Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Greed by definition is not a positive thing. "Intense and selfish desire for something, esp. wealth, power, or food."
The fact you need to regulate it, should tell you something
im just using the terminology that these people are using. i dont really think people are greedy because they want to make a lot of money. so whatever someone wants to call it, the desire to make more money is a good thing.
im just using the terminology that these people are using. i dont really think people are greedy because they want to make a lot of money. so whatever someone wants to call it, the desire to make more money is a good thing.
You said greed is good. It's not, I don't care who is defining greed incorrectly, correct them. The desire for success is one thing; Once you're successful, the desire for more (excess) is greed, and it's not a good model for a society to base itself on. I'll also argue the once the desire for $$ starts to skew your moral compass towards / dealing with fellow humans, it's not a positive thing either.
Admittedly, I don't know that much about the movement but I got to thinking about the backlash against Wall Street....
It occurred to me that most people I know that work and have profited from their work in the financial services industry/Wall Street do not come from money. Most of the people that I know--and I realize this is purely anecdotal---grew up solidly middle class, performed academically and attended top schools. They then headed to Wall Street in the 90s for their shot at the American dream. Many have made insane amounts of money--no doubt. However--I can honestly say the work they do is intense, and not for the faint hearted. The culture is about as tough as white collar work can get....and it's ubber competitive. It's not for me, for sure but for my generation (graduated 90s and are now hitting 40s) Wall Street offered the more ambitious among us the opportunity to hit it rich. The opportunity, but certainly, not the guarantee. No other industry that I came across offered that kind of climb up and while I did not take it, I don't begrudge those who did.
Do Wall Street jobs deserve such high pay? I don't know--but then again, do athletes or movie stars deserve the pay they make? Aren't we all in agreement that having a democratic government and a free market model is the American way? When we finish tearing down the salaries of Wall Streeters, will we then move to tear down movie stars and athletes--mandating no one make over a certain amount? And when we are done doing that, will any average joe have any method to hit it wildly rich? Let's face it--it's not as though entrepreneurs are hitting the highs--most small companies are driven out of business by the big ones. It is becoming nearly IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to skip economic classes. Take Wall Street away and we may it become even MORE difficult for anyone from the middle class to skip above via a salaried job. Meanwhile--the fat cats at the very tippy top---The ones that live off the interest in their fortunes and are able to avoid taxes through elaborate shelters---they will always make sure their offspring are cared for and the economic stratas will become even more affixed with even less ladders up....
Which led me right back to Wall Street......
I don't believe we are all po'd about the salaries as much as we are the rules of the game and the way they are now stacked. I am of the belief that the fault of this does not lie with Wall Street but rather with our legislators. The roots to our economic collapse go all the way back to the push towards globalization and the deregulation of many of our industries. I am thinking they ought to go take their protest to Washington! If the free market environment rewards the pay they make, fine. However--perhaps if we had better, smarter regulation---the profits and the motivations would not be so skewed and the work would be rewarded in a more equitable way. The issue is not the hard working people who have figured out a way to profit; the culprit is the system and the laws that promote this system in the first place.
Anyway---this is by no means my area of expertise, so I welcome feedback. This was juts a long brain fart I came up with while driving today.....
:-)
i think you're confusing a couple things. i know plenty of people that work for financial services firms. i know very few people who are high up in those firms. basically, i know the "peons" that work on wall street, not the ones that run the companies that they work for. surely, some bystanders going to work, that get paid much lower salaries, with the hope of a big bonus based on company performance, after working 80 hours per week, are getting harrassed in these protests unfairly. that's not the target though.
comparing an athlete or actor to the big salaries on wall street isn't the proper analogy. the athlete is the "peon" in sports, believe it or not, while the Steinbrenners and Jerry Jones' of the world are the "wall street" representation. if you reduce A-Rod's salary, that doesn't lower ticket prices, it increases the Steinbrenner's profits. it's tough to wrap one's head around, since professional athletes appear to us to make "a fortune", but the real money in professional sports is in the ownership of a team. Derek Jeter and A-Rod might be able to pool their assets together, maybe, and be able to afford a crappy MLB franchise. Matt Damon or George Clooney could never afford to buy a movie studio.
you're right though. it's not about the salaries of the "average" people that work on wall street. it's about the way the companies operate, and how they buy government officials, and how the guys at the top of these companies make exponentially more, the widest gap in our nation's history since the time before the great depression, then the "regular" people at these companies.
