Priceless in a really sad way.

[Delta_G]

Let's imagine a couple of cave men.  Og and Ooga will be their names. 

One day Og decides that he really likes strawberries.  So he spends weeks clearing a spot and scratching up the ground and plants some strawberries.  If they don't grow he's risked his food because while he was planting he wasn't gathering.  It's a pretty big risk. 


But it pays off and pretty soon everyone else is trading him other food for his berries.  Before long he's in a great spot.  What we might call wealthy. 

Now some years go by and there's a downturn for Ooga.  They had a bad year and didn't kill a mammoth.  His family is hungry. 

1.  So he goes to Og and says hey I'll help you pick the strawberries if I can keep a few. 

Or

2.  So he goes to Og and says it's not fair that Og has this and he doesn't.  Why was Og just ordained to have all these berries.  And he demands that Og give up half of his field of berries to him. 


Which one sounds fair. 

[ardly]

If the business fails will that same worker also share in the loss?  Or will he just get another job?   Why should someone who just does one step on the line make the same as the guy who had the idea and risked his fortune to build the business?

The big companies are all floated. The Directors usually escape with big bucks in their pockets, the shareholders (often workers pension funds)  suffer and the workers are out of a job usually at short notice.

[Delta_G]

The big companies are all floated. The Directors usually escape with big bucks in their pockets, the shareholders (often workers pension funds)  suffer and the workers are out of a job usually at short notice.

The big multinationals maybe.  But that only accounts for a tiny percentage of the actual businesses out here. 

If you really think that all business owners walk away with millions then you've obviously never been in business. 

As ours went down I worked for a considerable length of time, almost a year, with no salary so I could keep the lab techs paid.  Because I'm nice?  No, because they wouldn't have stayed without getting paid and I wanted to try to save the company.  I am still paying off the HELOC that I took to pay the bills while that was going on.  Not a one of the lab techs felt any pain except having to look for a job once we finally hit bankruptcy. 

And you think they should have had the same reward had we succeeded?  I take all the risk but everyone gets equal in the reward?  I didn't feel that way.  And my techs certainly didn't.  They're all happy that they're not making these payments with me. 

[Delta_G]

Is it fair that the ones who start off well and get support should lord it over the ones who have not?

You say "start off".  But when did they "start".  At what random point are you deciding to start history and assume that everything before that was set capriciously?

The analogy is this, imagine a man who turns on the television halfway through a Nascar race.  And then he gets upset because some of the cars are starting out on the lead lap, some are forced to start a lap behind, and this one poor guy had to start out with a wrecked car.   

[GoForSmoke]

If the business fails will that same worker also share in the loss?  Or will he just get another job?

That's true, if the business fails then the owner must be shot.

Why should someone who just does one step on the line make the same as the guy who had the idea and risked his fortune to build the business?

I was tearing down a bullshit line handed to me by a business owner who got it in an email. It's the usual focus on one chosen aspect of a situation while leaving 90% of what's relevant out of the matter.

If the business fails then the owner may be the reason why. When the line worker finds a new job it is without whatever that worker built up in the failed on including pension but hey, workers aren't real people like owners anyway.

If the business man does badly enough, screws people left and right while having more bankruptcies than failed marriages he might become President and fail the entire country or worse.

[ardly]

...
If the business man does badly enough, screws people left and right while having more bankruptcies than failed marriages he might become President and fail the entire country or worse.

ROFL. But they can become President only if they are stable geniuses with great unmatched wisdom.

[GoForSmoke]

You say "start off".  But when did they "start".  At what random point are you deciding to start history and assume that everything before that was set capriciously?

I knew enough who started the attitude and acts in public grade school. But they were getting kicked down by the private school kids so that makes it "the world is not fair" GOOD to do.

Is that history enough for ya? Can you figure it out from there or do you need help?

