Originally posted by rabbitjoker
Golf is a great example of this: There are an estimated 26 million golfers in the world. The #1 player in the world in 2010 made $5mm in winnings. The #200 player in the world made $268k. The #300 player made $24k. The #365 player made $5k. All of these players are still in the top 1% of the best golfers in the world - #365 could probably beat 25 million of the world's golfers on any given day - but the difference between "the best" and "pretty good" is $5mm (100% for argument sake).
interesting analogy
quote:
Originally posted by StereoPrincess
the true wealthy actually do not work. they earn money on money and twiddle their thumbs.
hahah also a good point
Nick Cenik
quote:
Originally posted by rabbitjoker
Golf is a great example of this: There are an estimated 26 million golfers in the world. The #1 player in the world in 2010 made $5mm in winnings. The #200 player in the world made $268k. The #300 player made $24k. The #365 player made $5k. All of these players are still in the top 1% of the best golfers in the world - #365 could probably beat 25 million of the world's golfers on any given day - but the difference between "the best" and "pretty good" is $5mm (100% for argument sake).
The global economic system (especially in the U.S.) is rigged to benefit the wealthy at the expense of the poor whereas the game of golf offers every player an opportunity to compete at the highest levels if his/her skill is adequate. People no longer still believe that Capitalism actually presents all with a fair chance to advance socially, economically, and politically - do they?
1dawoman
quote:
Originally posted by rabbitjoker
Golf is a great example of this: There are an estimated 26 million golfers in the world. The #1 player in the world in 2010 made $5mm in winnings. The #200 player in the world made $268k. The #300 player made $24k. The #365 player made $5k. All of these players are still in the top 1% of the best golfers in the world - #365 could probably beat 25 million of the world's golfers on any given day - but the difference between "the best" and "pretty good" is $5mm (100% for argument sake).
The difference between "the best" and the "pretty good" may be a lot more than strictly skill and talent. It may also be that "the best" had the advantage over the rest if s/he comes from a family with wealth already and therefore had the opportunity to have the best coaches, play at the best country clubs and have the best golf clubs/equipment.
Same goes for education, employment, power etc.
I would argue that when the gap between the rich and the poor is so large and is continuing to widen, it becomes increasingly difficult for the ones with the least means to have opportunities that enable them to advance their skill/technique/education thereby making the playing field increasingly unfair.
Luckily this isn't nearly as much of a problem in Canada as it is in the US.
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Cenik
The global economic system (especially in the U.S.) is rigged to benefit the wealthy at the expense of the poor whereas the game of golf offers every player an opportunity to compete at the highest levels if his/her skill is adequate.
I would argue that even golf is "rigged to benefit the wealthy" of course there are always exceptions to this...but that's exactly what they are...exceptions.
DeleteFromUsers
quote:
Originally posted by Elendil
We are all to blame. Human nature has driven us to the place we now find ourselves. Their is no escaping individual accountability, and no amount of pointing, fist shaking or gesturing at real or perceived enemies will alter that.
Clearly the answer is legislation. Legislation is the reason Canada's doing well and the US is in the ter. Period. Full stop. Humans are humans. Fictional borders don't, normally, change brain chemistry.
Waiting for humans to act exclusively altruistically is simply impossible and far outside the scope of the Occupy Movement and this discussion.
Societies (via governments on behalf of the people) control human behavior which is deemed to be not in society's best interested with legislation all the time. We live, eat, and breath these rules. They are the foundations of modern society.
Legislate US banks to act in their customers' best interests (as they are in Canada) and legislate away the ability of corporations to buy elections (as it is in Canada).
DeleteFromUsers
quote:
Originally posted by rabbitjoker
Deregulation is not the problem either. In fact there is too much regulation.
This is absolutely false. Unequivocally. There's no question. A lack of regulation is why we're here. 2008 happened because of the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999. Look it up.
Fact: All humans are stupid. You're stupid. I'm stupid. We're all in it together. No one knows everything, or even close.
Silly example: Leaded paint.
You probably don't know why lead is poisonous, or why we used to find it in our paint, pipes, makeup, etc. I don't know. I could look it up but I'm not too concerned.
You probably don't know how to make paint of any significant usefulness. Again, I don't either. I don't know what the raw materials are, how to pull them out of the ground, how to refine and treat them. I don't know what makes a paint durable or colour-fast. I could go on and on like this. Really, I just want to go to the store and buy some awesome paint when I damn feel like it. I bet you feel approximately the same.
Question is: shall we start selling leaded paint because YOU don't know why it's a bad idea, or how to make your own non-leaded paint?
