What Is With Americans' Unlimited Wants?

[james_bond_rulez]

Just today on Jay Leno's show, they were interviewing John Travolta's home in Florida. It has eight parking spaces - six for his cars and two for his aeroplanes. Oh, and a 1.4 mile runway round the back.

"Travolta flew daily from home to Tampa during last autumn's shoot of The Punisher, an action movie based on the antics of a Marvel comic-book hero, due to be released this spring. The actor, according to a local newspaper, "can walk out his door, under a canopied walkway and into the cockpit [of his Boeing], open the long mechanised gate [giving on to the runway] and be airborne in minutes."

Not being jealous or anything but why would anybody fly a boeing jet just to go to work when he could've flown a smaller plane or driven one of his six luxurious cars to work? So he had to fly his fancy 707, consume a shitload of fuel when most in other parts of the world who are still suffering for it, like America's bombing the shit out of Iraq just few a billion dollars a year worth of oil?

I dont care how much money u make or how famous you are, it just doesn't seem right to me.

This has gone far enough. The rest of the world can not sustain what America is using the resources at the rate it is using right now. On average, Americans use more water, more fuel, more energy, they eat more than the whole world combined. When are they gonna learn that the world is not full of fresh water, free oil oozing from the ground, and other resources that they can just TAKE without any justifiable reasons?

This is not an attack on American ideals, not an attack on American pride, not an attack on American Patriotism. So any Americans here please dont be so quick to judge my post. Just take a step back and think about it. Is it really worth all the efforts just to fulfill some "American Dream" at the expense of the rest of the world?

Thank you all for reading my post.

[Darth Sushi]

I'm sure Travolta did this because he's rich and loves planes. I think it's safe to say that his spending habits has nothing to do with duty, God, and country. But if you had won the Revolutionary war, would you have entitled this thread "What Is With British Unlimited Wants?" ;) Let's throw out the nationality label and call it what it is...an eccentric millionaire being eccentric. BTW, Travolta does have a British counterpart: Richard Branson. Both have plenty of money, both love flying (balloon vs plane :P ) and both are eccentric.

[ck-uk]

I suppose its just his pleasure mate.I've heard abot him many times over the yrs loving his flying.To him its like any other wealthy person or celeb driving their ferrari down the highway

[james_bond_rulez]

i may have used John as an example but can we look at this on a more general setting?

like the American general public?

[thewizeard]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez@13 April 2004 - 10:32
i may have used John as an example but can we look at this on a more general setting?

like the American general public?
:huh: Do they all go to work in private Boeing 707's?

Wow I am moving to the USA too... :rolleyes:

[jetje]

i'm gonna move this to world news events serious debates... ;)
(so no flaming no more, removed some posts that weren't on topic).

My opinion is you see the bigger picture in this, it's not ust americans that use the limited natural resources in the world. I guess everyone should take part on how to save the resources. John is an example but as someone prior stated those examples can be found in the whole world ;)

[MagicNakor]

Like the Tyco CEO. I wish I had a birthday party like that.

:ninja:

[bujub22]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@13 April 2004 - 09:36
Like the Tyco CEO. I wish I had a birthday party like that.

:ninja:
hell i wish i had a million dollar puffy party! ;)


but hey they earn there money and are spending it anyway they want !
hell i would!...but it must be pretty expensive driving jets all day with gas prices at alll time high??

[Busyman]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez@13 April 2004 - 05:20
Just today on Jay Leno's show, they were interviewing John Travolta's home in Florida. It has eight parking spaces - six for his cars and two for his aeroplanes. Oh, and a 1.4 mile runway round the back.

"Travolta flew daily from home to Tampa during last autumn's shoot of The Punisher, an action movie based on the antics of a Marvel comic-book hero, due to be released this spring. The actor, according to a local newspaper, "can walk out his door, under a canopied walkway and into the cockpit [of his Boeing], open the long mechanised gate [giving on to the runway] and be airborne in minutes."

Not being jealous or anything but why would anybody fly a boeing jet just to go to work when he could've flown a smaller plane or driven one of his six luxurious cars to work? So he had to fly his fancy 707, consume a shitload of fuel when most in other parts of the world who are still suffering for it, like America's bombing the shit out of Iraq just few a billion dollars a year worth of oil?

I dont care how much money u make or how famous you are, it just doesn't seem right to me.

