JW Insider

If I wore it, no one would believe that I had "NO BLOOD."
On the other hand . . .

If I wore it, no one would believe that I had "NO BLOOD."
On the other hand . . .

If I wore it, no one would believe that I had "NO BLOOD."
On the other hand . . .

Yikes! Without more instruction it could be taken as a plea that you need some.

Thanks. Of course, you should be careful to follow such a statement with "But . . . " at least for the sake of certain opposers.
Anyway, agree completely with everything you said above. I don't believe that, in the United States, most college degrees are worth the outrageous expense. They definitely were worth it through most of the 60's, 70's, 80's, and 90's if you were also an "educated consumer." There was a turning point in the 90's for some and in the 00's for most others, even before the financial crash became visible in '08. Starting in '08 it would be much easier to make a Peter Schiff style video. (That style of video can be made any time, of course, even when you want to fake a point, but you'd have to do a lot more editing to make it look like there was a consensus. Jay Leno could have proven that no college student knew that 2+2=4 merely by only including those who answered incorrectly, or with too long a pause, or were drunk, acting silly, nervous, etc.)
Now there are still more jobs available to college graduates than non-graduates of course, and this is even more critical in an economic downturn. But that doesn't mean the degree was worth the expense. And it's stupid that you would need a degree to make coffee at Starbucks.
The need to pay down a student loan does indeed make workers more controllable. That's a critical requirement of capitalists who wish to maximize profit even squeezing from those who believe they are well on the way to joining the "American Dream" someday. Student loans and car loans have been a big part of an abusive process to those who need them, but these problems are nowhere as big as the factors that fed 2008. Combined with the fact that the [banking&finance] criminals who abused taxpayers in 2008 are still fighting [bribing politicians] to be able to abuse with even less regulation now might though combine with student loans as a catalyst with these other problems to see a second wave [plunge] of recession/depression.

How about charging $100 to $175 or more for the majority of the seats? That accommodates the insane pretty well.
That said, you made the jump to associate a kind of parity between the deaf and the insane. That was stupid. Would you like to buy an orchestra seat for "Phantom" this Saturday?

Yikes. Good catch, Jack. The persons who wrote and checked the Awake! article in 1988 were probably not dishonest, but they more likely just had no understanding about statistics and how this type of question is used in social surveys.
The question has very little to do with the actual percent of students who hope that college gives them an opportunity for making more money -- which is probably always closer to 100%. Most pre-college students are making from $0 a year during High School or less than $1000/year in part time jobs. 100% of them SHOULD hope to make more money, even if they don't go to college for this purpose. Even more so if they are purposely or inadvertently preparing to follow the Bible's admonition:
1 Timothy 5:8  Certainly if anyone does not provide for those who are his own, and especially for those who are members of his household, he has disowned the faith and is worse than a person without faith.
The way the question is presented, however, it is possible for all students to say that 100% of them go to college for more money AND that 100% of them go to college for a better job AND that 100% go to learn things of interest AND that 100% go to please their family, etc. The idea is to try to get a feel for the priorities that are in a students head as they are just starting college. A student could conceivably claim that every one of those reasons was "Very Important."
All the survey above actually shows is what you said about how it only compares relative importance of motivational factors. It certainly does not say that only 70-some percent went to college to make more money. And the Awake! article is misleading when it says "spiritual goals declining." They probably were, but this survey says nothing about comparing these particular goals with their spiritual goals. Also, as noted above, providing for one's own, especially one's household is a spiritual goal according to 1 Timothy 5:8, or might even be considered by that verse to be MORE IMPORTANT than faith.
All that question is really allowing us to see is that students either think that several other factors are more important than money, or that they are not willing to admit that money is as important as it probably is, especially when asked to weigh it against less crass and better-sounding motivations.
When I hired people to work on my teams in IT departments (1985 to 2015), I didn't care too much whether a person went to college or not, as long as they could show the correct aptitude for technical testing, logic, programming, designing, data analysis, etc. But over the years, I began to appreciate that, in choosing among those of similar technical skills, those who went to college were almost always preferable. Even if it were for a degree in English, drama, psychology, education, sociology, etc., they were more likely to have better communication skills and more of what was more important to me: an "appreciation of ideas" (the second option of the survey). I would not have cared WHY they went to college, even if it was please their parents, or study for a career they no longer wanted, or even if they had already failed in a previous career.
Of course, college holds out the hope and promise of better or at least a wider array of employment opportunities. But this is not always the way things work out. In the United States, both the educational and financial institutions are always looking for ways to profit off students by taking a percentage of any increased income they might get from college. Student loans are managed by these institutions to maximize the profit from each student. Colleges also maximize the amount of tuition that they can get away with. 

