GIVING and TAKING of a person, a firm, a state or even humankind should be in balance or things go wrong... that is
the basic idea of the following rumination.
What is such a big deal about (G) GIVING and (T) TAKING? The big
deal is that in many cases G and T are not in balance and and we
tend to forget what serious and negative consequences it inevitably
- - -
If I breathe in (T) and do not breathe out (G) I will stop breathing
at all and start suffocating... that happens during an asthma attack...
and it is not OK.
If I eat a lot (T) and do not utilize (G) the calories the food
contains, my body begins to store them in a form of fat tissue and
more and more fat tissue growing on my body will cause extra stress
for it and eventually lead to developing certain diseases that will
inflict premature death on me... unless I intend to commit suicide
this is not OK.
I am afraid a lot of G and T misbalance is connected with differences
in power or actually seems to be synonymous with differences in
power (or dominance/submission). In marital consulting I often saw
the person having more power to TAKE more and GIVE less... without
being aware of it and taking such unfair distribution for granted
and, of course, not having a clue this is where the marital problems
In about as many cases (and this in not "blaming the victim")
I registered the person with less power to be unable to change one's
program of far more GIVING and much less TAKING - in order to to
win back respect and love of the drifting away or abusive partner...
both of course thoroughly dysfunctional patterns leading to a final
split specifically in modern "western" culture where marriages
tend to be based more and more on equality, mutual understanding,
respect and love.
What repeatedly strikes me in working with a couple is how creating
balance in G and T and so balance in power or dominance/submission,
even if it is only for a short time of a session, leads - immediately
- to a startling change: people begin to respect and love each other
and the difference is nearly palpable in verbal communication, body
language, facial expression - right there in my office.
It seems pretty obvious the patterns of G and T are programmed
into one's psyche early in the childhood. That's also the reason
why they are typically unconscious and why it is very difficult
to alter them so the change would really last.
- - -
As a psychic I mostly work with people on distance and can diagnose
and estimate the gravity of these patterns telepathically... which
seems even more accurate than face to face as I am not mislead by
subtle strategies of both parties often unconscious and meant to
cover the, sometimes embarrassing , reality of crude power differences.
Sometimes offering an explanation of basic principles and systematic
feedback on these issues helps and people are able to create a healthy
relationship by themselves. In other cases there has to be a series
of personal meetings where the dysfunctional patterns are identified,
clearly demonstrated and reprogrammed right there in action during
sessions with a couple.
Anyway it seems no relationship really works in a long term unless
there is pretty much a balance of G and T. Needless to say the fact
itself that people stay together in a relationship often doesn't
say much about real functionality of a relationship.
By the way, let me underline the immense importance of the functionality
of an intimate partnership and family background generally for businesspeople
as a source of emotional nourishment and balance at their stressful
- - -
Allow me to proceed from couples and their G and T to G and T in
I recall once being explained the idea of "Live and let live"
in business by an older Austrian entrepreneur while traveling through
mild and pleasant hills of the wine-land of Southern Moravia and
Northern Austria: truly nostalgic memory. For him the idea of "live
and let live" was a basic rule and he obviously relied on it
in order to keep his inner peace and clean conscience. I think it
had a lot to do with G and T.
I noticed about 50% of people who work for small firms or own one
themselves still stick to 50 : 50% balance of G and T in business.
And I noticed about 90% of corporate managers seem to be at G and
T ratio of 0 : 100% - completely out of proportion - and... about
80% of them generalizing this pattern to their relationships towards
own families... without being aware of it.
I noticed also a gradual shift of general G and T pattern in the
same "greedy" direction in younger managers who started
to work for big corporations recently - take bigger salaries and
working long hours - and conform to the ruling norms of rather cynical
indifference to broader than corporate interests.
"Power corrupts"... as well as workaholism and they both
tend to reduce sensitivity to the needs of others, so the needs
of the more powerful person, institution, firm, state become prioritized
to the needs of all others... and this distortion even feels right
Obviously religions functioned as counterweight in the history,
trying to reduce acting out greed or pure TAKING. For example, once
upon a time... taking interest for a loan was seen as wrong and
shameful thing to do in Christianity and it still is seen so in
Islam, as I read, which might explain the generally lower economic
efficiency of states with strongly prevailing Moslem religion. But
what have religions to do with business?
It is interesting to me that one of the oldest international corporations
oriented prevalently to GIVING, to charity (G : T = 90 : 10% - in
a long term, as I am estimating intuitively), namely Catholic Church,
has been doing economically pretty well for quite a long time already...
and so it seems corporations do not have to be so terribly greedy
and tightfisted as they mostly are in order to make quite a lot
of money. They would, I guess, have to be smarter even wise, have
vision perhaps and be definitely oriented to a long term perspective
to make profit otherwise than they mostly do now. (I apologize for
an inappropriately light tone of this paragraph to both those who
belong tho the Catholic Church and have done wonderful work with
it and those who were badly treated, abused even murdered by it...
now and in history.)
Another exception (and light touch of the area of politics): George
Soros a man who obviously can make a lot of money and who surely
can't be suspected for being a wimp financier may serve as a good
example of acting on G : T = 50 : 50% principle and thoroughly enjoying
it, as far as I can guess - and this estimate would apply to let's
say the last 10 years.
