Discussion in 'Off-topic Zone' started by JBond, Jan 10, 2013.
Great post but most of the people that try and change end up getting chewed up and spit out.
You are making great points and making sense. But the problem is getting people to even consider that there is a problem. People will function under the idea that nothing has changed and 'the good old days' phrase they like to denigrate is just a repeatable refrain for every generation of older people.
It's hard to work together when most won't even admit there has been a decline in things like social unity, perspectives on sacrifice and labor, etc.
that may be true friend and granted it can be an awful feeling but heck ya can't lay down there your whole life if ya got knocked down might as well get back up but let them know your resolve is only going to be that much stronger...We can do it, We can take her back we just have to be willing to do it.
there are none so blind that will not see... but those aren't the people you want to try and recruit those people are speed bumps nothing more...in time perhaps something will force their eyes open but you needn't spend your energy on such.
thank you my dear friend that means lots!!!!
Best post that I have ever read of yours and that's saying alot. Great post. I couldn't have have said it better if I tried.
Hard not to agree with a lot, but I'll bite to keep the conversation going.
First, I would be curious to what you thought the "ideal" was. I would submit it it was to the ability to live freely (liberty). Whether that was from religious persecution, living as servant under kingdom or the ability to simply set forth and make a living and succeed or fail on their own merits. I think this is the core that has driven many Americans to be so innovative over the last century or so and been a key component of its technological trailblazing (loosely - from ipads to phone to military, etc.). There was a sense that if "äuthority" told you "you can't do that." - That was a challenge to prove someone wrong if you had the conviction. Some of that still exists, but some of it is slowly eroding away.
Can't disagree much with that, but people have been willing to let morals, freedoms and other things slide. Ultimately, people are to blame, but it is not a simple answer that you can crucify people for. There has always been corruption, but the speed of how it is discovered and the volume can be quite overwhelming. 200 years ago, I submit, had similar corruption throughout the world, but most of it was not known. WHen there was a scandal it was easier for people to decry it en masse. I don't think people have the energy or time to fight all of the "shady"things they are bombarded with daily. There is a natural gravitation towards prioritization - for better or worse - born from necessity
Spot on again. I posted a page or so back that there has been a movement towards only positive reinforcement.
This is maybe where I start to dissent on the "implied social nirvana." Most people are not for big business and most people are for better education, better health, etc. However, I submit, that the structure of the health care and especially education systems are doing as much if not more harm long-term than big business.
The US Is at the top of educational spending per student of all countries in the world (Other studies still in top 2-3). Yet in almost every measurable, the return on that investment is scant amount to pitiful. At some point as a taxpayer, you should look at this as an investment in the future. If this was a 401K and the governement was forcing you to continue to increase funding in a buggy-whip maker stock, collectively people would demand change. But dialogue gets clouded by some tangible and intangible arguements.
I will say that healthcare has a similar set up that doesn't measure results and issues are hidden or obfuscated.
I won't expound too much on the ideas for "fixing" it, but I will argue that the US has moved away from many tenants of capitalism and that true capitalism almost demands a return on investment/assets/health and buyers are responsible for making as informed a decision as they can. When you do not know the true cost, people do not care. If Apple botches an iphone, you go to Samsung. I know healthcare has some idiosynchratic issues (pooling money and spreading cost, catastrophic disease, etc). But how many people actually look at the charges insurance companies pay or ask the doctor what a "cash price" is?
But herein lies many issues.
1) People have moved more "to keep up with the Jones", but ultimately that is on people and people should have to live with those decisions. Buying too big of a house, 3 cars, season tickets, 4 plasma TVs, boats, jewelry, clothes, cell phones, cable, etc. were not on the agenda for the majority even 30 years ago. There seems to be sentiment that when someone overextends, its big business fault and dont expect to have to admit they erred.
