http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/19/opinio...40119&_r=2

Like the man said, it's like a drug. I sit here and look at the money these people make, while saying to myself "I'd just work two or three years and go back home, where I can live off of it." I guess it isn't that simple for those who put forth the hours and effort to actually make money on the street. We see it with athletes, who have sat out entire seasons to become the highest paid at their position.

We all have that one thing that we do that's super addictive.

(01-20-2014 02:16 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Like the man said, it's like a drug. I sit here and look at the money these people make, while saying to myself "I'd just work two or three years and go back home, where I can live off of it." I guess it isn't that simple for those who put forth the hours and effort to actually make money on the street. We see it with athletes, who have sat out entire seasons to become the highest paid at their position.

We all have that one thing that we do that's super addictive.

Funny this thread came up while I'm watching Wall Street sequel. The owner of the brokerage featured in the movie was asked how much is enough for him to walk away. His answer, "more."

(01-20-2014 02:16 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Like the man said, it's like a drug. I sit here and look at the money these people make, while saying to myself "I'd just work two or three years and go back home, where I can live off of it." I guess it isn't that simple for those who put forth the hours and effort to actually make money on the street. We see it with athletes, who have sat out entire seasons to become the highest paid at their position.

We all have that one thing that we do that's super addictive.

I'm completely with you.

On that same note, I don't understand coaches who uproot their families for a 25 or even 50% raise when they're making millions. I get those who leave situations they're unhappy with or if it's a serious jump in their career as a whole, but I'm still shocked so few coaches who are successful don't just stay where they are at instead of jumping the next train to a 'big' payday as if their $2 million a year isn't big enough.

Maybe the guys who would do what I'm describing all become content too early in their careers, and are those simply happy to be coaching their own sons in high school football games.

I've given up six figure salaries twice in my life to be happy (edit: 3 times).

The NY state of mind is greed, and vote away others' money to make yourself feel better about the addiction of greed itself. It's not COMPLETELY disgusting if you vote for distribution of wealth, though very few people can afford the distribution so it's a double addition.

Make everyone else poorer while still raising your own bottom line and as a bonus get to feel "good" about yourself.



The South is somewhat different, thank God.

(01-20-2014 03:29 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:16 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Like the man said, it's like a drug. I sit here and look at the money these people make, while saying to myself "I'd just work two or three years and go back home, where I can live off of it." I guess it isn't that simple for those who put forth the hours and effort to actually make money on the street. We see it with athletes, who have sat out entire seasons to become the highest paid at their position.

We all have that one thing that we do that's super addictive.

I'm completely with you.

On that same note, I don't understand coaches who uproot their families for a 25 or even 50% raise when they're making millions. I get those who leave situations they're unhappy with or if it's a serious jump in their career as a whole, but I'm still shocked so few coaches who are successful don't just stay where they are at instead of jumping the next train to a 'big' payday as if their $2 million a year isn't big enough.

Maybe the guys who would do what I'm describing all become content too early in their careers, and are those simply happy to be coaching their own sons in high school football games.

You don't become the top of your industry without having a certain type of attitude. They go into the job knowing that they already want to leave. Their lives are a series of career moves. But to be fair, they are extremely disposable during their 10+ as position coaches and are only hired on a one year basis and will get booted for things that aren't necessarily their fault. Why have loyalty as a head coach when they would use you as a scapegoat when you were getting started?

At some point the money isn't as important as the stature.

(01-20-2014 03:48 PM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  I've given up six figure salaries twice in my life to be happy (edit: 3 times).

The NY state of mind is greed, and vote away others' money to make yourself feel better about the addiction of greed itself. It's not COMPLETELY disgusting if you vote for distribution of wealth, though very few people can afford the distribution so it's a double addition.

Make everyone else poorer while still raising your own bottom line and as a bonus get to feel "good" about yourself.



The South is somewhat different, thank God.

I wouldn't say that. Go to Charlotte (the second largest financial centre in the country). They're the same way within finance.

The only thing I can think of that makes me feel the same way is booking tenants. It makes me feel like I just hit a half-court buzzer beater.

(01-20-2014 04:12 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I wouldn't say that. Go to Charlotte (the second largest financial centre in the country). They're the same way within finance.

Ok, outside of Charlotte (which I agree) and maybe Hampton Roads the South is different.

(01-20-2014 04:58 PM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 04:12 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I wouldn't say that. Go to Charlotte (the second largest financial centre in the country). They're the same way within finance.

Ok, outside of Charlotte (which I agree) and maybe Hampton Roads the South is different.

I'd say outside of any major city. If you have skyscrapers, you have a certain type of ambition.

(01-20-2014 05:00 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 04:58 PM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 04:12 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I wouldn't say that. Go to Charlotte (the second largest financial centre in the country). They're the same way within finance.

Ok, outside of Charlotte (which I agree) and maybe Hampton Roads the South is different.

I'd say outside of any major city. If you have skyscrapers, you have a certain type of ambition.

Eh, I've travelled all over the south - Roanoke, Lynchburg, Richmond, anywhere in TN, WV, LA, AL, etc I'd have to disagree.

People are generally happy with being able to eat, 2500 sq ft, and drive something half decent.

(01-20-2014 05:14 PM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 05:00 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 04:58 PM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 04:12 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I wouldn't say that. Go to Charlotte (the second largest financial centre in the country). They're the same way within finance.