This is not only a complete fraud, but is a physical impossibility. 
I sure hope you or any of the Brothers and Sisters did NOT invest in it ... and your money is completely and totally gone forever ... and even WORSE ... have to live with the fact that ..... rats! ... there is no diplomatic way to say it.
 

Let's not take this too far out of context. The suggestion was not generally about "the unity experienced by Jehovah's Witnesses today" but about historical value of the unity of belief we have held with respect to chronology. What I actually said was:
From the very start --from the first few issues of the Watchtower in 1879-- the idea has been that true Christians fell into two camps:
"Wise virgins" who understood that a "Midnight Cry!" had gone out somewhere around 1859 (halfway between 1844 and 1874).  "Foolish virgins" who do not prepare based on the content of the call that began going out before 1874, and who therefore do not understand that the door to the marriage feast is closing, and the need to believe in this chronology as it is the specific thing that separates the wise from the foolish virgins. They need to believe in the chronology to get their lamps in order by 1878  . . . then by 1881. The person responsible for bringing the news of this "midnight cry" "herald of the morning" or "herald of Christ's presence in 1874" would be the individual identified as the "faithful and wise servant." This belief that Jesus' presence had begun in 1874 was the basis for the name "Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence" since 1874. The belief that his presence had begun in 1874 remained with us until 1943/1944. 70 years of a false teaching. In those 70 years, how many spoke up against this false teaching? 
Due to the significance given to the year 1874 and a 40 year harvest timed from 1878 to 1918, the 1878 date remained with us from about 1922 until about 1961 as the beginning of the "Elijah" work, after which they were finally considered "false" doctrines. Although tying Russell to Elijah is evidently making a comeback.
*** w13 7/15 p. 11 par. 6 “Look! I Am With You All the Days” ***
6 What is the larger fulfillment of Malachi’s prophecy? During the decades leading up to 1914, C. T. Russell and his close associates did a work like that of John the Baptizer. *** kr chap. 2 p. 14 par. 6 The Kingdom Is Born in Heaven ***
Those taking the lead among them—Charles T. Russell and his close associates—did, indeed, act as the foretold “messenger,”
But, still, the emphasis on dates was admitted to be the reason for the predictions that did not come true for 1914, 1915, 1918, 1925 the 1970's and then for the remainder of the twentieth century. All the predictions from the 1950's through the 1990's about how the generation that was old enough to witness and understand the sign in 1914 would not die out before Armageddon also turned out to be false predictions. The prediction that young persons ready to graduate high school in the late 1960's would never grow old in this system turned out to be false. The predictions from 1919 through 1925 that "millions now living will never die" turned out to be a false prediction.
Wisdom is proved righteous by its works. So I was talking about the practical aspect of our preaching work. Some of it has been tainted with the attraction of false predictions. The distraction of dates. The fact that Jesus said not to go after those who declare that they know the time is at hand. And we know that making false predictions in the name of Jehovah is a form of uncleanness. If we are truly concerned with keeping the congregation clean we should all do our part to help root out all forms of uncleanness.
Jesus did; Peter did; Paul did. But it's no wonder so many missed it, with all this emphasis on dates.