2)I would agree that taxes should be fair, but this chimes of a mantra without fully realizing the bigger picture. You have state tax arbitrage, unfunded liabilities and programs that most people do not understand or keep track of. When "equitable" taxes are presented, it is under the guise of "children/education" (see above) or healthcare. I live in California, grew up in Tennessee, the roads and infrastructure are 900x better in Tennessee than in California. One has a 10% income tax and sales tax and another has only a 9% sales tax. I would venture to say Texas is similar to TN.
3) I would be curious to know what you are citing as "rich spending." I will say that no rich person eschews an investment because of a higher tax rate, that is as dumb as not cashing a lottery ticket due to taxes. But rich people usually invest if there is a possibility of a good return - like expanding or acquiring businesses. I would agree that rich people can only "consume" so much retail crap. So, are rates too low on BUffet - likely. But throwing more money into the government (who have gotten into this hole) doesn't seem overly wise either in the last 50 years. [\quote]
America is unique to many other nations. Similar sized (or larger) have relatively homogenous residents and a sense of nationalism or pride is easier to sell and get buy in for "collective good" program.
While diversity has undeniably benefited America, it also makes it more difficult to get everyone to work for the same goal nationally when they are focused on the needs of their household or neighborhood. Since you do not live in the US, I would bet where you live, it is difficult to become a citizen of that country and being there past visa expiration is likely zero tolerance.
My intention is not to only blame or single out immigration, but it is a microchosm of the difficulties in governing the US compared to Finland, Norway, Germany, Japan, or Australia (more socialistic countries).
Back to how that relates to kids - it comes down to responsibility. Those kids that are instilled that if they flunked a test it was "their" fault and not because "the teacher" hated them or "I had a headache" is a reasonable excuse at home.
I still think the majority of kids are going to be fine, but if people want to start weeding out the least common denominator (Kardashiskanks, Housewives, Gangnam, etc.) then we would be moving in a small degree toward the right track of scorning stupidity and rewarding substance
People get rich by producing goods and services that consumers want, and production of goods and services creates jobs and puts wealth into the economy.
lots and lots of good stuff there thank you
but I guess if I was to summarize we both agree as a people weneed to put whatever crutches are being used away and take control of that what we can control and do some reassessing on what really is important.
no doubt friend you would have to have the means but if they spent it as fast as they made it they wouldn't be rich now would they and the money would again go back into the economy where it belongs for the betterment of all.
Don't all young children try hard? Kind of the reason they all get trophies, isn't it?
Agreed. I just think that building a consensus goal will likely occur only in a real survival crisis or mass attack. Galvanizing everyone to a general social cause is difficult.
Again, respectfully, this is sounds really good, but its not prudent for anyone to spend as fast you make it.
One of the biggest killers in business is the lack of working capital. (Simplified) Many growing businesses do not have the reserves or credit to either invest to acquire product at the same rate to fill orders. Their sales create large accounts receivables but no cash. Mismanaged can lead to missing payroll and automatic bankruptcy.
Also, putting all money "back into the economy" creates a bubble. For the individual, there should be a prudent savings component and deleverging of personal assets over time. Retirement requires that one not spend (on consumables) all income. If you are talking about investments, however, many smart people do put money to work (investing in project apprediable assets).
I think you may be speaking of am inflection point in income/net worth where the personal marginal utility of acquiring 1 more dollar diminishes to the point where the difference is unnoticeable. That is valid, then there should be that discussion of investing for the greater good. You see some of this in charitable donations and fund raising. Obviously, for basic services and public needs, taxes are part of the equation through out an earnings arc
Hope I am not being presumptuous, but i have had similar conversations with people who all rich people do is hoard cash and measure piles. On the contrary, most rich people (not the ones whose outlandish actions make headlines) are very disciplined. They don't just buy a Ferrari every month, they invest in appreciable assets (stocks, bonds, businesses) whie keeping liquid assets in reserves.
A fool and his money are soon parted is so true. What is alarming to me is how many people I meet who dont understand time value of money and only focus on getting the new iphone 5 vs 4 in order to feel good. The majority of the outlandish stories you read about obscene spending is usually temporary and you know about it because that person was more concerned with vanity than discipline (see worldcom, Enron, etc execs).