I can come up with a thousand examples of regulation protecting people like you who don't know one damn thing about it, yet it saves your life every day of the year.
Full circle: Deregulation such that banks can take customers' personal savings and bet on high-risk investments (for the bank's exclusive profit) is simply ing insane. Hence: regulation.
Nick Cenik
quote:
Originally posted by DeleteFromUsers
This is absolutely false. Unequivocally. There's no question. A lack of regulation is why we're here.
Exactly.
GGM
dbl post
GGM
quote:
Originally posted by DeleteFromUsers
Both posts = well said.
Nick Cenik
[Apologies if this is a re-post]
I'm proud of this Marine for standing up against the NYPD bullies:
Originally posted by DeleteFromUsers
This is absolutely false. Unequivocally. There's no question. A lack of regulation is why we're here. 2008 happened because of the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999. Look it up.
Fact: All humans are stupid. You're stupid. I'm stupid. We're all in it together. No one knows everything, or even close.
Silly example: Leaded paint.
You probably don't know why lead is poisonous, or why we used to find it in our paint, pipes, makeup, etc. I don't know. I could look it up but I'm not too concerned.
You probably don't know how to make paint of any significant usefulness. Again, I don't either. I don't know what the raw materials are, how to pull them out of the ground, how to refine and treat them. I don't know what makes a paint durable or colour-fast. I could go on and on like this. Really, I just want to go to the store and buy some awesome paint when I damn feel like it. I bet you feel approximately the same.
Question is: shall we start selling leaded paint because YOU don't know why it's a bad idea, or how to make your own non-leaded paint?
I can come up with a thousand examples of regulation protecting people like you who don't know one damn thing about it, yet it saves your life every day of the year.
Full circle: Deregulation such that banks can take customers' personal savings and bet on high-risk investments (for the bank's exclusive profit) is simply ing insane. Hence: regulation.
I most certainly agree that regulation is a major fact of life that we all benefit from in many, many ways. I would certainly never deny that. Hell, if increased regulation on banks in the United States is a primary goal and concern of the movement, I wouldn't oppose it by any means. I would, however, point out that in many cases, it is regulation that creates potential for monopoly or oligopoly to form, and decreases ease of access into market for small businesses. I would caution against looking to regulation as a save-all, and rather look to it as applying in some cases, but ultimately failing in others. The determination of where to apply regulation relies in the hands of incredibly intelligent think-tanks more than it does politicians and every day individuals.
quote:
Originally posted by StereoPrincess
the true wealthy actually do not work. they earn money on money and twiddle their thumbs.
This is not a good point, by any means.
You don't know too many "rich" people, do you?
While your image of the stereotypical rich person sitting around twiddling their thumbs may play well into whatever reality you're creating for yourself, it certainly doesn't hold any weight on observations I've made on several individuals with over 25 million dollar in combined assets (and well beyond the 100 million dollar mark in some cases)- all of whom hustle hard for the money they've earned. In fact, in every case, they continue to act exactly as they have when they did not have such wealth.
A quick survey of the richest individuals of the world will also reveal many who most certainly do not "twiddle their thumbs".
Sure, there are plenty of trust fund babies around the world for whom this may not be the case, but your errant generalization seems more based on "sureality" shows and is exactly that - an error.
Elendil
quote:
Originally posted by Orko
Or if you are a large corporation like Disney, McDonlads, or other toy makers, you actually try and curve future markets to suit your goals, by engaging young kids.
The rise of consumerism, could surely be correlated to the amount of advertising directed at children, and the proliferation of TV.
The financial problems facing North America did not start in the last 10 years. This is a snow ball got rolling decades ago.
On this, I don't disagree with you. However, yet again - who is at fault here? Only the corporation, for making use of media to achieve it's goal (of making money, of course)? What about the parent, for allowing their child to sit parked in front of advertisements and failing to teach the child essential skills of reason, independent critical thinking, etc?
I don't disagree that the financial crisis did not start in the last 10 years. In fact, I said no such thing on any occasion. However, it has come to a head (and the head continues to develop).
What should be clear from the collection of my posts is that I do not look to blame any one, central pinpoint facet. These are all trends that have been developing since the dawn of civilization. I look to our nature, the psychology of man, the story of mans development, and see all that I need to understand why we are here, and why the solution is far from simple, and unobtainable (at least in the form we'd most hope). This is not to say that we should not continue to strive for higher things - quite the opposite, in fact. However, I wish to make it clear that the act of blame, pointing fingers and generalization without and equal amount directed towards ourselves is a critical error. I seek not to blame others, but to blame myself first, and assess what it is I must do before I go telling anyone else their business.