Ok, outside of Charlotte (which I agree) and maybe Hampton Roads the South is different.

I'd say outside of any major city. If you have skyscrapers, you have a certain type of ambition.

Eh, I've travelled all over the south - Roanoke, Lynchburg, Richmond, anywhere in TN, WV, LA, AL, etc I'd have to disagree.

People are generally happy with being able to eat, 2500 sq ft, and drive something half decent.

Most people any place in the nation are happy with that. That's why they call it an average lifestyle.

People with the mentality that you don't like are everywhere. It's not a Southern/rest of the country thing.

(01-20-2014 05:19 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 05:14 PM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 05:00 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 04:58 PM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 04:12 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I wouldn't say that. Go to Charlotte (the second largest financial centre in the country). They're the same way within finance.

Ok, outside of Charlotte (which I agree) and maybe Hampton Roads the South is different.

I'd say outside of any major city. If you have skyscrapers, you have a certain type of ambition.

Eh, I've travelled all over the south - Roanoke, Lynchburg, Richmond, anywhere in TN, WV, LA, AL, etc I'd have to disagree.

People are generally happy with being able to eat, 2500 sq ft, and drive something half decent.

Most people any place in the nation are happy with that. That's why they call it an average lifestyle.

People with the mentality that you don't like are everywhere. It's not a Southern/rest of the country thing.

You're entitled to your opinion, but every northern vendor who does a plant tour comments on the southern fiscal attitude.

Quote: Wealth addicts are responsible for the vast and toxic disparity between the rich and the poor and the annihilation of the middle class. Only a wealth addict would feel justified in receiving $14 million in compensation —including an $8.5 million bonus —as the McDonald’s C.E.O., Don Thompson, did in 2012, while his company then published a brochure for its work force on how to survive on their low wages. Only a wealth addict would earn hundreds of millions as a hedge-fund manager, and then lobby to maintain a tax loophole that gave him a lower tax rate than his secretary.

This is the fundamental ridiculousness of the current ideologue dogma attempting to steer financial policy in this country. These ******** are complete psycopaths.

And they do nothing to enhance society. As the author states, his entire profession could disappear and society wouldnt notice. Unlike his nurse practitioner mom who actually did something worthwhile and helped people.

(01-20-2014 05:30 PM)Artifice Wrote:  

Quote: Wealth addicts are responsible for the vast and toxic disparity between the rich and the poor and the annihilation of the middle class. Only a wealth addict would feel justified in receiving $14 million in compensation —including an $8.5 million bonus —as the McDonald’s C.E.O., Don Thompson, did in 2012, while his company then published a brochure for its work force on how to survive on their low wages. Only a wealth addict would earn hundreds of millions as a hedge-fund manager, and then lobby to maintain a tax loophole that gave him a lower tax rate than his secretary.

You're not being extremely profound here. There are also power-addicts and attention-addicts who value influence over wealth and they often work for far less, but touch more people. Which one would you rather have?

Your question is disingenuous.

Which ones are currently destroying our economy?

(01-20-2014 05:45 PM)Artifice Wrote:  Your question is disingenuous.

Which ones are currently destroying our economy?

All of them to an extent. Yours are in business, mine are in government.

We all should be thankful for those who sought great wealth because without them we would never have had the country we all enjoy today. Were it not for capitalism and the desire for profit, our country, and world, would be a far less desirable place.

Without the desire to profit, no one would have built the transcontinental railroad, the shipping industry, the warehouses to support the goods of farmers, the oil rigs, the steel mills, the auto manufacturers, and the computers and their software. No one would have spent the time to develop the pharmaceuticals that have prolonged and improved life.

How much did communism contribute to the global good? Nothing.

The quest for individual wealth is the driving force that leads to innovation and economic growth. Yes, greed is good.

(01-20-2014 06:04 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  We all should be thankful for those who sought great wealth because without them we would never have had the country we all enjoy today. Were it not for capitalism and the desire for profit, our country, and world, would be a far less desirable place.

Without the desire to profit, no one would have built the transcontinental railroad, the shipping industry, the warehouses to support the goods of farmers, the oil rigs, the steel mills, the auto manufacturers, and the computers and their software. No one would have spent the time to develop the pharmaceuticals that have prolonged and improved life.

How much did communism contribute to the global good? Nothing.

The quest for individual wealth is the driving force that leads to innovation and economic growth. Yes, greed is good.

(01-20-2014 06:04 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  We all should be thankful for those who sought great wealth because without them we would never have had the country we all enjoy today. Were it not for capitalism and the desire for profit, our country, and world, would be a far less desirable place.

Without the desire to profit, no one would have built the transcontinental railroad, the shipping industry, the warehouses to support the goods of farmers, the oil rigs, the steel mills, the auto manufacturers, and the computers and their software. No one would have spent the time to develop the pharmaceuticals that have prolonged and improved life.

How much did communism contribute to the global good? Nothing.

The quest for individual wealth is the driving force that leads to innovation and economic growth. Yes, greed is good.

Yeah, greed is good to a certain point. But there is a level where it can be a detriment. After a certain point, greed makes you want to get involved with the government either directly or indirectly. It'll make you lobby for regulations that keep you at the top of the market, stifling innovation and advancement from other people. This is the point where the quest for individual wealth becomes the quest for dominance.

It's not all about capitalism vs. communism. Capitalism can hurt itself if greed goes too far.