 |
|  |
 |
|
Colon
|
 |
Antwerp, Colon's Chocolate Canard Country
Jan 1970 time: 06:36
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Spiffor
And looking for their interest, like anybody does in a capitalist system. Is it any surprise that unaccountable people, who decide of their salaries, raise their salaries? Well, it doesn't surprise me. I don't even think they are evil to do so. I happen to think, however, that they need to be held accountable, so that it is not possible for them to (rationally) abuse their power.
There is scum among execs, but they aren't all scum. However, save for a few business-monks, they are self serving and look for their interests first. Hence the importance of making them accountable. | [/QUOTE]
Everyone looks after their interests first. And you suck at quoting posts.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Aeson
|
 |
orangesoda
Nov 2001 time: 22:36
|
|
quote: Originally posted by JohnT
Well, I wouldn't care if their "outrage" was equally distributed... but it's not. It isn't the amount of money that these people make that bothers the Left, its the "type" of person who makes it that bothers them. |
I think I've seen quite a bit of opposition in the OT to athletes whining that they don't get enough money. And I rarely read the OT. A rather unfair and baseless stereotype you are pushing JohnT.
No one needs that much money. I don't care who it is, or how they get the money. When people keep more than they or their families need, or can use without being decadent, that's what bothers me.
My Dad has a PHD in horticulture (not sure what area the exact degree he holds is in). His education level is such that it puts him in a category with ~20 other people world wide in his feild of expertise. He has been gainfully employed for close to 40 years, working 16 hour days harvest season, and not much less the rest of the year. Even with his education level he gets right in and does the manual labor too. When he retires he will have made roughly 3 million dollars in lifetime.
He could have demanded salaries several times what he worked for, and even given himself raises in some positions. But, he choose to work the majority of his life for friends he made and the LDS agricultural holdings which support the LDS welfare system along with tithing and fast offerings. 10% of his earnings have gone to the LDS Church as tithing even. Much of which ends up going to charitable causes. More has gone directly to charity, and not just giving of money, but his free time as well.
With that, we've always lived well, 2-3 cars, owning nice houses, food to eat, even luxuries like a ski boat, hot tub, electronics, and he's helped or helping all his 8 children go to college and get on their feet.
He's done all that on less than one of these CEO's, stars, whatever, will make in a single year. There are countless other hard working people who live similar lives, doing their jobs which need to be done every day, and yet because of our screwed up sense of what's valuable, many of them barely eek out livings. I have no doubt that most people making a ton of money work hard doing a job which is necessary for our economy to function well. I doubt they work harder than the rest who aren't making much money, and who's jobs are just as important.
You can make a lot of money, and still use it well. There are those who do, and good for them. The "outrage" here (from me at least) is directed towards those who live decadently off salaries that no one needs to make, keeping it to themselves (and in some cases going so far as using that money or power to keep others down or further increase their own decadence).
quote: Originally posted by Ming
And heck, isn't the number one capitalist, Bill Gates, the LARGEST giver to charity. Your broad sweeping generalizations are just that... but I guess they sound good to you  |
Charity is always a good thing, and Bill Gates should be congratulated for giving. Having billions of dollars to give away makes it possible to give some of those billions away though. He still has billions, so there is still a lot of room for improvement in that area. (widow's mote)
That's not to say I think he should give away everything he has. Someone who builds a company should be able to keep their interest in it regardless of how much it's worth. I don't see any problem with that. Spending hundreds of millions on a house that represents possible housing for thousands of families isn't very charitable though. Some of the business practices his company used to amass that fortune weren't very charitable either.
That's the way our economy works, but it's not the way that worthwhile people or companies approach business IMO.
Last edited by Aeson on 14-05-2004 at 03:33
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36. Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|