People Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eki

That proves my point that there are just few winners and thousands of losers.

And how many low-paid employees they have? I read that the CEO of a Finnish supermarket chain makes 102 times more than his employees in average. I guess it's even worse in the US.

---

What the hell are you on about? Why does the number of winners and losers matter? Why is it your business how much more a CEO makes than his employees? If you don't like it, shop somewhere else. You seem to be arguing that it is some sort of national tragedy that mom & pop shops go out of business. Why? What do you want to do about it? Guaruntee that every start up will succeed? Great, get that law passed, I'll go start some stupid company then when it fails, Eki and his buddies will support me "because it's just not fair that my business was a loser".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

And not at any moment do you think that the sheer extent to which the corporate giants are entrenched, the sheer financial power at their disposal and their utter ruthlessness may be no barrier?

---

Entrenched with whom? What financial power, and why is their power a barrier to me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Oh, that old chestnut — 'you can't be a rich socialist'. Why is that attitude apparently not allowed, whereas you would presumably not have any objection to a poor capitalist?

---

Ah, but you can't be a rch socialist by the very definition of the term. You know everyone should be equal. From each according to their abilty, to each according to their need. And all that.

I honestly don't have an objection to what Bruce, Michael, and those like them are doing. I just don't understand why anyone would pay to see/hear their product when they are getting rich by being a hypocrite. I, for one, don't really want to give my money to someone who hates me and the system I believe in. But that's just me. If others don't feel that way, then they are free to give these hypocrites their money. No skin off my nose. Just don't cry to me when you're broke.

According to tax statistics, the highest salary income in Finland last year was over €8 million by the former CEO of Nokia,Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo. Much of it was from the "golden handshake" he got when they fired him. How many regular workers get millions when they're fired? None.

And Nokia has been in business since 1865, so you can't seriously believe a start-up is competing in the same league with them, no matter how good their business idea is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Ah, but you can't be a rch socialist by the very definition of the term. You know everyone should be equal. From each according to their abilty, to each according to their need. And all that.

I honestly don't have an objection to what Bruce, Michael, and those like them are doing. I just don't understand why anyone would pay to see/hear their product when they are getting rich by being a hypocrite. I, for one, don't really want to give my money to someone who hates me and the system I believe in. But that's just me. If others don't feel that way, then they are free to give these hypocrites their money. No skin off my nose. Just don't cry to me when you're broke.

---

I hate to tell you that capitalist topics — hedge funds, blind trusts, dividend forecasts and so on — don't make for good music.

Aside from that, I just find your reasoning utterly groundless. There is nothing hypocritical about being wealthy and believing in the redistribution of said wealth, so long as one pays one's taxes where one should and to the required amount, and does some good with what remains. It is also worth pointing out that there is no alternative but to engage with the capitalist system. An airheadedly stupid Conservative MP was on UK television the other week saying that the anti-capitalist protesters in London should not be taken seriously because they buy their coffee from Starbucks, unfortunately failing to grasp that, if one is in a city centre nowadays, there is no choice but to use the range of blandly corporate outlets that now populate the high street.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Entrenched with whom? What financial power, and why is their power a barrier to me?

---

Like I said, your perspective is touchingly naïve.

Have you not seen for yourself the dominance of large chains on the high street, which have in recent years increasingly forced out the individual independents? There is one demonstration of corporate dominance in action. There is little or no way for the average person to compete. Still, I suppose you view such bland, corporate homogeneity as a positive development, proving as it does the superiority of the free market? To hell with independent individualism, hey?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I hate to tell you that capitalist topics — hedge funds, blind trusts, dividend forecasts and so on — don't make for good music.

Aside from that, I just find your reasoning utterly groundless. There is nothing hypocritical about being wealthy and believing in the redistribution of said wealth, so long as one pays one's taxes where one should and to the required amount, and does some good with what remains. It is also worth pointing out that there is no alternative but to engage with the capitalist system. An airheadedly stupid Conservative MP was on UK television the other week saying that the anti-capitalist protesters in London should not be taken seriously because they buy their coffee from Starbucks, unfortunately failing to grasp that, if one is in a city centre nowadays, there is no choice but to use the range of blandly corporate outlets that now populate the high street.

---

How do you not see the irony in protesting "evil corporations" that make "too much profit" while at the same time using products produced by huge corporations making massive profits? I mean most of these people down occupying Wall Street have macs, ipads, and ipods. Apple's profit margin is a whopping 23.43% Apple Profit Margin (AAPL). And to top it all off they're built by outsourcing jobs to China. How do you not see the humor in that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

My own ambition, I would rather spend time with my family, and play video games than spend the time and energy needed to make a start up work.

---

It's not just about the time and energy you put to work. Also connections, capital, ideas, skills, talent and sheer luck among other things play a role, so you can't say everybody start from the same start line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

How do you not see the irony in protesting "evil corporations" that make "too much profit" while at the same time using products produced by huge corporations making massive profits? I mean most of these people down occupying Wall Street have macs, ipads, and ipods. Apple's profit margin is a whopping 23.43% Apple Profit Margin (AAPL). And to top it all off they're built by outsourcing jobs to China. How do you not see the humor in that?

---

Did they have choices other than being without those things? OK, the Chinese will figure out how they make cheaper mac, ipad and ipod clones withouth Apple, but not yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Like I said, your perspective is touchingly naïve.

Have you not seen for yourself the dominance of large chains on the high street, which have in recent years increasingly forced out the individual independents? There is one demonstration of corporate dominance in action. There is little or no way for the average person to compete. Still, I suppose you view such bland, corporate homogeneity as a positive development, proving as it does the superiority of the free market? To hell with independent individualism, hey?

---

I wouldn't say that bland corporate homogeneity is good or bad. It just (at the moment at least) makes economic sense. I would rather support locally owned businesses, and do when I can. But do you honestly expect people to pay more for goods, just to support locally owned businesses? To hell with balance family budgets, hey?

And the fact that large chains are currently dominating the high street does not prove nor dis-prove barriers. I suppose you might be making the argument that they have a certain buying power based on scale. Ok I'll buy that. But why is that bad? And why is that necessarily a barrier to my entrance into the market? Is it even sort of a barrier to entrance into the market? What large chain doesn't have a competitor? Even if there is a monopoly somewhere, why is that inhearently bad?

Let's take an example from my life. I don't know if you are familiar with Lowe's (do they have those in Europe?). It's one of those large chain hardware stores. Stuff there is dirt cheap. The drawback to Lowe's is that they employ mostly high school and college kids at minimum wage that have no clue what the difference is between a light bulb and a 2x4. I go there when I know exactly what I want/need simply because it's cheap, and pretty much the same thing I'll get anywhere else. But if I need a specialty item I'll go to my local shop down the street because they have people in there that know what they're talking about. Sure I'll pay more there, but I'll get the right thing. You see each store has it's niche, they're good at what they do. What you seem to be proposing is for everyone to be forced to go to the mom & pop shop down the road out of some sort of "good for the community". Why is supporting someone who is expensive "good" even though I have to pay more than is necessary?