This has gone far enough. The rest of the world can not sustain what America is using the resources at the rate it is using right now. On average, Americans use more water, more fuel, more energy, they eat more than the whole world combined. When are they gonna learn that the world is not full of fresh water, free oil oozing from the ground, and other resources that they can just TAKE without any justifiable reasons?

This is not an attack on American ideals, not an attack on American pride, not an attack on American Patriotism. So any Americans here please dont be so quick to judge my post. Just take a step back and think about it. Is it really worth all the efforts just to fulfill some "American Dream" at the expense of the rest of the world?

Thank you all for reading my post.
Very ignorant post.

The labeling is horrible. Everyone has their standards of what is excessive. I supposed we (the American general public) live in excess. <_<

Some say we shouldn&#39;t drive SUV&#39;s. You failed to mention those that live in excess in the Arab world.....better yet the rich world.

It seems you have honed in America because you would like to live here. :lol: :lol:

Otherwise, you would have realized that many "rich" people live in excess.
If you get water from a well, be happy.

There are Americans that do that too.

[MagicNakor]

Originally posted by bujub22+13 April 2004 - 14:44--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bujub22 @ 13 April 2004 - 14:44)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-MagicNakor@13 April 2004 - 09:36
Like the Tyco CEO. I wish I had a birthday party like that.

:ninja:
hell i wish i had a million dollar puffy party&#33; ;)


but hey they earn there money and are spending it anyway they want &#33;
hell i would&#33;...but it must be pretty expensive driving jets all day with gas prices at alll time high?? [/b][/quote]
Well, the ex-Tyco CEO didn&#39;t really earn the money. ;) He&#39;s being charged with grand larceny, falsifying business records, violating state business laws, tax evasion, and fraud, I believe. I don&#39;t think the jury&#39;s decided on his fate yet.

:ninja:

[j2k4]

There will always be the richest (Bill Gates), the super-rich (Rupert Murdoch, Sumner Redstone, George Soros), the very rich (Paul McCartney, Oprah Winfrey), the merely-rich (Travolta and most other movie-people), the wealthy (none especially notable, name-wise), the well-off (many, many people), and the comfortable (some of whom live in my neighborhood; not including me, of course).

Likewise, there will always be similar varieties of the poor and less-fortunate, from "hard time paying the bills" to "grinding, Haitian-style poverty".

The rich exhibit altruism to the extent that they can, or want to; they also treat themselves rather well, as we all know.

We all aspire to wealth, don&#39;t we?

One thing to keep in mind, though:

Wealth is not a zero-sum game; the fact of Bill Gates&#39; or John Travolta&#39;s wealth has not the slightest thing to do with the relative "poorness" of the poorest person on earth.

What the rich have is money, and so are equipped to create a higher standard of living for everyone by the fact of seeking to preserve their wealth.

Money does not accrue interest automatically; it must be "put to work" in order to do so, and thus has at least the potential to benefit those further down the economic ladder.

Poor people don&#39;t own businesses or employ people.

Though Bill Gates has donated astounding amounts of money to a variety of worthy causes, the best thing he does for the less-fortunate is to continue being rich, as, in the long-run, many more people benefit thereby.

Sorry to be spouting basic economics here, but an occasional reminder seems appropriate. ;)

[dwightfry]

I was watching this show on Donald Trump. He said, "I like fancy stuff, sometimes I don&#39;t even like the stuff, I just like having them."

For some reason I used to have respect for Trump, but after that....not so much. I suppose almost anyone with his kind of money would be like that though. I would like to think that I would only buy what I would enjoy, and not stuff just to show off.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by dwightfry@13 April 2004 - 11:55
I was watching this show on Donald Trump. He said, "I like fancy stuff, sometimes I don&#39;t even like the stuff, I just like having them."

For some reason I used to have respect for Trump, but after that....not so much. I suppose almost anyone with his kind of money would be like that though. I would like to think that I would only buy what I would enjoy, and not stuff just to show off.
I don&#39;t like showboating all the time but it&#39;s not a big a deal.

In some cases it is good. It shows a sense of style. Look at basketball. There&#39;s no reason to do different styles of dunks but it pleases the fans.

[DWells55]

This thread should be "What Is With Rich People&#39;s Unlimited Wants". there is a lot of poverty in America. The American general public is nothing like this. I live in a rich snob town, and we&#39;re not even close to that.

Edit: Now that I read it over a bit more, that was very stereotypical. I&#39;m gonna have to go make a thread "What Is With Brits&#39; Tea and Crumpets?" :lol: .

