Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › The Forgotten Man
- This topic has 287 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 1 month ago by kewp.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 7, 2008 at 12:17 PM #282934October 7, 2008 at 12:17 PM #282950yojimboParticipant
Ok, false choice it is.
I see the difference between us. You believe the predominant amount of those who are well off were lucky. I believe they probably worked hard, educated themselves, adapted to market conditions, saw a product or service that they felt would provide value to people and pursued it. Luck certainly helps though.
Once again, let’s try to generalize. I know that is difficult for engineers, but my use of Brin as an example was just that – an example. Pick any founder of a successful startup. Of course, I guess it wouldn’t matter who I picked if you truly believe success is only a product of luck.
Also, you are not in their peer group. I’m sorry. It’s nice that you have a high level of self esteem but you are not part of their group. You may be smarter, or more detail oriented, or better at writing terse, more intellectual-than-thou posts on boards than they are but they managed to break free of the routinized world of nine to five by creating something of value, taking risk, and competing successfully in the marketplace over a long period of time.
“Blessed”? Who said anything about being blessed? I’m not putting them up on a pedestal I just respect the fact that they’ve done something productive. I mean they could have just stuck with the 9-5 routine and driven to work everyday, done what they were told, earned their paycheck, driven home, watched TV and posted on boards about how sad it is that the rich are shafting the poor and the government needs to step in and help.
As for health care. I’ll take care of myself thanks.
October 7, 2008 at 12:17 PM #282961yojimboParticipantOk, false choice it is.
I see the difference between us. You believe the predominant amount of those who are well off were lucky. I believe they probably worked hard, educated themselves, adapted to market conditions, saw a product or service that they felt would provide value to people and pursued it. Luck certainly helps though.
Once again, let’s try to generalize. I know that is difficult for engineers, but my use of Brin as an example was just that – an example. Pick any founder of a successful startup. Of course, I guess it wouldn’t matter who I picked if you truly believe success is only a product of luck.
Also, you are not in their peer group. I’m sorry. It’s nice that you have a high level of self esteem but you are not part of their group. You may be smarter, or more detail oriented, or better at writing terse, more intellectual-than-thou posts on boards than they are but they managed to break free of the routinized world of nine to five by creating something of value, taking risk, and competing successfully in the marketplace over a long period of time.
“Blessed”? Who said anything about being blessed? I’m not putting them up on a pedestal I just respect the fact that they’ve done something productive. I mean they could have just stuck with the 9-5 routine and driven to work everyday, done what they were told, earned their paycheck, driven home, watched TV and posted on boards about how sad it is that the rich are shafting the poor and the government needs to step in and help.
As for health care. I’ll take care of myself thanks.
October 7, 2008 at 12:27 PM #282629EugeneParticipantThere are people who work demanding physical jobs and get paid minimum wage. There are people who sit in their chairs 9 to 5 doing “white collar” jobs, and they get paid five times as much. And then there are people who were born into wealth, and they don’t really have to work at all. The outcome is 80% genetics and parents’ socioeconomic status, 20% personal effort.
You can’t fight genetics, but you can do something to make sure that children of people from the first and third categories get equal access to healthcare and education.
As one smart guy said long time ago, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”.October 7, 2008 at 12:27 PM #282912EugeneParticipantThere are people who work demanding physical jobs and get paid minimum wage. There are people who sit in their chairs 9 to 5 doing “white collar” jobs, and they get paid five times as much. And then there are people who were born into wealth, and they don’t really have to work at all. The outcome is 80% genetics and parents’ socioeconomic status, 20% personal effort.
You can’t fight genetics, but you can do something to make sure that children of people from the first and third categories get equal access to healthcare and education.
As one smart guy said long time ago, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”.October 7, 2008 at 12:27 PM #282939EugeneParticipantThere are people who work demanding physical jobs and get paid minimum wage. There are people who sit in their chairs 9 to 5 doing “white collar” jobs, and they get paid five times as much. And then there are people who were born into wealth, and they don’t really have to work at all. The outcome is 80% genetics and parents’ socioeconomic status, 20% personal effort.
You can’t fight genetics, but you can do something to make sure that children of people from the first and third categories get equal access to healthcare and education.
As one smart guy said long time ago, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”.October 7, 2008 at 12:27 PM #282955EugeneParticipantThere are people who work demanding physical jobs and get paid minimum wage. There are people who sit in their chairs 9 to 5 doing “white collar” jobs, and they get paid five times as much. And then there are people who were born into wealth, and they don’t really have to work at all. The outcome is 80% genetics and parents’ socioeconomic status, 20% personal effort.
You can’t fight genetics, but you can do something to make sure that children of people from the first and third categories get equal access to healthcare and education.
