Eating Cake
What's with the saying,
You want to have your cake and eat it, too.
Well of course I do! What's the point of having a cake if you can't eat it? Does anyone know any history on this silly statement?
Comments
1
What is the origin of the phrase:
: "You can't have your cake and eat it too" ?
From "Random House Dictionary of Popular Proverbs and Sayings" by Gregory Y. Titelman:
"You can't have your cake and eat it too -- One can't use something up and still have it to enjoy. This proverb was recorded in the book of proverbs by John Heywood in 1546, and is first attested in the United States in the 1742 'Colonial Records of Georgia' in 'Original Papers, 1735-1752.' The adage is found in varying forms: You can't eat your cake and have it too. You can't have everything and eat it too; Eat your cake and have the crumbs in bed with you, etc. ..."
This should clear up pretty much nothing. That is a weird saying.
: "You can't have your cake and eat it too" ?
From "Random House Dictionary of Popular Proverbs and Sayings" by Gregory Y. Titelman:
"You can't have your cake and eat it too -- One can't use something up and still have it to enjoy. This proverb was recorded in the book of proverbs by John Heywood in 1546, and is first attested in the United States in the 1742 'Colonial Records of Georgia' in 'Original Papers, 1735-1752.' The adage is found in varying forms: You can't eat your cake and have it too. You can't have everything and eat it too; Eat your cake and have the crumbs in bed with you, etc. ..."
This should clear up pretty much nothing. That is a weird saying.
Posted by: Tomslick at January 16, 2006 09:31 PM (xNjHI)
2
I prefer to think of it as a "mom-ism", something mothers say to get their kids to shut up. Reason, mom is always right, but if that is true, I'll never get cake again, and I've had cake and eaten it too, but if that's true, then mom is wrong, back to step one, and the kid's head nearly explodes, but mommy dearest gets a few moments of peace.
Also works as a "dad-ism" and HELL YES I will say this to my kids!
Also works as a "dad-ism" and HELL YES I will say this to my kids!
Posted by: Smokey at January 16, 2006 10:17 PM (K7uqT)
3
That's interesting, Tomslick, and I guess it explains it.
I guess it makes more sense in reverse -- you can't eat your can and still have it. Weird, though...why would I want to have the cake after I've eaten it?
I guess it makes more sense in reverse -- you can't eat your can and still have it. Weird, though...why would I want to have the cake after I've eaten it?
Posted by: Ogre at January 16, 2006 10:45 PM (+Gl1m)
4
Ogie:
Happy New Year! The phrase is not as silly as it seems.
You nailed it here. "Weird, though...why would I want to have the cake after I've eaten it?" Maybe one would want to have it, but of course it can't be done. That is exactly the point.
Here is another example of wanting to eat your cake and have it too: "I want to raise taxes for the prosperity of the country." Why doesn't that work? Because you are looting the people who create prosperity! You want to eat the creators and still have them!
"Eating your cake and having it too" is a serious phrase and a serious problem in our culture.
All the best..
Andy
Happy New Year! The phrase is not as silly as it seems.
You nailed it here. "Weird, though...why would I want to have the cake after I've eaten it?" Maybe one would want to have it, but of course it can't be done. That is exactly the point.
Here is another example of wanting to eat your cake and have it too: "I want to raise taxes for the prosperity of the country." Why doesn't that work? Because you are looting the people who create prosperity! You want to eat the creators and still have them!
"Eating your cake and having it too" is a serious phrase and a serious problem in our culture.
All the best..
Andy
Posted by: The Charlotte Capitalist at January 16, 2006 11:21 PM (jqUF+)
5
Ogie....More:
Conservatives say they want free markets, wealth, and capitalism; but then invoke the morality of religion: sacrifice, duty, and altruism as their base. They can't have it both ways. Sacrifice, duty, and altruism do not lead to free markets, wealth, and capitalism. They lead to the opposites.
Here's another one for liberals and conservatives (and libertarians)..."Wishing won't make it so."
Andy
Conservatives say they want free markets, wealth, and capitalism; but then invoke the morality of religion: sacrifice, duty, and altruism as their base. They can't have it both ways. Sacrifice, duty, and altruism do not lead to free markets, wealth, and capitalism. They lead to the opposites.
Here's another one for liberals and conservatives (and libertarians)..."Wishing won't make it so."
Andy
Posted by: The Charlotte Capitalist at January 16, 2006 11:31 PM (jqUF+)
6
MMMMM. Cake . . .
Posted by: oddybobo at January 17, 2006 02:32 PM (6Gm0j)
7
There is nothing altruistic about taking money from people who are richer than you. It is altruistic to give to those who are poorer than you but only if you are not forced to do it.
The argument is that with altruism, religion, sacrifice and duty capitalism can work and people will not have to be forced to do things.
The argument is that with altruism, religion, sacrifice and duty capitalism can work and people will not have to be forced to do things.
Posted by: Mindflame at January 17, 2006 04:40 PM (SlODe)
8
That's the key, Mindflame. You can have capitalism and altrusim in the same place very easily!
The opposite of capitalism and free markets is not religion, it's government control.
Why can't I sacrifice in a free market? If I'm free, I can -- if I'm not free, I cannot.
The opposite of capitalism and free markets is not religion, it's government control.
Why can't I sacrifice in a free market? If I'm free, I can -- if I'm not free, I cannot.
Posted by: Ogre at January 17, 2006 07:29 PM (/k+l4)
9
I think Mindflame hit the nail on the head. In a TRULY free market, the poor won't just be left in the cold, those of us who feel a duty to help will still be here, but not like the govt is today. In stead of just giving them money and HOPING they will find a job and all, we feed them, clothe them, HELP THEM write a resume, HELP THEM learn a new skill, then HELP THEM FIND A JOB so they won't need charity any more.
Kind of goes back to "give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. TEACH a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime."
And sorry if quoting this was "out of line" but it seemed to fit.
Kind of goes back to "give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. TEACH a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime."
And sorry if quoting this was "out of line" but it seemed to fit.
Posted by: Smokey at January 17, 2006 07:32 PM (K7uqT)
10
No, that's it Smokey -- just because people are free and live in a free society with capitalism doesn't mean they will suddenly and completely reject sacrifice.
Posted by: Ogre at January 17, 2006 07:37 PM (/k+l4)
11
Being free and living in a free society is the best way I can see to promote sacrifice. Only in a free society do you have things to sacrifice for (besides the universal sacrifice for children, family, etc.). Does anyone remember the Iraqi conscripts waving the white flag ? Surely they weren't willing to sacrifice their lives for their oppressive government.
Posted by: Johnny Uno at January 19, 2006 05:01 PM (ovA1+)
12
Excellent point, Johnny! (Only in a free society do you have things to sacrifice for)
Posted by: Ogre at January 19, 2006 08:40 PM (/k+l4)
Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.004 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0024 seconds, 20 records returned.
Page size 9 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.