[Busyman]

Originally posted by DWells55@13 April 2004 - 14:28
This thread should be "What Is With Rich People&#39;s Unlimited Wants". there is a lot of poverty in America. The American general public is nothing like this. I live in a rich snob town, and we&#39;re not even close to that.

Edit: Now that I read it over a bit more, that was very stereotypical. I&#39;m gonna have to go make a thread "What Is With Brits&#39; Tea and Crumpets?" :lol: .
What&#39;s funny is there weren&#39;t any Americans stereotyping Brits or anything of the like.

If you are on top there&#39;s no need to say much. If you are on the bottom, you talk bad about the people that you think are on top.

[B.Helto]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez@13 April 2004 - 10:32
i may have used John as an example but can we look at this on a more general setting?

like the American general public?
No.

[J'Pol]

I believe it was a Canadian who started the thread.

Oh and I think that currently the "richest" person is asessed to be Ingvar Kamprad, the Swede who formed IKEA.

Current estimate of wealth &#036;53,000,000,000

Mr Gates currently &#036;46,600,000,000

Apparently Mr Kamprad is famous for a relatively frugal lifestyle. He is said to drive an old Volvo and fly economy class.

The main reason he has overtaken Mr Gates is not because of any clever move on his part. It is simply that his wealth is actually in Crowns, of which he is said to have 400,000,000,000. However Mr Gates fortune is in Dollars. Which have been slipping back badly for quite some time.

[Darth Sushi]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez@13 April 2004 - 11:32
i may have used John as an example but can we look at this on a more general setting?

like the American general public?
Yes, by all means since every American have two planes parked in the garage and we all drive hummers. :P It&#39;s also much easier to park my plane at Walmart when you have a handicap sticker. <_<

[james_bond_rulez]

Originally posted by j2k4@13 April 2004 - 05:44
There will always be the richest (Bill Gates), the super-rich (Rupert Murdoch, Sumner Redstone, George Soros), the very rich (Paul McCartney, Oprah Winfrey), the merely-rich (Travolta and most other movie-people), the wealthy (none especially notable, name-wise), the well-off (many, many people), and the comfortable (some of whom live in my neighborhood; not including me, of course).

Likewise, there will always be similar varieties of the poor and less-fortunate, from "hard time paying the bills" to "grinding, Haitian-style poverty".

The rich exhibit altruism to the extent that they can, or want to; they also treat themselves rather well, as we all know.

We all aspire to wealth, don&#39;t we?

One thing to keep in mind, though:

Wealth is not a zero-sum game; the fact of Bill Gates&#39; or John Travolta&#39;s wealth has not the slightest thing to do with the relative "poorness" of the poorest person on earth.

What the rich have is money, and so are equipped to create a higher standard of living for everyone by the fact of seeking to preserve their wealth.

Money does not accrue interest automatically; it must be "put to work" in order to do so, and thus has at least the potential to benefit those further down the economic ladder.

Poor people don&#39;t own businesses or employ people.

Though Bill Gates has donated astounding amounts of money to a variety of worthy causes, the best thing he does for the less-fortunate is to continue being rich, as, in the long-run, many more people benefit thereby.

Sorry to be spouting basic economics here, but an occasional reminder seems appropriate. ;)
I like ur thoughtful reply but really, my post is not about the rich. It&#39;s about Americans&#39; lavish lifestyle and using up un-necessary resources.

I mean, sure, everybody likes to be rich, and we all aspire to wealth, and that&#39;s what drives this nation. Incentives to create new ideas and innovations. You have intellitecual copyrights, you have patents, you have your industries. But while being a superpower in the face of the world. Other countries, like China, tries hard to outcompete the US by means of cheaper labour, more productive factories, more jobs available to its citizens to stimulate the economy and blah blah blah all the stuff.

I like to address to Busyman, since he&#39;s anti-everything whenever there is any civilized discussion regarding America, that you lighten up. I am not trying to put Americans down, stop being so defensive and say that everything I&#39;ve said is bs.

no i am not sterotyping anything. This is what we have studied in our geography class, I cam vividly recall my teacher discussion this with the class.

Let&#39;s look at an average American household compared to a Japanese household, now I dont have all the statistics numbers handy since I took that class while I was in high school. But the rationale is that on average, Americans consume more than other country in the world. Is it necessary to feed the American children so much that a good percentage of them are overweight?