As one smart guy said long time ago, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”.October 7, 2008 at 12:27 PM #282966EugeneParticipantThere are people who work demanding physical jobs and get paid minimum wage. There are people who sit in their chairs 9 to 5 doing “white collar” jobs, and they get paid five times as much. And then there are people who were born into wealth, and they don’t really have to work at all. The outcome is 80% genetics and parents’ socioeconomic status, 20% personal effort.
You can’t fight genetics, but you can do something to make sure that children of people from the first and third categories get equal access to healthcare and education.
As one smart guy said long time ago, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”.October 7, 2008 at 12:53 PM #282639kewpParticipantI see the difference between us. You believe the predominant amount of those who are well off were lucky.
The clear majority of people I know that are well off came from already wealthy families. So, yeah, luck definitely has something to do with it.
Beyond that, the super-rich became that way primarily by exploiting loopholes that are only available to (tada!), the already very wealthy. Hedge funds are great example of this. Want market beating returns? Sorry, rich people only. Don’t want to pay taxes on your gains? No problem; its all done off-shore!
Again, this group *already* already has advantages far beyond anything available to the average American. Do they really deserve a tax break for that?
Also, you are not in their peer group. I’m sorry.
I meant we are of the same age, similar educational backgrounds and yes, took the similar risks at the same time. They got lucky. Most of us didn’t. And as much as I would like to believe we live in a meritocracy, I’m just not that naive.
I mean they could have just stuck with the 9-5 routine and driven to work everyday, done what they were told, earned their paycheck, driven home, watched TV and posted on boards about how sad it is that the rich are shafting the poor and the government needs to step in and help.
Um, you do realize the government is stepping in and bailing out the rich folk with 700 billion dollars of poor folks taxes?
October 7, 2008 at 12:53 PM #282922kewpParticipantI see the difference between us. You believe the predominant amount of those who are well off were lucky.
The clear majority of people I know that are well off came from already wealthy families. So, yeah, luck definitely has something to do with it.
Beyond that, the super-rich became that way primarily by exploiting loopholes that are only available to (tada!), the already very wealthy. Hedge funds are great example of this. Want market beating returns? Sorry, rich people only. Don’t want to pay taxes on your gains? No problem; its all done off-shore!
Again, this group *already* already has advantages far beyond anything available to the average American. Do they really deserve a tax break for that?
Also, you are not in their peer group. I’m sorry.
I meant we are of the same age, similar educational backgrounds and yes, took the similar risks at the same time. They got lucky. Most of us didn’t. And as much as I would like to believe we live in a meritocracy, I’m just not that naive.
I mean they could have just stuck with the 9-5 routine and driven to work everyday, done what they were told, earned their paycheck, driven home, watched TV and posted on boards about how sad it is that the rich are shafting the poor and the government needs to step in and help.
Um, you do realize the government is stepping in and bailing out the rich folk with 700 billion dollars of poor folks taxes?
October 7, 2008 at 12:53 PM #282949kewpParticipantI see the difference between us. You believe the predominant amount of those who are well off were lucky.
The clear majority of people I know that are well off came from already wealthy families. So, yeah, luck definitely has something to do with it.
Beyond that, the super-rich became that way primarily by exploiting loopholes that are only available to (tada!), the already very wealthy. Hedge funds are great example of this. Want market beating returns? Sorry, rich people only. Don’t want to pay taxes on your gains? No problem; its all done off-shore!
Again, this group *already* already has advantages far beyond anything available to the average American. Do they really deserve a tax break for that?
Also, you are not in their peer group. I’m sorry.
I meant we are of the same age, similar educational backgrounds and yes, took the similar risks at the same time. They got lucky. Most of us didn’t. And as much as I would like to believe we live in a meritocracy, I’m just not that naive.
I mean they could have just stuck with the 9-5 routine and driven to work everyday, done what they were told, earned their paycheck, driven home, watched TV and posted on boards about how sad it is that the rich are shafting the poor and the government needs to step in and help.
Um, you do realize the government is stepping in and bailing out the rich folk with 700 billion dollars of poor folks taxes?
October 7, 2008 at 12:53 PM #282965kewpParticipantI see the difference between us. You believe the predominant amount of those who are well off were lucky.
The clear majority of people I know that are well off came from already wealthy families. So, yeah, luck definitely has something to do with it.
Beyond that, the super-rich became that way primarily by exploiting loopholes that are only available to (tada!), the already very wealthy. Hedge funds are great example of this. Want market beating returns? Sorry, rich people only. Don’t want to pay taxes on your gains? No problem; its all done off-shore!
Again, this group *already* already has advantages far beyond anything available to the average American. Do they really deserve a tax break for that?
