent of the average American take on other cultures and I quote... "give 'em Coca Cola for their property"
 
Costanza said:

Hate to break it to you
but land is a material good
and
his attachment to that land is materialistic.

How many lives could he touch with $60 million dollars?​
Click to expand...

u r right

fuck that dude

lets send my man here in to get close to him and take his shit

96w4lc.jpg


:cool:​
 
Hmm, another thread about someone refusing to accept a large some of money.
Damn, I dunno know what to say.

It's refreshing to see folks who will not comprise their beliefs systems for financial gains. My hats off.
 
manhertm said:
What would that kind of money mean to a man, that never needed it. Your comment is reminiscent of the average American take on other cultures and I quote... "give 'em Coca Cola for their property"
Click to expand...
What about the needs of others???

It's obviously a selfish decision. That's not always a bad thing as he, himself, is the main person affected by this but I don't see the dude as some hero or at all admirable.

You misinterpret my words, which were quite clear. I never justifyed offering him the money, as that was never at issue. I criticized his rejecting the money. Big difference.
 
The funny thing is that some cats in here are saying "what he could do for the world with that money" while disregarding what the buyers (who already have the 60 million) could do for the world with that money.

Damn shame....
 
Costanza said:
What about the needs of others???

It's obviously a selfish decision. That's not always a bad thing as he, himself, is the main person affected by this but I don't see the dude as some hero or at all admirable.

You misinterpret my words, which were quite clear. I never justifyed offering him the money, as that was never at issue. I criticized his rejecting the money. Big difference.
Click to expand...

It's not a selfish decision. I could work 5 more hours per week easily and give all to charity, it doesn't make me selfish for not doing it. This dude was offered 60 million dollars for his land, do you think whoever's offering him that money truly has the surrounding area in mind. They could disrupt a whole community by purchasing that land, then would the old dude be responsible for that because he took the money? On the contrary I think if everyone in America made a decision to not get money for the sake of getting it, we would see instant charity without even thinking about it. You can't solve real problems by throwing money at it.
 
Mr

keone said:
A St. Lucia man who lives in a corrugated home, without electricity or water, has turned down an offer of $60 million for his land.

Claudius Lousien sleeps on an old lounger and his dinner consists of the fish he catches cooked on left-over coals from his charcoal fire. He says his father was born on the Caribbean island and that he has never visited a doctor or a dentist.

Lousien's home sits atop a hill with views of all directions and he says it's "a nice place, cool and quiet, with all these beautiful trees."

The 70-year-old simply said he doesn't want to sell because he wants "to be buried here.
http://forbezdvd.com/blog/2010/03/22/man-refuses-to-sell-land-for-60-million/
Click to expand...
And knowing how greedy fuckin' developers are, that might be sooner than he would like. :hmm:
 
Dr. Munhihausen II said:
The funny thing is that some cats in here are saying "what he could do for the world with that money" while disregarding what the buyers (who already have the 60 million) could do for the world with that money.

Damn shame....
Click to expand...
Pshhh... :smh::smh::smh:

What's the headline here??? A greedy business trying to buy land for a reason that isn't even mentioned? Or the man who refused to sell and who everybody predictably lauds as a hero?

I'm just giving another perspective... It's not the best course of action possible.

It's superior to selling the money and blowing it on cars, mansions, and hookers... It's probably superior to whatever the business that has the money hopes to gain... But it's not the best thing that counld be done.

Perhaps, instead of offering one of five dozen "co-signs," it might be of some use for someone to point that out.
 
manhertm said:
It's not a selfish decision. I could work 5 more hours per week easily and give all to charity, it doesn't make me selfish for not doing it. This dude was offered 60 million dollars for his land, do you think whoever's offering him that money truly has the surrounding area in mind. They could disrupt a whole community by purchasing that land, then would the old dude be responsible for that because he took the money? On the contrary I think if everyone in America made a decision to not get money for the sake of getting it, we would see instant charity without even thinking about it. You can't solve real problems by throwing money at it.
Click to expand...

The one thing you could be right about is that the people offering him that money truly could disrupt a whole community by purchasing the land-- I have no idea what their agenda is.

We only have what the article told us to go on. The man didn't say that he was standing up for his community by not selling the land (in fact, the extreme sum of money would seem to indicate that he is the last obstacle in their way, though that is just speculation).

Here is the motivation as written in the article: The 70-year-old simply said he doesn't want to sell because he wants "to be buried here."

That seems like a trivial attachment to me. I wonder how many people in Indonesia and Haiti were buried thinking they'd spend eternity in one spot until a tsunami or earthquake changed their plans for them.

He could easily relocate and if he has true peace of mind, as kaya wrote, then he should be able to be happy in myriad places and help a lot of other people in the process. I wouldn't expect that from some corporation, as Dr. Munchausen ignorantly chides me for failing to do-- there is no hope for them. But this guy could have done much better.
 
Costanza said:
Fuck that.

I'm not a believer that money brings happiness but this dude can be content somewhere else. Donate the money to charity if you don't need it or want for material things. But it makes no sense to turn down that kind of money.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:


Why be content anywhere, when he's happy where he is now?

Your "alternate perspective" is just stupid. He shouldn't feel any obligation to sell his happiness for 'charity' in the same way (as someone pointed out above) you're not calling on the buyers to abandon their business efforts in the name of this 'charity'.
 