Yes. In my imaginary illustration, a coin that had the same date on both sides is giving the accurate minting date on both sides.
That's because I was making an illustration to match VAT 4956 which, on both sides, references the exact date on which the original observations were made. In the case of VAT 4956 it refers specifically to the same date of 568/7 for the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar on both sides. The coin illustration was not really about coins, of course, it was an illustration about how honest you might consider me to be if I tried to pass off a coin that clearly said 587 as if it were a coin from 607 using the kinds of tactics I described. In real life, of course, an ancient coin cannot contain a B.C. date, and VAT 4956 is not a coin; it's a "text" or "diary" about a couple dozen astronomical observations. In fact, it's a later copy that has at least one minor error in it (which is one day off). 
VAT 4956 has a couple dozen observations on it, and all of them fit a specific year. It just so happens that all the other observations from Nebuchadnezzar's reign and the observations from all other Neo-Babylonian kings give us the same exact date. So we really don't even need VAT 4956 to see the chronology, but it's nice to know that it's further evidence and none of the evidence contradicts any of the other evidence.
You shouldn't say something like 2+1=4; and then "This" is why 2 dogs +1 dog = 4 dogs. It's true you could claim all kinds of possible alternative endings based on the premise that 2+1=4, but I mean that if your premise is unproven or false, then you should do the opposite of drawing a specific conclusion based on such a premise. Saying "this is why" or "therefore, this is true" after an unproven premise is "heavy-handed."
This can depend on the topic and the level of experience each scholar has in that particular topic area, whether it's the physics of making clay tablets, experience with hundreds of astronomical readings, Assyrian/Mesopotamian linguistics, paleography, etc. If none of the scholars have made any attempt to "discredit" scripture then this other point about finding "common ground" will be meaningless. Wiseman and Grayson have, evidently without even trying, translated documents of the Neo-Babylonian Empire that just happen to contain evidence for a Babylonian chronology that has a common ground with the scriptures. There is no contradiction between the secular chronology of Babylon and the Scriptures. In fact, it is the Watchtower chronology that creates more problems against the Biblical evidence. In effect, then it is the Watchtower chronology that, by comparison, attempts to "discredit" scripture, although I'm sure it's not on purpose. It's just that a higher priority is given to making 1914 appear to be right, than in being concerned about how the theory tends to contradict scripture. I think past posts in this thread and others on the same topic have already highlighted about 5 ways in which this has happened.
VAT 4956 pinpoints Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year to be 568/7. If you can pinpoint his 37th year then you can pinpoint his 18th to be 587/6, right? If you can pinpoint that my 37th year of life was in 1994, then you can also pinpoint that my 18th year was in 1975, right? If you don't know how to do this, you should admit this right away, and someone can always draw a chart.
So your only question is whether you believe that the destruction of Jerusalem was in Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year, or his 19th year, or some other year if you prefer. No matter which year you prefer, you can pinpoint it to a calendar year in the same way you can pinpoint his 37th year to be 568/7 from VAT 4956.
Outside of that, why should anyone care what Carl Jonsson says? Why should anyone care what any ex-JWs say? There are probably a MILLION ex-JWs (literally) who don't even know who this Carl Jonsson is, and could rightly care nothing about 607 or 587. What Carl Jonsson says is no different than what every other modern Neo-Babylonian scholar says about Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year. It just depends on whether you choose Nebuchadnezzar's year 18 or 19 for the destruction of Jerusalem. Which year do you choose, by the way? For some reason this was a difficult question for 607 promoters when it came up the last few times.
Of course, the reason is obvious why someone should need to try to tie something to a specific person known as an "apostate" even if a million other non-religious persons and all other Neo-Babylonian scholars believe the same thing. Just for fun, everyone should look at a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
Notice especially the ones under "Red Herring" and "ad hominem" including these, like, "poisoning the well":
Ad hominem – attacking the arguer instead of the argument. Poisoning the well – a subtype of ad hominem presenting adverse information about a target person with the intention of discrediting everything that the target person says. Abusive fallacy – a subtype of ad hominem that verbally abuses the opponent rather than arguing about the originally proposed argument. Appeal to motive – a subtype of ad hominem that dismisses an idea by questioning the motives of its proposer. Traitorous critic fallacy (ergo decedo) – a subtype of ad hominem where a critic's perceived affiliation is seen as the underlying reason for the criticism and the critic is asked to stay away from the issue altogether. Appeal to fear – a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made by increasing fear and prejudice towards the opposing side Appeal to spite – a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made through exploiting people's bitterness or spite towards an opposing party. Judgmental language – insulting or pejorative language to influence the recipient's judgment Good point. The FAITH of the Bible Student shouldn't depend on secular chronology. Yet, so many Witnesses think that the secular date 607 must somehow be "credited" to be true -- yet 607 is completely dependent on SECULAR chronology. To be sure, it requires that we use secular chronology and then requires that we make a mistake in the way we use it, but we can't get anywhere close to 607 without depending on secular chronology. The Watchtower even uses the premise that 539 is a kind of ABSOLUTE secular date from which we then count 70 years farther back to get the secular date for the time period starting 70 years earlier. Yet, you are right in your implication that no true Bible Student should need such secular dates like 539 and 607 for his faith.
The term "absolute" is used by archaeologists and astronomers who study historical texts like these to describe the ability to tie this entire period from Nebuchadnezzar's father, Nebuchadnezzar and down to Cyrus and beyond to specific years or ranges of years in our calendar, such as, 587, 597, 607, 617, 539, 529, etc. They do not use the term "absolute" because we need to put "faith" in it. The Watchower, on the other hand, has used the term "absolute" "reliable" and "pivotal" with respect to such secular dates like 539 with the idea that we should have "faith" in them -- that we have reason to "believe" in them.
You or Allen may have to come out of the tentative zone then and just explain clearly what it is you are trying to say. I believe I caught some of it from a set of previous posts, and Allen agreed to that part that I said I understood, but he also said he wasn't ready to present the entire theory yet. I can respect that, but it's not useful to make guesses here, because the entire thing could become a moving target until the theory is "nailed down" so to speak.
It's possible that Allen once thought of "scholar JW" as someone with the background to help validate or invalidate the theory through shared resources. If so, I can see another reason for a further delay. If asked, I'll be glad to see if I can help, as I have offered before. But otherwise I'll have no more to say on those ideas until the theory is spelled out. I should also mention again that I am offering to look up resources, test astronomical data, help look up variations in published translations, or any number of things. And as several others here can attest, I have had such conversations "on the side" completely in private, completely confidentially, without ever publicizing names or any of the content of those conversations. One such side conversation on this forum now contains 203 private posts as of today.