While it is hard to draw up comparasons, I&#39;ve used the extreme example of John Travolta as an example to show just how far Americans will go to fulfill their "American Dream". Most families in the US have 2 cars, like, ppl complaint that the gas is so expensive, then why do you have two cars? Why not take the public transportation or car pool? And you have to buy the BIG screen TV, BIG american pickup trucks, BIG everything?

[J'Pol]

Why do people always assume that everyone else is striving for wealth.

I am not, if I had been I would have lived my life in a very different way.

I would describe my lifestyle as comfortable, I have no desire to accumulate wealth. No thanks on the eye of the needle scenario.

[james_bond_rulez]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@13 April 2004 - 11:06
Why do people always assume that everyone else is striving for wealth.

I am not, if I had been I would have lived my life in a very different way.

I would describe my lifestyle as comfortable, I have no desire to accumulate wealth. No thanks on the eye of the needle scenario.
but then that&#39;s only you :rolleyes:

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez+13 April 2004 - 21:08--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (james_bond_rulez @ 13 April 2004 - 21:08)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@13 April 2004 - 11:06
Why do people always assume that everyone else is striving for wealth.

I am not, if I had been I would have lived my life in a very different way.

I would describe my lifestyle as comfortable, I have no desire to accumulate wealth. No thanks on the eye of the needle scenario.
but then that&#39;s only you :rolleyes: [/b][/quote]
I can assure you it is not.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by bujub22@13 April 2004 - 13:44

but hey they earn there money and are spending it anyway they want &#33;

Nobody earns multi-million dollars a year.

They may get paid that, they do not earn it.

Most CEO&#39;s (and indeed Directors) are merely an expensive overhead, with the real work being done by Middle Management and the workforce.


The sooner that the "Investors" crack down on Fat Cat Salaries the better, in my opinion. However most Investors dont care about the individual Companies policies, just at the payback on the shares.

This allows the "Directors" to basically pay themselves what they want.


Let&#39;s look at an average American household compared to a Japanese household, now I dont have all the statistics numbers handy since I took that class while I was in high school. But the rationale is that on average, Americans consume more than other country in the world. Is it necessary to feed the American children so much that a good percentage of them are overweight?


Define "Average".

If you go by wealth, then please remember that there are an awful lot of very rich Americans (Relatively Speaking) per head of population, this drags the "average wage" to a point where most Americans earn well under the "Average".....

I believe that you can be officially classed as "Poor" in the USA, and still have a quite a good standard of living (as you can in the UK). This doesnt mean that all Poor Americans have a decent standard of Living, its merely a byproduct of the above paragraph....

Fuel is often used as an example of US "waste", however;

I would expect the USA (and Canada) to use a lot more fuel per citizen than say, the UK. It takes me something like 6 hours to drive to the other side of my country...some US and Canadian citizens need to drive further just to reach the nearest city.

For this reason, the respective Governments dont tax fuel as much as our more compact European countries do (esp the UK :angry: ) ... as fuel is cheap, there really is no pressure to have very efficiant cars...its a Catch22 situation.

Despite the lack of pressure, there are a lot more "Compacts" around these days compared to 10 years ago... And even the Euro countries, with the huge price of fuel, have their "Gas Guzzlers"...

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Rat Faced+13 April 2004 - 21:14--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rat Faced @ 13 April 2004 - 21:14)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-bujub22@13 April 2004 - 13:44

but hey they earn there money and are spending it anyway they want &#33;

Nobody earns multi-million dollars a year.

They may get paid that, they do not earn it.

Most CEO&#39;s (and indeed Directors) are merely an expensive overhead, with the real work being done by Middle Management and the workforce.


The sooner that the "Investors" crack down on Fat Cat Salaries the better, in my opinion. However most Investors dont care about the individual Companies policies, just at the payback on the shares.

This allows the "Directors" to basically pay themselves what they want. [/b][/quote]
I think that the vast bulk of the mega salaries are actually made up of productivity bonuses.

This means that in order for the "fat-cat" to make his fortune the company he heads must make a bigger fortune.

They obviously see this as worthwhile. Yes we payed him £3,000,000 in bonuses, but profits were up £30,000,000. Given that this is measurable, profit before he came in versus profit after, they and he are quite happy with the situation.

If he fails to perform he gets the basic (still very high) payment but is also shown the door.

If both parties are happy, then there is no problem.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@13 April 2004 - 20:36

I think that the vast bulk of the mega salaries are actually made up of productivity bonuses.

This means that in order for the "fat-cat" to make his fortune the company he heads must make a bigger fortune.

