Thread: Is making/having money a bad thing on SRP?

Originally Posted by honedright

I wonder why it's considered poor taste to flaunt wealth for some (don't get me wrong, I am also socially conditioned to see this as tacky), yet we applaud other forms of open display of talent and wealth.

My statement assumes that the ability to generate large sums of wealth is also a sort of talent or ability. And not everyone seems to be endowed with such talent/ ability.

Take, for example, athletes (professional or Olympic caliber). These people are naturally endowed with certain physical abilities which allow them to excel far beyond the capabilities of the average Joe (or Jane) often leading to large salaried contracts. Yet we tend idolize these people and their enormous incomes. Alex Rodriguez and Michael Phelps come to mind.

But why does it seem that some (?) or many (?) equally and naturally talented business people, industrialists, corporations, etc. are often instead villainised for their success?

Or am I off base here?

I see your point, but I think it's one thing for us to admire them and another if they were to go on and on about how talented/wealthy they are. The line is somewhere in there, IMHO.

Also, I don't know what others experience in business is, but to me, a lot of "wealthy" upper echelon VPs, etc. aren't particularly talented. They played the game, maybe had rich or well connected parents, maybe they were in the right place at the right time, etc. They have their underlings do most of the work. They ask for reports that they don't even know what to do with, collect fat pay checks and take huge severance packages when the company hits the skids. I'm sure we've all come across the type. I don't see being able to "play the corporate game" as being talented or noble because you're usually just trying to screw/deceive someone.

On the other hand, a person who truly creates something, say the Google guys (?) or Bruce Springsteen - you know what I mean - should have our admiration.

Jordan

Bruce Springsteen doesn't deserve a dime!

Interestingly enough, I will be speaking on money and greed next week. From what I can see, it is not the wealth or poverty that makes a person a jerk or a saint, so to speak. It is what that person carries inside of themself. We tend to look at the extremes and ignore the middle ground or average. Hence, it is easy to stereotype both the poor and the wealthy when in fact, we are only looking at the extremes. The reason we don't see the average of each is because they don't get our attention and as such we don't count them.

The wisest thing I have ever heard about money is that it should be a neutral item in our lives. I had to think about this when I first heard it, but it made sense after awhile.

Originally Posted by jnich67

I see your point, but I think it's one thing for us to admire them and another if they were to go on and on about how talented/wealthy they are. The line is somewhere in there, IMHO.

Also, I don't know what others experience in business is, but to me, a lot of "wealthy" upper echelon VPs, etc. aren't particularly talented. They played the game, maybe had rich or well connected parents, maybe they were in the right place at the right time, etc. They have their underlings do most of the work. They ask for reports that they don't even know what to do with, collect fat pay checks and take huge severance packages when the company hits the skids. I'm sure we've all come across the type. I don't see being able to "play the corporate game" as being talented or noble because you're usually just trying to screw/deceive someone.

On the other hand, a person who truly creates something, say the Google guys (?) or Bruce Springsteen - you know what I mean - should have our admiration.

Jordan

Just a little gentlemanly (I hope it's taken that way) devil's advocate -

The part I put in bold, "They played the game" stood out to me. I am not so sure that playing the game (sort of goes with my athlete analogy?) is not a talent. It's certainly not a talent that I would, or could, ever aspire to, or even be proud of.

I see a lot of the management politics and "games" that go on where I work. I would never do it. I seriously doubt that I could do it. I think it takes a special sort of person (good or bad depending on how you view it) to survive in that arena. But maybe that ability to survive justifies the income? In other words "more power to you" if you can hack it? You or I may think the boss is an idiot, but would you really want that job? Really?

Venturing back to the athlete analogy and the "screw/ deceive someone" from above; I'll venture to argue that sports can be just as down and dirty in order to win. And sometimes the dirtier (or more deceptive) the play, the louder the crowd cheers. And isn't it true that athletes flaunt their superior talents in our faces every time they perform? We just accept that as awesome entertainment. Why don't we give the same credit to a successful, yet ruthless businessman, maintaining the bottom line and serving his stockholders? (and providing the public a good or service to boot)

Like I said at the beginning, just devil's advocate. But am I way out on a limb?

It's shades of gray and some very fine lines.