So we should think like the scribes?

I was the founding member of my former family.
When my children were very little, they wanted to do "something" that was either too expensive, or dangerous ... I forget what ... and I said they could not do it.  My eldest Son sez: "Hey Dad ... don't we get a vote?"
  It would have been three against one... and I could see the "look of victory" on their faces as they realized that ....
I replied "Yes, everybody here gets to vote, but we vote by how much you weigh ... and I weigh more than everybody else here".
Same thing.
 

Matthew 8:14
14 And when Jesus entered Peter’s house, he saw his mother-in-law lying sick with a fever.
1 Cor 9:5
5 Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?
1 Timothy 3:2
2 Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife,

I had some respect for Christiane Amanpour in the past even from the time when she spoke for CNN when CNN was the voice of the US State Department. I thought that her particular perspective helped move CNN away from just a state-run propaganda tool, and that her recent absence was punishment for it. But she is back, and I realized from the way she worded things tonight across from Anderson Cooper (regarding tonight's US air strikes on Syria) that it is motivated by more than just the fact that CNN is very excited to be able to report on explosions. She went right back to her old role of restating questionable items as absolute facts, which is of course, the method that our state propaganda has needed to reinforce the military's views from a supposedly "neutral" perspective.
 

True, but I was about those who want to expose the mainstream media to the point where people will pop up in their headwaters to demand why they are being lied to, or any meeting and or town halls that they have by those exposing falsehood in big numbers, things of that nature, but I agree. RT is part of Russia: RT is funded in whole or in part by the Russian government. There is though a few independent Journalist who have appeared on RT to speak truth, leaving RT newsroom team unable to counter them and or change the subject, other times, independents just speak truth to get a reaction out of the mainstream newsroom team, one of the reasons you do not see independents every now and then because of how they put the RT team at the edge of their seats.
But yeah there are some people who are on the outside, but they do not get a lot attention though, for the mainstream media equals them on the level of Alex Jones and or the likes of Tomi Lauren, who pretty let the mainstream mess with her head as well as Donald Trump and friends, of whom she supports.
At the same time those who speak truth and or against the mainstream, like I said, are often silenced and or blocked somehow, but they are good, some have quite the colorful language though, but get to the point because they too have been fed up with the lies and misinformation.
I'll make note of this, for this is the first time I ran across these two names.

