4 ms·

Everything in life is a choice. Often it's a choice between two bad options-- that's life. Covering your ears and humming loudly at the problem doesn't elimin

Everything in life is a choice. Often it's a choice between two bad options-- that's life. Covering your ears and humming loudly at the problem doesn't eliminate your responsibility to address it; nor the consequences for doing so.

grammaton 16y ago
Sorry, this one is a tad ambiguous. By "humming loudly at the problem," are you talking about addressing problems in your own life, a'la the dominant theme of this thread, or addressing the problems of capitalism as suggested by the author of the article?
- rick888 16y ago
  "addressing the problems of capitalism as suggested by the author of the article?" and what problems are those? That not everyone comes out on top? Of course this is the case. I am interested in alternatives that don't involve limiting the success of the people that are actually creating wealth or taking exorbitant amounts of money through taxes. When you've lived long enough, you realize that there aren't many ideas that are truly unique. Most "new" ideas are just old ideas that have been sugar-coated to make them more palatable. So I'm waiting for your new and unique idea that will somehow give people a better chance at life, success, an freedom than capitalism.
  - grammaton 16y ago
    Did I suggest I had any such idea? Did I suggest limiting anyone's success or taking exorbitant amounts of money through taxes? The problems in question are not that not everyone comes out on top - it's that "not coming out on top" involves a great deal of exploitation and coercion. More so than most will admit. The problem is that "coming out on top" now means you control a hugely disproportionate sum of wealth - and thereby exert a disproportionate influence on society, invariably to the expense of others. "limiting the success of the people that are actually creating wealth." And therein lies one of the problems - the rewards do not go to those who make the wealth, and that's exactly the point the author of the article was making. If an engineer invents a radical new process for fabricating microchips, who is paid the huge sum of money resulting from it - the CEO or the engineer? Which one actually created wealth and value? "When you've lived long enough, you realize that there aren't many ideas that are truly unique." This is merely condescension. Age doesn't grant you any magical insights, and you don't have to reach a certain age to know there are no new ideas. I figured that out a long time ago. That said, you want to talk about defeatists attitudes? "There are no new ideas" is a cake taker in that department. I don't have all the answers, and I don't claim to - but we have absolutely zero chance of addressing social issues if we as a society won't even acknowledge them. And just because I don't have a better alternative right now, doesn't mean that no one else does either - or that I won't in the future.
    - rick888 16y ago
      "Did I suggest I had any such idea? Did I suggest limiting anyone's success or taking exorbitant amounts of money through taxes?" No, but I'm waiting for it. "The problem is that "coming out on top" now means you control a hugely disproportionate sum of wealth" ...that you've earned. I don't see a problem. "and thereby exert a disproportionate influence on society, invariably to the expense of others." Then let's not allow people with money to set the rules. Capitalism isn't the problem. It's corrupt politicians that take kickbacks. I would also like to mention that money is power. In any time in history, the more money you have, the more power you possess. It will always be the case. If not money, then whatever currency we are using. It's not like you can't go out and earn your own. "And therein lies one of the problems - the rewards do not go to those who make the wealth, and that's exactly the point the author of the article was making." You can't make a blanket statement like this, because it's not true in most cases. When the guy in the article was working as a "Jack-in-the-Box counterperson", what was he willing to risk all of his time and money to run the business? It sounds to me like he wants the same amount of profits as an owner, but none of the risks. As I've stated earlier, I don't think people would really like it if companies were allowed to hire people at no pay, work them day and night for the hope that they will make a profit (which is what it takes as an owner). Just ask anyone here that is trying to start a company. You might make it big, but you will probably fail many more times before you succeed. Most people want a comfort blanket. They don't want to have to worry about profit margins. They want to know that they will get paid every month. "If an engineer invents a radical new process for fabricating microchips, who is paid the huge sum of money resulting from it - the CEO or the engineer? Which one actually created wealth and value?" If the engineer is under contract and using the resources, money, and lab of his employer to create this radical new process, he is getting paid a salary he agreed upon (which wasn't by force). If he is using all of his own equipment, under no contract, it can make him very rich. I don't really see a problem with anything you are describing, except your sense of entitlement. "This is merely condescension. Age doesn't grant you any magical insights, and you don't have to reach a certain age to know there are no new ideas. I figured that out a long time ago. That said, you want to talk about defeatists attitudes? "There are no new ideas" is a cake taker in that department." Do you actually think I believe there isn't anything new? I was merely pointing out that there are thousands of years of history and experience in the economic, finance, and politics department, which can show you what works and what doesn't (and if your idea is radically new or just a rehash of something old). Age can grant you insight, if you learn from history and your experiences. Ponzi schemes are a good example of this. They will always fail in the end, yet people continue to fall for them. "I don't have all the answers, and I don't claim to - but we have absolutely zero chance of addressing social issues if we as a society won't even acknowledge them. And just because I don't have a better alternative right now, doesn't mean that no one else does either - or that I won't in the future." There are more important social issues to address than some guy that is whining about his life.
- Calamitous 16y ago
  Sorry, yes, I was referring to personal choice. Although I do think that there are many more options in any given situation (personal or otherwise) than people are willing to consider-- comfort and inertia are deceptively powerful forces.
- Calamitous 16y ago
  Sorry, yes, I was referring to personal choice. Although I do think that there are many more options in any given situation (personal or otherwise) than people are willing to consider-- comfort and inertia are deceptively powerful forces.