Also, you are not in their peer group. I’m sorry.
I meant we are of the same age, similar educational backgrounds and yes, took the similar risks at the same time. They got lucky. Most of us didn’t. And as much as I would like to believe we live in a meritocracy, I’m just not that naive.
I mean they could have just stuck with the 9-5 routine and driven to work everyday, done what they were told, earned their paycheck, driven home, watched TV and posted on boards about how sad it is that the rich are shafting the poor and the government needs to step in and help.
Um, you do realize the government is stepping in and bailing out the rich folk with 700 billion dollars of poor folks taxes?
October 7, 2008 at 12:53 PM #282976kewpParticipantI see the difference between us. You believe the predominant amount of those who are well off were lucky.
The clear majority of people I know that are well off came from already wealthy families. So, yeah, luck definitely has something to do with it.
Beyond that, the super-rich became that way primarily by exploiting loopholes that are only available to (tada!), the already very wealthy. Hedge funds are great example of this. Want market beating returns? Sorry, rich people only. Don’t want to pay taxes on your gains? No problem; its all done off-shore!
Again, this group *already* already has advantages far beyond anything available to the average American. Do they really deserve a tax break for that?
Also, you are not in their peer group. I’m sorry.
I meant we are of the same age, similar educational backgrounds and yes, took the similar risks at the same time. They got lucky. Most of us didn’t. And as much as I would like to believe we live in a meritocracy, I’m just not that naive.
I mean they could have just stuck with the 9-5 routine and driven to work everyday, done what they were told, earned their paycheck, driven home, watched TV and posted on boards about how sad it is that the rich are shafting the poor and the government needs to step in and help.
Um, you do realize the government is stepping in and bailing out the rich folk with 700 billion dollars of poor folks taxes?
October 7, 2008 at 1:03 PM #282649underdoseParticipant[quote]
As one smart guy said long time ago, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”.
[/quote]Smart guy? Who? Karl Marx?
I agree with you that ability is largely a genetic accident. I call it the DNA lottery. I make decent money because I am good with computers and can automate getting a lot done with little physical effort, but a lot of mental effort and creativity. To a degree I earned it because I went to school to learn computer science and worked my tail off to learn it as best I could and get good grades. But to a degree I recognize that I was born with a predisposition for it, some freakish gift that my synapses are wired just so that analytical reasoning comes easily to me. Is it fair? Maybe not. But should I be punished for the misfortune of being born with ability? What justice would there be in that? And how much incentive would I feel to employ my natural born gifts if I am required to bear a disproportionate load? I’d be better served to fein disability, and claim extraordinary needs.
esmith, you are taking it too far to the other extreme. The key is to try to have empathy for everyone. Put yourself in the shoes of anyone in society. What if you had by accident been born with a predisposition to practice medicine. Would you want socialized medicine? Would you want to be essentially enslaved by the government? What if you had been born in poverty with below average intelligence and no hope of acquiring white collar skills? Would you want a purely capitalistic meritocracy? The tough thing is that no system is fair to everyone. But some systems are so extremely unfair to some segment of the population that they are down right oppressive. If you want full blown communism, from those with ability to those with needs, well, as John Lennon said:
If you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain’t gonna make it with anyone any howOctober 7, 2008 at 1:03 PM #282932underdoseParticipant[quote]
As one smart guy said long time ago, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”.
[/quote]Smart guy? Who? Karl Marx?
I agree with you that ability is largely a genetic accident. I call it the DNA lottery. I make decent money because I am good with computers and can automate getting a lot done with little physical effort, but a lot of mental effort and creativity. To a degree I earned it because I went to school to learn computer science and worked my tail off to learn it as best I could and get good grades. But to a degree I recognize that I was born with a predisposition for it, some freakish gift that my synapses are wired just so that analytical reasoning comes easily to me. Is it fair? Maybe not. But should I be punished for the misfortune of being born with ability? What justice would there be in that? And how much incentive would I feel to employ my natural born gifts if I am required to bear a disproportionate load? I’d be better served to fein disability, and claim extraordinary needs.
esmith, you are taking it too far to the other extreme. The key is to try to have empathy for everyone. Put yourself in the shoes of anyone in society. What if you had by accident been born with a predisposition to practice medicine. Would you want socialized medicine? Would you want to be essentially enslaved by the government? What if you had been born in poverty with below average intelligence and no hope of acquiring white collar skills? Would you want a purely capitalistic meritocracy? The tough thing is that no system is fair to everyone. But some systems are so extremely unfair to some segment of the population that they are down right oppressive. If you want full blown communism, from those with ability to those with needs, well, as John Lennon said:
If you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain’t gonna make it with anyone any how -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.