People are already suspicious of the mainstream media outlets from other countries. RT for example is considered fake news here even when (or especially when) it is being more accurate than any mainstream US outlets. And of course, it very often really is fake news, too. Here, it would take someone outside the mainstream ideologies, one who could recognize the great overlap between the supposedly divergent ideologies of, say MSNBC and FOX.
I think that Michael Parenti and Noam Chomsky already did an excellent job with their own attempts, Inventing Reality and Manufacturing Consent, respectively, but their own ideologies make their findings seem suspect to most. https://lorenzoae.wordpress.com/2016/05/31/chomsky-vs-parenti/

I am no fan of Fox, nor Carlson, but I agree. I am equally ashamed of MSNBC and CNN and NPR among others. Trump has become the perfect distraction so that most of the major networks don't worry about asking difficult questions about foreign policy. Of course, there are times when any one of these networks will be correct on certain issues, but it must serve an existing (and very predictable) ideology.
I assume Trump is always looking for ways to remain popular with an anti-Hillary/anti-Obama base, but with a very limited and obsolete political world-view. This will probably continue to serve him well for another few years because his opposition offers little more than "We're not Trump" in response. (And the fact that most Americans are politically gullible to the propaganda of only one of two camps.)

Even if money and being able to make a living were completely a non-issue ... the value of a comprehensive education, ESPECIALLY history, is so that we are not being played for suckers ... and have to pay the life-long price for BEING suckers.
... pawns on a chessboard we do not even know exists.

Anytime. Most mainstream news media, coupled with social media cannot be trusted 100%, for not all the time they speak what is true unless it is in their favor, in addition to the recent video that came out some days ago that exposed the news media. I am not a fan of fox news, however, Tucker Carlson, sometimes, is on point with what he has to say, especially when challenged by falsehood.
The White Helmets are against Bashar al-Assad for they are among pro-opposition groups that fight for their own Anti-Assad political agenda, of which they had done so in the past and they have done some morbid things in order to push propaganda. They either have actors/actress pretending to be injured and or dead (sometimes they use dead bodies), re-locate them to areas to stage said propaganda, even take photos in a way that would shift people's emotions (like what happen to Ivanka Trump last year, hence Donald Trump's actions afterwards), and they will even use the corpses of dead people to stage said propaganda, even children.
For instance, the corpses of the children that were gassed by the chemicals, their bodies were sent to different locations and staged for photos and propaganda in order to make said imaginary/video look very graphic and believable - for some of the corpses had been arranged together to make it seem several of the children died together, as well as using the same exact corpses for other photos but in a different position and or location, said media of this propaganda had surfaced online, and it is not something for the squeamish to look at. As for the dead bodies, they are under tight control by the Jaysh al-Islam, who gave access to the White Helmets do do what they need in order to push propaganda. The thing is these people are stupid for they do not realize some people can see through their lies and deception, but sadly, those who are being fed misinformation by mainstream media, do not see this, thus becoming easily given information that is lacking greatly.
That being said, this is an example of the actions of the Pro-Opposition groups, just like the White Helmets, a while back faking a rescue, using an actor.
 
Trump is very unpredictable like a villain straight out of a Batman comic, you do not know how he will strike, what he will do next and or where he will pop up - just like his actions last year, April 2017. Trump, it would seem is just a puppet, one puppet who is too sure of himself. The problem though is the guy he hired, John R. Bolton, US National Security Advisor. Bolton is a guy who is ready for war and wanting war, in addition to that you have the UK, who is already at odds with Russia for a chemical attack, France being ready to take action if necessary with the Saudis ready to back the US, as well as Israel who had already jumped the gun, but the Saudis and Israel are in this because of Iran, and knowing Israel's PM, he does not want Iran occupying Syria, as well as its fear of Iranian strikes.
All and all, stuff like this is important, but like I said, mainstream media will not speak of such, they will waste time talking about Trump's affair with an adult actress when there is more important things at hand whereas it can prove fatal for civilians should things go off the wall crazy if war breaks out.
As for the oil, what can be said is the big money ballers of the oil cartel are there for it. There those in power that want that oil and most likely they will take said oil as they did in past, including places like Africa, after said target have been dealt with, other times they just take it, as they did in Haiti.
 