I wish it wasnt human nature to only recall the sensational, but it is.
Last point to think about, when people say "betterment of all", it raises an interesting moral question which is hard to really answer. Most people are talking only domestically, but is there no responsibility to foreigners?
One can postulate that the US would like the world to have more democracy and does intervene (monetarily or militarily) in programs to further that agenda (Darfur, Bosnia). So in business, if consumers are demanding lower prices (beit from competition or less disposable income) and businesses do outsource to reduce costs and pass those along to a demanding customer, is the business responsible if the outsourcing is bettering the lives of mankind? Or is the customer?
I personally find this a troubling trend that Americans are choosing shortsighted cheaper and less quality over better quality and higher cost. But I can't help but think that the customer is really indifferent. The need to acquire stuff those in the next income bracket have are of higher priority than quality, nationalism - even though I doubt you would not see that result in a poll.
The best learning experiences for me have been failure moments.
Not making the JV basketball team.
Doing poorly in a college class and taking it over.
Etc. I'm not afraid to admit it, because hitting the bottom and figuring out on your own how to climb back up is the best way to understand the value of hard work and to learn techniques for consistent success.
The entitlement/get it now society that we've created from all of the "everyone's special" and "feel good" mouthpieces has led to this. Nobody lets anyone fail anymore. Guess what? Not everyone is meant to be a white collar professional making six figures. But that's an even bigger problem these days that I don't want to get into.
Bottom line/TL;DR - early failure builds character.
Again great stuff
lets see if I can better explain myself.... First off I am what I am and what I am is a believer in the goodness of mankind...that given the choice to do right a vast majority would willingly and joyfully do it... So I think that getting a vast majority of people to move in a direction would hopefully not require some dire/catastrophic event. People may get into a comfort zone but upon showing them and educating them and given them a realistic plan I think most people would implement it without having to have a event.
Again perhaps the business model itself is wrong maybe it shouldn't be profit driven but for the goodness of mankind driven...If we remain within the old model it encourages greed and corruption...the business model must change from profit driven to something else...see when business's talk about exploiting a market ask yourself what is the market when you break it all down at its lowest denominator it is people...so the market being the people what exactly is exploiting a market other than exploiting people..I realize it is a simple way to look at it but sometimes looking at a problem in its simplest form make the problem easier to manage. IF we allow the current business model to continue the change needed to take place could never happen...We should be working hard on space exploration not necessarily space exploitation though that may need to be as resources will be needed..We should be heavily invested on the betterment of the quality of life. There was a time when a parent could stay home and raise children while the other went out to work and his/her income was enough to support a family comfortably. there is enough food currently in the world to feed the hungry, to cloth the poor and to provide shelter for those in need...and no one would miss a thing its already available. The arguement I have heard is that it would crash the world economy if handouts were giving and people would stop working etc...
Let me ask you given the choice of being a productive member in society and vegetating on a couch which would you choose...Everyone I know would choose to do something with their lives...so many people seem to be worried about someone sitting home collecting a welfare check while they have to go out and work...well the people that would sit at home and do that you wouldn't want them in your work force to begin with most people want to be wanted and useful and if they can have fun and gather satisfaction from that so much the better... If you agree than we can start feeding, clothing and sheltering the poor. You wouldn't believe just how many people take offence to that idea. Once we eliminate class distinctions and we understand that we are all equal we can eliminate a lot what ails this world...again you might be surprised by those that need to feel better than somebody to have someone they believe inferior so they can feel superior.
those thing will need to change and you will see a change in so many other things it would be like dominoes falling
Yeah, maybe so, but as long as this generation of deluded narcissts will pay our social security, no problem right?
Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
Expanding one's business usually involves leveraging one's existing assets. The more wealth you've accumulated, the more you can borrow from a bank or lending institution. The more you can borrow, the faster you can expand your business and create jobs.
Simply spending everything one earns isn't necessarily in the best interest of economic growth long term.
I blame the trekkies and transformer geeks.:look:
I blame the state of New Jersey. :