You're both forgetting the real culprits -- the generation in between! The 'Silent Generation' are the ones who really blew it. (Those born late 1928+/- to 1945 -- too young to have fought in WW2 but too old to be baby boomers.)
They are the ones who controlled Congress from 1980 until 2010 -- the period of unbridled spending. They are the ones who squandered away their own social security trust funds saddling their children and grandchildren with their bills.
And if we didn't have to pay their bills, the federal budget would be balanced! What's the deficit this year -- around $1.3 trillion? And how much are we paying for social security and medicare? Hmm... about $1.3 trillion.
And they wonder why their kids don't have time to visit. The 'kids' (baby boomers and gen X'ers) are working two underpaid jobs just to try making ends meet!
but they did it at the request of their constituents. you can't blame congress for problems you told them to create.
You people protesting at Occupy Wall Street can be naive and not realize who's actually pulling the strings of your movement, you can deny this is a Communist pushed movement, but it is, the good thing though is this, it will fizzle out because the majority of people aren't on your side, they're too busy working to make their presence know, but they will make it known on election day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanonGrace
You just tapped into one of the main things that ticks me off about this.... the fact that people I know have to step over these people to get to....WORK, which is the very thing this country needs right now. Workers producing not drama rousers protesting......
....and when I became such a conservative fuddy duddy is still a mystery to me.
;-)
i don't know why you think that everyone participating in this movement is unemployed, and that the ones that are don't want to work.
i don't know why you think this has anything to do with Communism, other than the purpose of trying to divert from what's actually happening. Wanting a capitalist society that includes regulations is not a desire for communism. Wanting to return to periods of time in our nation's history where the tax system was progressive, and everyone paid more taxes, is not communism. Is the top bracket paying 39% communism, but paying 35% is capitalism? what about the subsequent brackets below the top, also paying historically low rates? what about all the tax loopholes, that create a completely different "effective" rate?
this isn't a choice between 100% free markets, and 100% socialism. that's the problem with some people, they don't realize that there is this thing called compromising.
You really don't understand it at all, do you? look at how many people voted in 2008 and 2010. then start looking at the people who are becoming more active and involved. you'll see...
I think you've made some excellent points overall.
This playing of the "the rich aren't paying enough" card is meant to do one thing, divide, and it reaks of desperation by those using it. I'm nowhere near rich, if anything I'm middle class or lower depending on your definition, but I refuse to be envious and angry at those who have more than me. I have no doubt that I could be wealthy if I had the drive and incentive to do so, that's what America is all about. I know too many people in life who make excuses and want to blame because they're not successful, yet they never look inside themselves. As I mentioned in another post, I had to pay for my own College, I worked 1 full-time and 1 part-time and went to school part-time, there's nothing that says you have a right to finish College in 4 years, so what if it takes longer? as for student loans? I had no desire to start off my career in debt, so I took the slow route, same with buying a home, we could've very easily bought over my means, but we knew what we were comfortable with that and stuck with it, and I can say at least I have a decent amount of equity in my home unlike others who bought over their means.
this playing of "their all young hippies and communist" card is meant to do one thing, divide, and it wreaks of desperation by those using it.
it's not about being envious or angry. it's not about blaming. it's not about success. you completely miss what's going on. open your mind. this isn't a bunch of liberal hippies. it has people across the political spectrum waking up to it.
There is nothing to congratulate, Lizzy. It will accomplish nothing except for "misery loves company".
If you want to change something in your life, Lizzy, it is up to you to make it happen as an individual person. Huddling with other incompetents for warmth will not change your life.
Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for yourself.
that's exactly waht the protestors are doing, sir. They have asked how they can enact change, and have found that it's not by voting alone, it's about raising your voice. raising it collectively with others who agree with you happens to get more attention.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