This is a video explaining who the White Helmets are:
 

Thanks for collecting so many of the salient points in a single post. Most people in the United States who feel that they are getting the truth through true freedom of the press, speech, etc., believe the major networks that only pretend to be showing two sides of an issue. I caught a very lucid piece of questioning by Tucker Carlson on FoxNews, who asked a Republican Senator why the US would be so anxious to attack Syria without attempting an investigation into the so-called chemical attack in Douma. The Senator's response was that he must be a supporter of Putin to even ask such a question. White Helmet propaganda videos are still very sloppy and full of contradictions, and individuals among them have been caught in blatant lies and acts of terror of their own.
Fortunately, Trump appears to be backing down on his own rhetoric today, and the White House admits that they realize the fight would quickly escalate into something "messy." The US still has limited proxy control over large parts of Syria where most of the oil fields are, but is accidentally tipping its hand in some of the recent admissions to this effect.

Well you got 2 factions who are not a fan of each other regarding the Middle East.
The UN and the DS are on both sides, however, their members are pushing for war, examples like Bolton and Nikki Haley.
Team I                                                                        Team II
                                    < United Nations >
United States                                                              Russia
France                                                                         Syria
United Kingdom                     VS                               China
Israel                                                                           Iran
Saudi Arabia                                                               Hezbala
The Rebels/Kurds                                                       Assad Militants
Other Allies                                                                 Other Allies
                              < Deep State World Order >
 
US: Pursuing a Regime Change in Syria (Going to war with 7 countries in 5 years, foreshadowed words of Wesley Clark of NATO)
France/US/UK: Preparing Air, Navy United for a sustained assault on Syria.
Israel: Jumped the gun without any sort of investigation on the Chemical Attack (FF) and bombed Syria positions.
Saudi Arabia (AL’SURA): Will be joining in an attack on Syria with their allies. Thus resulting in Airline companies having to change routes for the next 48 hours in the Middle East (as of April 10th, 2018) – away from Syria due to a chance of an attack.
Team I: Will be the first bloods should war break out, for it will be an action done by their hands.
Russia: Angered by approaching US Navy Destroyers approach Syria without notification. Claims there is no evidence of a chemical attack in Douma, for suspect attack came from the White Helmets (clear bias in this matter). Russia even stated weeks prior to the attack there would be a chemical attack and the blame will be pinned on Bashar al-Assad of Syria. Moscow has issued stark warnings on risks of US military action on Syria and  possible military clash with RU vs US for Russian warplanes have been deployed in Syria due to Destroyers, and bombers are on standby as we speak that will target US, France, UK forces should they strike. Russia is right now jamming US drones, which is affecting US operations, but the Russians are denying this.
Iran: Threatening to restart their nuclear enrichment, this can begin within a matter of days.
China: Being one of the biggest allies to both Iran/Russia, for their relations with Russia had increased, said to be the best in history – Economically and Militarily, while their relations with the US is at an all time low. China also has a relationship with Syria and has offered them supplies due to civil war conflict Syria has had since 2011. China also backs probes into suspected Syria Chemical Attack; Gulf States condemn incident. China warns against military action in Syria as a threat of US strikes put everyone on HIGH ALERT. They have even told Russia they will support them by military means against the US.
Other: US and Russian battle forces have already killed each other about a month and a half ago. RU mercs was hit by US strikes, dozens of RU mercs killed.
Misc: This also goes hand in hand with the US and China Trade War, for financially things are also escalating.
North Korean can proof to be a potential ally to China.
It is said we are closer to World War III since the Cuban Missile Crisis, for things are starting to, and or has begun to escalate out of control and is soon to reach a tipping point.

