Left Wing and Right Wing

And 'some' peolpe use the phrase 'some peolpe' when too political, or don't have the conviction, to say what they think. Therefore the interpretation of the statement lays in the head of the observer not that of the composer. It also allows those 'some' peolpe to abdicate the message delivered. Conscious free of any upset, misunderstanding or general hurt which may have been created.


No different to the CEO who makes decisions on redundancies and sackings on that he has to show bottom line growth regardless of personal or emotional or community cost

Amazing how when you boil it down, those protesting distaste actually demonstrate the same ignorance as those they protest about

Or could just be a Clarkesonism...you decide

 

Phew, I'm glad I quoted some examples of "some people" in my post or I'd be facing The Wrath of Bradders right now! :biggrin:

Yep. Shareholders must be protected at all costs ...we can always find another workforce and associated communities!

If I didn't know better, I'd think this was a generalisation regarding everyone who protests against capitalism! You know, lumping in the commies with the people who protest against the behavious of companies like Nestlé and such. But of course, it isn't, is it?

Who, me? No way. Let the CEO decide, it's what he's paid for!

 

Rich means different things to different people. A more useful phrase would be 'independently wealthy', the point at which you no longer need to work to sustain your needs, but different people have different needs and are at different stages in their lives. The one thing we can be sure about the 'rich' is that even if we confiscated all of their riches and distributed it amongst the rest it would make little difference on the day to day lives of the rest. This is because there are simply too few people who are 'rich'. Those in the top 1% in the UK earn over about £120,000, now to me that is well off but it certainly isn't rich. The statistics are so skewed that it is easy to come out with headline grabbing figures that mask the reality, whatever that may be.

 

Actually Loz this bit "view their goal as more important than a "sense of morality" or "of social justice".

Forgive me if i misunderstood what you said but you said it.

Of course there are some that have gotten rich via distasteful and or illegal means but that does not mean that every rich person is immoral and unjust. Not in my eyes it doesn't, perhaps in yours it does.

 

Johnv: I know you make the distinction that you dont think £120k is rich but lets start from that point just to get the ball rolling.

Higher or lower anyone ?

Can you earn > £120k honestly and fairly.

 

I don't think there is a limit to what you can earn honestly and fairly, in the same way there is no lower limit to what you can obtain dishonestly; it is how you earn it that is relevant. JK Rowling is very rich and she obtained those riches honestly and fairly. I don't think there should be an arbitrary limit placed upon how much someone can earn or amass as long as it is done within the law. The issue for me is social mobility, which surged under Mrs T and fell under Mr B. Why is that ?

 

I agree with all of that, bet there are others that wont.

I have no issue with an employer of mine making millions from the work of me and my co workers. If i was in their position so would i and i dont begrudge the fact they are either more intelligent, hardworking, lucky or what ever it took to put them in that position.

 

No problem, Desmoboy. let's look at what I said.

I said, "Some folks hate the fact that many rich people have a different mindset, a different set of values. That they have a single-minded focus towards getting richer than they currently are, and view their goal as more important than a "sense of morality" or "of social justice"."

I am not generalising that all rich folk have one goal and one goal only. Some chase the buck and that's all she wrote. Some chase the buck and salve their conscience by giving to charity. Some feel they are fine with their conscience and have nothing to feel guilty about. Some chase the buck but also want to do great things for the world. All kinds of motivations there. Just so that you know that I know there are fifty shades of rich.

You could probably read, "That they have a single-minded focus towards getting richer than they currently are, and view their goal as more important than a 'sense of morality' or 'of social justice'"." as my reference to all rich folk, and that they are all morally bankrupt. This was sloppy of me; I only intended to refer to the mindset of a some non-rich people who hate "many rich people" for their greed and apparent lack of social conscience.

If rich people viewed their pursuit of riches as less important than "a sense of morality" or "of social justice", they might not actually be rich. They could be working in social services, on overseas aid projects, they could be health-workers, policemen or firemen, any number of socially motivated walks of life.
Instead, they seek to make themselves rich. That could be because they feel their main goal in life is to have a happy and prosperous workforce working for them, or their goal is to sell the best pension plans possible to the greatest number of people, but well, I'm not convinced of that. No, I think that in the majority of cases, the first call on a rich person's energies is getting or staying rich, with other goals secondary. Not unimportant, mind, but secondary.

Now, people who hate the way the rich go about their business, in a more reasoned way then simply acting upon jealousy, may dislike the mindset of a person whose main goal is to be as rich as they can possibly be. They see it as chasing the buck in preference to other types of behaviour. In some cases I think they are right to dislike or hate the mechanics of how the rich get or stay rich. It depends upon whether the process of getting/staying rich is detrimental to individuals, communities or societies as a whole.

I hope you can see now that we agree on this particular issue.

And so you know where I am coming from, I consider myself mostly capitalist - but not by conviction. It's just that I have yet to see a workable alternative to capitalism. Any system that ignores mankind's inherent greed (be it the taking an extra chocolate sweetie kind or the fuck everyone else over to get ahead kind) is doomed to failure.

 

Lol awesome

 

My walls of text will ride around the outside of you, all day :biggrin:

 

I'd rather be riding my bike round the outside or working to keep my family as they are accustomed to being kept

 

I flew back to Switzerland today.

Business class is a small section of the aircraft, but there was one woman in it, 40-ish, with her three sons, none of whom looked over 10. They took up one row (two seats each side of the aisle). I found this surprising: it's a 90 minute flight. How much does a business class seat cost? Quite a lot more than an economy one.

I assume they are rich, however you want to calculate it.

 

Great to listen to the interview of the CEO of Gregg's today!

I agree with him! Why should fat cats get so much more than the freindly girl behind the counter!

 

Do they still play 'How much is that doggy in the window' tune at Geneva airport?

 

Or she works in the travel industry:I know a high powered rep who works for Hertz...unbelievable how many times she would wangle seats,"up front",despite her and her old man clutching cattle class tickets...