grammaton 16y ago

Sorry, this one is a tad ambiguous. By "humming loudly at the problem," are you talking about addressing problems in your own life, a'la the dominant theme of this thread, or addressing the problems of capitalism as suggested by the author of the article?

rick888 16y ago
"addressing the problems of capitalism as suggested by the author of the article?" and what problems are those? That not everyone comes out on top? Of course this is the case. I am interested in alternatives that don't involve limiting the success of the people that are actually creating wealth or taking exorbitant amounts of money through taxes. When you've lived long enough, you realize that there aren't many ideas that are truly unique. Most "new" ideas are just old ideas that have been sugar-coated to make them more palatable. So I'm waiting for your new and unique idea that will somehow give people a better chance at life, success, an freedom than capitalism.
- grammaton 16y ago
  Did I suggest I had any such idea? Did I suggest limiting anyone's success or taking exorbitant amounts of money through taxes? The problems in question are not that not everyone comes out on top - it's that "not coming out on top" involves a great deal of exploitation and coercion. More so than most will admit. The problem is that "coming out on top" now means you control a hugely disproportionate sum of wealth - and thereby exert a disproportionate influence on society, invariably to the expense of others. "limiting the success of the people that are actually creating wealth." And therein lies one of the problems - the rewards do not go to those who make the wealth, and that's exactly the point the author of the article was making. If an engineer invents a radical new process for fabricating microchips, who is paid the huge sum of money resulting from it - the CEO or the engineer? Which one actually created wealth and value? "When you've lived long enough, you realize that there aren't many ideas that are truly unique." This is merely condescension. Age doesn't grant you any magical insights, and you don't have to reach a certain age to know there are no new ideas. I figured that out a long time ago. That said, you want to talk about defeatists attitudes? "There are no new ideas" is a cake taker in that department. I don't have all the answers, and I don't claim to - but we have absolutely zero chance of addressing social issues if we as a society won't even acknowledge them. And just because I don't have a better alternative right now, doesn't mean that no one else does either - or that I won't in the future.
  - rick888 16y ago
    "Did I suggest I had any such idea? Did I suggest limiting anyone's success or taking exorbitant amounts of money through taxes?" No, but I'm waiting for it. "The problem is that "coming out on top" now means you control a hugely disproportionate sum of wealth" ...that you've earned. I don't see a problem. "and thereby exert a disproportionate influence on society, invariably to the expense of others." Then let's not allow people with money to set the rules. Capitalism isn't the problem. It's corrupt politicians that take kickbacks. I would also like to mention that money is power. In any time in history, the more money you have, the more power you possess. It will always be the case. If not money, then whatever currency we are using. It's not like you can't go out and earn your own. "And therein lies one of the problems - the rewards do not go to those who make the wealth, and that's exactly the point the author of the article was making." You can't make a blanket statement like this, because it's not true in most cases. When the guy in the article was working as a "Jack-in-the-Box counterperson", what was he willing to risk all of his time and money to run the business? It sounds to me like he wants the same amount of profits as an owner, but none of the risks. As I've stated earlier, I don't think people would really like it if companies were allowed to hire people at no pay, work them day and night for the hope that they will make a profit (which is what it takes as an owner). Just ask anyone here that is trying to start a company. You might make it big, but you will probably fail many more times before you succeed. Most people want a comfort blanket. They don't want to have to worry about profit margins. They want to know that they will get paid every month. "If an engineer invents a radical new process for fabricating microchips, who is paid the huge sum of money resulting from it - the CEO or the engineer? Which one actually created wealth and value?" If the engineer is under contract and using the resources, money, and lab of his employer to create this radical new process, he is getting paid a salary he agreed upon (which wasn't by force). If he is using all of his own equipment, under no contract, it can make him very rich. I don't really see a problem with anything you are describing, except your sense of entitlement. "This is merely condescension. Age doesn't grant you any magical insights, and you don't have to reach a certain age to know there are no new ideas. I figured that out a long time ago. That said, you want to talk about defeatists attitudes? "There are no new ideas" is a cake taker in that department." Do you actually think I believe there isn't anything new? I was merely pointing out that there are thousands of years of history and experience in the economic, finance, and politics department, which can show you what works and what doesn't (and if your idea is radically new or just a rehash of something old). Age can grant you insight, if you learn from history and your experiences. Ponzi schemes are a good example of this. They will always fail in the end, yet people continue to fall for them. "I don't have all the answers, and I don't claim to - but we have absolutely zero chance of addressing social issues if we as a society won't even acknowledge them. And just because I don't have a better alternative right now, doesn't mean that no one else does either - or that I won't in the future." There are more important social issues to address than some guy that is whining about his life.
Calamitous 16y ago
Sorry, yes, I was referring to personal choice. Although I do think that there are many more options in any given situation (personal or otherwise) than people are willing to consider-- comfort and inertia are deceptively powerful forces.
Calamitous 16y ago
Sorry, yes, I was referring to personal choice. Although I do think that there are many more options in any given situation (personal or otherwise) than people are willing to consider-- comfort and inertia are deceptively powerful forces.