Matthew 8:14
14 And when Jesus entered Peter’s house, he saw his mother-in-law lying sick with a fever.
1 Cor 9:5
5 Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?
1 Timothy 3:2
2 Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife,

I just noticed that I said this without a proper qualification. Most of us know that there is no reward for good works, such as preaching, pioneering, giving excellent talks, going to Bethel, serving as a missionary, ministerial servant, or elder, or Governing Body member, etc. Jehovah rewards his servants, not for the good they do, but for the proper loving motivation in the heart.
But, true proper motivation will result in actions. If we truly love God (faith) and our neighbor we cannot help but act upon that love. We will show our fellow human neighbors and brothers mercy, patience, love, empathy, kindness -- all fruits (outgrowths) of the proper spirit in our hearts. To the extent possible in our own circumstances, that automatically translates to action (good works). True faith cannot exist, therefore, without good actions that follow. Not everyone can do the same amount however (the widow's "mite," workers who arrive at the 11th hour, etc.). But if those who put in more work are jealous or disturbed by the lesser work others have done, then they don't understand that it was not the work that was rewarded, but the proper motivation. They don't understand what this means:
"I want mercy, not sacrifice"

I just noticed that I said this without a proper qualification. Most of us know that there is no reward for good works, such as preaching, pioneering, giving excellent talks, going to Bethel, serving as a missionary, ministerial servant, or elder, or Governing Body member, etc. Jehovah rewards his servants, not for the good they do, but for the proper loving motivation in the heart.
But, true proper motivation will result in actions. If we truly love God (faith) and our neighbor we cannot help but act upon that love. We will show our fellow human neighbors and brothers mercy, patience, love, empathy, kindness -- all fruits (outgrowths) of the proper spirit in our hearts. To the extent possible in our own circumstances, that automatically translates to action (good works). True faith cannot exist, therefore, without good actions that follow. Not everyone can do the same amount however (the widow's "mite," workers who arrive at the 11th hour, etc.). But if those who put in more work are jealous or disturbed by the lesser work others have done, then they don't understand that it was not the work that was rewarded, but the proper motivation. They don't understand what this means:
"I want mercy, not sacrifice"

There are probably several appropriate applications we could find in the parable. I think the primary idea is found in the context of Matthew, especially:
(Matthew 19:27-30) 27 Then Peter said in reply: “Look! We have left all things and followed you; what, then, will there be for us?” 28 Jesus said to them: “Truly I say to you, in the re-creation, when the Son of man sits down on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes of Israel. 29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands for the sake of my name will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit everlasting life. 30 “But many who are first will be last and the last first. That is what immediately preceded the parable in Matthew, and the following comes right after it...
(Matthew 20:16-28) 16 In this way, the last ones will be first, and the first ones last.” 17 While going up to Jerusalem, Jesus took the 12 disciples aside privately. . . 20 Then the mother of the sons of Zebʹe·dee approached him with her sons, doing obeisance and asking for something from him. 21 He said to her: “What do you want?” She replied to him: “Give the word that these two sons of mine may sit down, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your Kingdom.” 22 Jesus answered: “You do not know what you are asking for. . . . to sit down at my right hand and at my left is not mine to give, but it belongs to those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.” 24 When the ten others heard about it, they became indignant at the two brothers. 25 But Jesus called them to him and said: “You know that the rulers of the nations lord it over them and the great men wield authority over them. 26 This must not be the way among you; but whoever wants to become great among you must be your minister, 27 and whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave. 28 Just as the Son of man came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his life as a ransom in exchange for many.” So, I think the primary point is not about preaching, per se, although preaching is one of the valid ministries in response to learning about the Kingdom of the Heavens, so it's included. But the context shows that there are those who would begin thinking that they deserved a bigger and better reward for their ministries. They wanted titles. If it applied to the current preaching work it would be more related to the idea that a person who might give up more things (perhaps giving up 60 or 70 hours a month as opposed to one who gives up only a ten hours a month) might feel entitled to a title. Not that there is anything wrong with titles as goals or incentives on their own. It's a matter of feeling that reaching certain goals in the ministry makes one more deserving of a reward. Among humans, there is always a tendency to create a hierarchy of rewards and titles. In Christianity, there is only one basic reward, everlasting life. (Ironically, there are religions, including our own, that try to distinguish between "everlasting life" and "immortality," as a way to create a hierarchy of rewards.) Even that reward, however, is not the same as the way that humans think of giving rewards -- it's not for a certain amount of work, or a certain level of responsibility, or based on how much one has given up. There is no reward for serving and preaching and doing good things for others. In Christianity, there is only a "reward" for good motives. The road to eternal life is paved with good intentions, not good works. It's only the intentions (motives) that count. It's when Jehovah sees that our actions are motivated by love for God and love for neighbor.