They obviously see this as worthwhile. Yes we payed him £3,000,000 in bonuses, but profits were up £30,000,000. Given that this is measurable, profit before he came in versus profit after, they and he are quite happy with the situation.

This is indeed "The Theory", and i would have no problem if I believed this were the case.

You dont have to look far to see huge "Productivity" bonus&#39; being paid for large companies that made a loss...

If the are fired, sorry "resign", then they also get a huge payoff.

When a large company Fires a crap CEO, with no payoff, the same way they do some poor slob on the shopfloor.........

I say again... despite the "Theory". The work is done mainly by Middle/Lower Management and the workforce. The Directors often just live off and take the credit for a "Team Effort", where they were not part of the Team.

No One deserves to be paid &#036;multi-millions as a salary.

I am willing to say that some, ie Some guy that has built his business up and works all the hours under the sun, and hasnt made it a public company etc etc etc....Deserves every penny he makes. He has earned it.

[hi_what_is_up!]

We americans do it because we are successful and we can afford to do it. It is our right to do so.

[Biggles]

I would tend to agree with J&#39;Pol

If I had wanted great wealth I would not have chosen to be a Civil Servant. I also suspect that on buying the occasional lottery ticket I would remember to check it, :blink: but I rarely do.

I have always been rather taken by the teachings of Epicurus. He advocated that the purpose of life was enjoyment. When questioned that many Stoics appeared to live a more extravagant life than himself, he replied, "when I walk the hills in solitude and dine on bread and fresh water I despise shallow pleasures and could not be happier".

Many take Epicurus&#39; teachings as licence to do as you please and, indeed, they could be. However, he taught caution. For every rampant sexual fling a bunny was waiting in trepidation, for every lavish meal there is a coronary by-pass lurking (ok I am paraphrasing now :rolleyes: ) and for every reckless drunken night a day of pain to follow.

In other words, do as you like but be kind to yourself. Consequently, comfortable is all that is required.

Happiness is not the product of wealth although it is perfectly possible to be wealthy and happy. However, it is certainly true that poverty can bring misery if that poverty prevents one from being kind to oneself. (I am not a sackcloth and ashes individual I would hasten to add)

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Rat Faced+13 April 2004 - 22:02--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rat Faced @ 13 April 2004 - 22:02)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@13 April 2004 - 20:36

I think that the vast bulk of the mega salaries are actually made up of productivity bonuses.

This means that in order for the "fat-cat" to make his fortune the company he heads must make a bigger fortune.

They obviously see this as worthwhile. Yes we payed him £3,000,000 in bonuses, but profits were up £30,000,000. Given that this is measurable, profit before he came in versus profit after, they and he are quite happy with the situation.

This is indeed "The Theory", and i would have no problem if I believed this were the case.

You dont have to look far to see huge "Productivity" bonus&#39; being paid for large companies that made a loss...

If the are fired, sorry "resign", then they also get a huge payoff.

When a large company Fires a crap CEO, with no payoff, the same way they do some poor slob on the shopfloor.........

I say again... despite the "Theory". The work is done mainly by Middle/Lower Management and the workforce. The Directors often just live off and take the credit for a "Team Effort", where they were not part of the Team.

No One deserves to be paid &#036;multi-millions as a salary.

I am willing to say that some, ie Some guy that has built his business up and works all the hours under the sun, and hasnt made it a public company etc etc etc....Deserves every penny he makes. He has earned it. [/b][/quote]
No footballer earns £5,000,000 per annum.

Or £500,000 per annum as far as I am concerned, or anywhere near it.

How much is Alan Shearer paid, for playing a game. How is that justified, because he can kick a ball hard and in a straight line.

Its a supply and demand thing mate. If someone is identified as a top executive then they must be paid top wages (in bonuses) to secure their services. I would rather we gave the salaries to the wealth creators than to the football players.

Look at some of the feckin semi-literate neds who will be paid millions of pounds in salaries and sponsorship deals. Wayne Rooney springs to mind.

There are worst crimes against society than top executives being paid large sums of money.

[4th gen]

I&#39;ve not read the thread, but I just thought I&#39;d say that Michael Schumacher makes approximately £30 million per year, before bonuses and sponsorship

[Moby.]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez@13 April 2004 - 19:55
no i am not sterotyping anything. This is what we have studied in our geography class, I cam vividly recall my teacher discussion this with the class.
Oh, well there&#39;s no way I can argue with that. :blink:

I guess we all do live extravagant lifestyles. So exactly what IS with all us Americans?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by 4th gen@13 April 2004 - 23:20
I&#39;ve not read the thread, but I just thought I&#39;d say that Michael Schumacher makes approximately £30 million per year, before bonuses and sponsorship
That&#39;s a shed load of money for brenging.