In 1986 the US SAT test got dumbed down after US scores dropped following the Reagan Public Education Rape. It was cheat errrr change the test or give regular kids as decent chance and the response was change the test and screw the middle class and poor who didn't EARN their kids a decent education.

We've had over 30 years of that since and it's worked out well for the Everything For The Rich Party, their base is uneducated and dumb as dogs voting for the people who screwed them down and tells them what to think.

[GoForSmoke]

ROFL. But they can become President only if they are stable geniuses with great unmatched wisdom.

And have a voting base dumb enough to believe it. 

But then when you can believe that the Book of Genesis is ==literally== true, what's left?

[Qdeathstar]

Everyone has an opportunity to work for their self, but they choose not to for many reasons.  When people complain about rich people who take down millions while their workers are only making 60k are really complaining about success. How dare he be successful. You ignore all the risk undertaken before his business was proven successful. For every 1 successful business there are 10 failed ones. A guy that makes it has earned his millions. If he didn't exist his employees wouldn't be employed.

[GoForSmoke]

What a load of crap!

Some JERK expects people to work as hard as he does for less than 2% of pay now gets turned into "How dare he be successful."

Are you that stupid or do you think we are?

BTW, it was the businessman who made the complaint, not the workers.

[Robin2]

Why should someone who just does one step on the line make the same as the guy who had the idea and risked his fortune to build the business?

This pre-supposes a lot of stuff. For example, would the world have been better off if he had not started the business? Or, why should we applaud someone who takes a business risk for the principal purpose of making himself rich?

I don't have a problem with some people having larger salaries or more wealth than others. I just think there should be a limit to the acceptable difference. Nobody needs more than $10million.

And to pick up on the Og and Ooga story ... "Which one sounds fair?"   Ooga is in difficulty that's not of his making and Og has far more than he needs. I can't see anything wrong with Og giving stuff to Ooga. And, yes, it would be a decent thing if Ooga would do something for Og in return.

And, from Reply #98 ...

When people complain about rich people who take down millions while their workers are only making 60k are really complaining about success.

When people take down millions it has to come from somewhere - basically from the sweat of the guy that is only paid a measly 60k by a business that could easily afford to pay him 3 or 4 times as much.

IMHO it is quite wrong to associate excessive wealth with "success". The proper association is with "greed".

Those greedy people are often psychopaths who manipulate everyone, including public opinion, so they can satisfy their own needs without any regard for the plight of anyone else. And those people who mould public opinion to further their own interests are the people who, for example, deny global warming and put our children and grandchildren at risk of starvation or conflict. Watch Jared Diamond in the link I posted in Reply #87

...R

[Qdeathstar]

Some JERK expects people to work as hard as he does for less than 2% of pay now gets turned into "How dare he be successful."

Are you that stupid or do you think we are?

Well, I mean, "we" must be pretty stupid to work for the "jerk" if "we" really feel it is wrong. I admire the jerk who inspires fools.

[Qdeathstar]

Success is driven partially by greed, no doubt. And I am fine with that.

[GoForSmoke]

I don't have a problem with an owner getting rich honestly. It can be done, I've written software to help it be done.

But when the owner abuses the workers along the way, the owner is an inhuman jerk who deserves to die painfully.

Well, I mean, you must be pretty stupid to work for the "jerk" if you really feel it is wrong.Well, I mean, you must be pretty stupid to work for the "jerk" if you really feel it is wrong.

Spin it how you want comrade. You're wrong and you know it.

[Delta_G]

I knew enough who started the attitude and acts in public grade school. But they were getting kicked down by the private school kids so that makes it "the world is not fair" GOOD to do.

Is that history enough for ya? Can you figure it out from there or do you need help?

So they just got the private school and you didn't?  It just came down that way for no reason.  Well why didn't you go to the private school then if it was so much better. 

That's a rhetorical question. It was because they had more money.  Was that because they started off ahead?  Or are you starting your history at the birth of the generation with no respect for what the parents or family has done.