Costanza
Think about what dudes "causes" or what he really cares about in his "world". How could he give it to the poor or homeless that's the way they live, money is useless to them. Education? All they need to know is how to read the weather and get food, know how to avoid shit that will kill u out there. Health? Dudes 70 never been to the doctor. Like somebody said earlier the people with intentions of buying the land will more than likely develop in some way fucking up the environment of the land they live off of. Think of the other people who survive off of fish from the water source that will be too polluted to maintain life, the animals whos habitat will be ruined. Not selling out is the unselfish thing to do in my opinion.

This did make me think how did land get officially distributed historically? I mean just cause his family has been living there how is it legally his? Why can't they just kill him and build what ever they want? Or do it without killing him.
 
Last edited:
I'm conflicted about this. On one hand- if he has no need or desire for anything else than to be buried there.... fine.
 
Costanza said:
The one thing you could be right about is that the people offering him that money truly could disrupt a whole community by purchasing the land-- I have no idea what their agenda is.

We only have what the article told us to go on. The man didn't say that he was standing up for his community by not selling the land (in fact, the extreme sum of money would seem to indicate that he is the last obstacle in their way, though that is just speculation).

Here is the motivation as written in the article: The 70-year-old simply said he doesn't want to sell because he wants "to be buried here."

That seems like a trivial attachment to me. I wonder how many people in Indonesia and Haiti were buried thinking they'd spend eternity in one spot until a tsunami or earthquake changed their plans for them.

He could easily relocate and if he has true peace of mind, as kaya wrote, then he should be able to be happy in myriad places and help a lot of other people in the process. I wouldn't expect that from some corporation, as Dr. Munchausen ignorantly chides me for failing to do-- there is no hope for them. But this guy could have done much better.
Click to expand...

I think you using your definitions on life to judge this guy. Anybody's peace of mind can be affected. I'm sure there were a lot of Africans with peace of mind ,before their capture. I doubt they held on to that across the Atlantic. As for Tsunami and earthquake, they are all acts of nature, nothing you can predict or prevent. These circumstances are created by man and most likely out of greed. No we don't know the buyer's agenda, but it's not hard to assume, it isn't a wildlife reservation.

You, yourself are being selfish to assume a man living with no electricity in a corrugated home can take $60 million and do something constructive for the greater good. That's damn near 10% of that island GDP going to a man, that probably wouldn't know what to do with a $1000. Who would handle that for him, who would or could he trust to do the right thing. You're also assuming his act is selfish, without know what this man has done in his life. An act of charity could be simply fishing for his neighbors. He's not responsible for the world, because he didn't fuck it up or create it's problems. We don't know the scope of his understanding when it comes to the rest of the world, so why would we put that kind of responsibility on him. You could be made the president tomorrow with all the good intentions in the world and still screw up the task. :dunno:
 
personally, i think he's stupid, but in

these days & this age i guess this is commendable.

everyone cant be bought.
 
manhertm said:
I think you using your definitions on life to judge this guy. Anybody's peace of mind can be affected. I'm sure there were a lot of Africans with peace of mind ,before their capture. I doubt they held on to that across the Atlantic. As for Tsunami and earthquake, they are all acts of nature, nothing you can predict or prevent. These circumstances are created by man and most likely out of greed. No we don't know the buyer's agenda, but it's not hard to assume, it isn't a wildlife reservation.
Click to expand...

Of course, I'm using my perspective on life to judge him-- We all do. I try to be open to other perspectives and I'm willing to adopt new ideas if they seem better than the ones I've had but when any of us call something stupid, we're making a judgment based on our own perspectives.

There is no value in placing your rotting corpse under any specific soil and no guarantee that it will stay there.

manhertm said:
You, yourself are being selfish to assume a man living with no electricity in a corrugated home can take $60 million and do something constructive for the greater good. That's damn near 10% of that island GDP going to a man, that probably wouldn't know what to do with a $1000. Who would handle that for him, who would or could he trust to do the right thing.
Click to expand...

I wasn't being at all selfish... Ignorant, perhaps. You're right that I didn't consider his intelligence and access to information...

Even without electricity, I would think this man has some idea that there is a lot of shit wrong in the world and be able to grasp that a ton of money could help feed some people who were unable to eat. I've never encountered anyone who lived as this man is described as living, though, so like I said, I'm willing to admit my own ignorance.

manhertm said:
You're also assuming his act is selfish, without know what this man has done in his life. An act of charity could be simply fishing for his neighbors. He's not responsible for the world, because he didn't fuck it up or create it's problems. We don't know the scope of his understanding when it comes to the rest of the world, so why would we put that kind of responsibility on him. You could be made the president tomorrow with all the good intentions in the world and still screw up the task. :dunno:
Click to expand...

As I said in the response that you quoted, we only have the information provided in this article to go on. I don't know his language skills, any possible barrier between he and the reporter, his mental health or the quality of the reporting. But the article says that he gave a reason for wanting to keep the land which was as simple as his wanting to be buried there. If he wanted to protect his neighbor's lifestyles-- and, again, for his one piece of land to be so valuable, I would think a lot of the land around it had already been acquired-- that would not be selfish. But the reason he gave-- the one that everybody is co-signing-- was a selfish decision-- all about HIM.
 

Make a Contribution to Remove NSFW Ads
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top