I like the idea there could be people who would be able to counterbalance
some of the weakness of democracy, who - with their personal wealth
- could follow and materialize visions on a longer than an election
term. And could compete with a president that uses state money but
can't afford to accomplish much that would last longer than his
short period in power... during which he also has to pay back to
the subjects that contributed to his election campaign.
But I don't want to feed my wishful thinking too much: For comparison
let's make an estimate on Bill Gates G : T = 10 : 90%, Sir Richard
Branson of Virgin empire G : T = 0 : 100%... and as far as I can
tell 95% or the richest individuals of the world falling into the
category of incredible disproportionate G and T.
I am glad there is George Soros as an example of both a tough businessman
G : T = 50 : 50% as I would hate to be seen as an blind opponent
of successful businesspeople (and I would love to hear about more
of those who any reader suspects can have G : T = 50 : 50%... would
you kindly let me know?).
The problem seems to be people, institutions, states with a fair
balance of G and T (= about 50 : 50%) are in clear minority (5%?)
among those in power in the world and the unscrupulous and badly
shortsighted sharks seem to prevail.
- - -
There is a limit, though, of how far the imbalance of G and T can
go... and it is the planet Earth' s limit in raw materials, energy
resources, drinkable water, breathable air, food, place...
I intuitively find the planet Earth very generous G : T = 100 :
0% but its GIVING seems to be already slower than humankind's TAKING
and with the speed of imbalance growing it seems to me humankind
will start to have real troubles in about 50 years from now... unless
of course something is done which I hope it might be still possible.
What I am getting about humankind in relationship to the planet
Earth: Humankind has (not a very impressive) G : T = 1 : 99%...
and what is needed from humankind toward the Earth for sustainable
development seems to be G : T = 50 : 50% (whatever it means concretely)
- like in any relationship that is healthy and is supposed to last.
Again the USA, the world' s biggest power with best technologies
and education and biggest capital seem to be incredibly blind or
unaware with G : T = 1 : 99 ( in my estimate)... the implied idea
probably being "till there is something to TAKE, let's be sure
to TAKE it for ourselves and not leave it to the others"...
which I as a psychic prognosticator find unnecessarily pessimistic,
passive and defeatist in case of a superpower and of course deeply
irresponsible of the powerful upper crust. Unfortunately these thoughts
don't even seem to reach conscious level of mind of people in power...
I really haven't heard about any long term plan or vision reflecting
this, expressed by the president or the government of the USA (besides
perhaps flying to the Moon and Mars)... which is rather shocking
as own children or grandchildren of those now in power are already
in danger. The shortsightedness is rather hard to believe... unless
we realize how much the USA functioning seems to be based on pathology:
fear + anxiety and acting them out / compensating them.
Of course the poor countries of the third world are like the less
powerful partner in a marriage: their needs are overlooked to big
degree and they are on average forced to G : T = 90 : 10%.
- - -
Following are some of my intuitive appraisals of various subjects'
G : T:
My intuitive take on some countries in G : T:
China 90 : 10
Russia 80 : 20
India 90 : 10
Germany 50 : 50
Norway 44: 56
EU in general 50: 50
new EU states 20 : 80
Japan 0 : 100
How (= in what direction) I perceive some institutions etc. influence
G : T ratio in the world:
International Monetary Fund 0 : 100
World Bank 1 : 99
NATO 0 : 100
UN 100 : 1
US film production, values is expresses 60: 40
average advertising 0: 100
My take on politicians' average personal G : T:
Churchill 50 : 50
Roosevelt 50 : 50
Stalin 0 : 100
Hitler 10 : 90
Mussolini 10 : 90
Blair 30 : 70
Bush 10 : 90
Putin 0 : 100
Schroeder 20 : 80
Berlusconi 0 : 100
Chirac 1 : 99
My take on US democratic presidential candidates' average G : T:
John Kerry 50 : 50
Howard Dean 20 : 80
Wesley K. Clark 30 : 70
John Edwards 20 : 80
Joseph I. Lieberman 1 : 99
...seems like USA has some chance!!! Unfortunately, the G and T
scale is not the only one describing personality.
- - -
I would say I am (not the only one who is) portraying rather a
bleak future... which might be the reason why people in general
actually hesitate to look reasonably far ahead. Sorry for that.
And a logical question would be: what can one do in order to prevent
a global catastrophe?
I think (besides hiding one's had into sand or planning to move
to Luna or Mars) a lot can be done in "thinking globally, acting
locally"... for example, as I have attempted to demonstrate,
everybody can try to live on psychologically (in both private and
business sectors) and politically healthy ratio of GIVING : TAKING
= 50 : 50%... and ...just for the heck of it... perhaps you can
start (and be shocked) by finding out how big your "ecological
footprint" is (on http://www.earthday.net/footprint/index.asp)
and estimating how much GIVING you are supposed to do in order to
get to GT5050.
I will be glad to give psychic reading on this theme for you personally
or for whoever you would like to oblige by bestowing such problematic
Cambridge, MA, USA, February 2004