While athletes have their ups and downs during a career, at the end of the day they can't fake it (putting aside the recent steroid situation). They either have the talent or they don't. No talent businessmen can and do fake it and have the employees and "books" to cover for them. Their play is not broadcast for all to see. Maybe I'm just stating the obvious...

Jordan

Originally Posted by gssixgun

This made me realize long ago what my parents taught me was all I ever needed to learn about money, very simple "Spend Less Then You Make"
"Always have 6 months of your bills in the bank"....

What blows my mind is how many people make millions cough*daveramsey*cough. Teaching people that simple idea.

I'm 3 years out of college, I just got a job opportunity, where I will make more than I would have ever realistically dreamed of at this stage of my life. I'm not turning it down. And I'm going to earn EVERY penny of it. I'll be working like a dog.

If I suddenly won the lottery, and you knew me, you wouldn't ever know. I'd probably quit this job, start a few businesses and live off of that. And I'd let my standard of living increase with the increase in my business. (well ok there might be a small collection of Automobiles (hello dream CJ), razors, and fishtanks) but nothing I couldn't explain as my businesses are doing well...

I hear a repeated theme on these posts, that the rich are jerks, and I don't want to be rich. Personally, I think jerks are going to be jerks whether they are on welfare or stupid rich. I do think the jerks may have more contact with people the richer they are. But I mainly think people just don't understand. Take my boss for instance, he is a huge tightwad. As cheap as they come. He'll pick a penny up off the floor. And all the time people are complaining about their salary or how he may have toed the line ethically dealing with clients to make a few more bucks. I hear him called all sorts of versions of "jerk".
But when times became tough, (work in the oil industry) there is a reason why not one person in our company has been laid off. There is a reason why his company didn't fail during the 80's. There is a reason why he is still hiring.
Those same reasons why people hated working for him, are the same reasons they still have a job. And they still have no clue.

Well finally a subject dear to me.

As the big spendur its very difficult waking up in the morning deciding whether to go yachting, or take a drive in the country in my Aston Martin or go flying in my private jet or go down to the salvation army and serve meals to the poor as a sporting jesture.

Id like to say more however my new private jet is being delivered at my private landing strip behind my summer cottage so I must leave now.

You see the really rich live in another world from the rest of us and if they grew up in that environment we could never relate to it and either could they to our world and if they acquired their money later on they usually have contempt for those who are like what they used to be. Of course there are exceptions however most of what we think are exceptions are just people putting on a different face when it suits them so they seem more acceptable to the average people. There are a very few who truly retain their humble roots after they become very wealthy.

So to speak about whether these people are nice or not really means nothing. If your talking though about someone who earns a couple hundred grand a year yep, most of them just think they are better than everyone else just that they live in our world which the super rich do not do.

So I think I'll get in the privte jet and jet to Italy and have the Maestro make me a seven day set with solid platinum scales encrusted with rubies.

I would say that there is a pretty wide spread of demographics here. I doubt that anyone is as poor as a church mouse, simply because this forum cultivates expensive tastes, laying out much for a respectable razor collection, interesting soaps, exciting brushes et al. Therefore, we are a rather self-selecting bunch. However, that doesn't invalidate out opinions.

Living in the UK, with that peculiar fusion of socialism and capitalism, I have developed certain taste for high-taxes and the usage of wealth to benefit the poorest in our society. It has been said that a society can be judged by how it treats its poorest members, so the welfare state is an important factor. Therefore, I would not begrudge a wealthy man his dues (although there was a case of a man who was in charge of HBOS - a bank which went REALLY bust - trying to claim his £700kpa pension) provided he agrees to pump a large amount of it back into the economy for equable dispersal. Currently, taxes for amounts over £150kpa stand at 50% here, which I think fair.

I find it interesting regarding "eccentricity". As I have found, the more one earns, the less one is inclined to spend. My uncle has recently retired from a job paying over £200kpa and he still lives frugally, drives a 15 year old car (OK, it's a BMW but still) and watches over expenses like a hawk. Of course, for some it is also true that one adapts to one's income. Somebody who's on £40kpa may complain about being unable to meet his bills, but if he then loses his job and earns £20kpa, will probably have similar problems once he adapts his circumstances.

The lottery. The American dream of being filthy rich and decadent. Be driven my money if you like, but you can't take it with you.

I'm just starting to read Tocqueville "Democracy in America" (1835).

Tocqueville notes that the predominant characteristics of Americans is their love of money and hard work. But also a disdain for showiness.