Are you sure that is not including bonuses and sponsorships mate.

Is that his "basic" from Ferarri.

[hi_what_is_up!]

Alex Rodriguez(spell?) makes to much godamn money and he isn&#39;t good enough to make 25 million dollars a year just for the game not for anything else.

[4th gen]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+13 April 2004 - 21:41--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol @ 13 April 2004 - 21:41)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-4th gen@13 April 2004 - 23:20
I&#39;ve not read the thread, but I just thought I&#39;d say that Michael Schumacher makes approximately £30 million per year, before bonuses and sponsorship
That&#39;s a shed load of money for brenging.

Are you sure that is not including bonuses and sponsorships mate.

Is that his "basic" from Ferarri. [/b][/quote]
Yeah, that&#39;s his basic Ferrari pay. The main sponsor on his baseball cap gives him &#036;20m US per year

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by 4th gen+13 April 2004 - 23:49--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (4th gen @ 13 April 2004 - 23:49)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@13 April 2004 - 21:41
<!--QuoteBegin-4th gen@13 April 2004 - 23:20
I&#39;ve not read the thread, but I just thought I&#39;d say that Michael Schumacher makes approximately £30 million per year, before bonuses and sponsorship
That&#39;s a shed load of money for brenging.

Are you sure that is not including bonuses and sponsorships mate.

Is that his "basic" from Ferarri.
Yeah, that&#39;s his basic Ferrari pay. The main sponsor on his baseball cap gives him &#036;20m US per year [/b][/quote]
Are you sure it isn&#39;t &#036;30 million

[4th gen]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@13 April 2004 - 22:00
Are you sure it isn&#39;t &#036;30 million
It&#39;s possible. I&#39;m quoting from memory a couple of years ago.

[tdos20]

is this about poverty? or are we all sitting in front of expensive computers, linked to the internet with warm bads and meals to look forward to, I would say in opinion only that the international share of wealth is a disgrace and also very difficult to do anythingabout short of revolution (I doubt even that would work).
If we&#39;re going to talk about americas "waste" of resources these issues must also be discussed, as far as I can tell all we as individuals can do is to play fair in these things by supporting charity ect, and by dl-ing johns movies not buying them.

[james_bond_rulez]

Originally posted by tdos20@13 April 2004 - 14:38
is this about poverty? or are we all sitting in front of expensive computers, linked to the internet with warm bads and meals to look forward to, I would say in opinion only that the international share of wealth is a disgrace and also very difficult to do anythingabout short of revolution (I doubt even that would work).
If we&#39;re going to talk about americas "waste" of resources these issues must also be discussed, as far as I can tell all we as individuals can do is to play fair in these things by supporting charity ect, and by dl-ing johns movies not buying them.
i like ur response :lol:

and no this is not about the rich and it&#39;s not about the poor

some of you seemed to have missed the point

[vidcc]

my plane is more economical on long trips than my SUV....perhaps the minivan could beat it :rolleyes:

[james_bond_rulez]

why does everybody has a plane nowadays? :blink:

[yonki]

Originally posted by bujub22@13 April 2004 - 14:44
but hey they earn there money and are spending it anyway they want &#33;

Thats the problem. They cant, or maybe they can and they do but its wrong. At least not with limited resources like water or food. The problem here is that you (or we) give money too much value :(

[clocker]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@13 April 2004 - 15:26


Its a supply and demand thing mate. If someone is identified as a top executive then they must be paid top wages (in bonuses) to secure their services. I would rather we gave the salaries to the wealth creators than to the football players.




An interesting post ( as usual) JP, but I think there is a flaw in the logic.
Fact is, really, these highly paid execs/CEOs have very little bargaining power.
After all, how many &#036;1 million/year jobs are out there?
Can you walk out the door of one business and walk right into another just like it?

The emporor seems to be without clothing in this case....no one has pointed it out to the stockholders yet is all.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by clocker@13 April 2004 - 19:28

Can you walk out the door of one business and walk right into another just like it?


Oddly enough, that does seem to happen, old buddy.

It&#39;s a small community, the CEO club. :P

4th Gen-

How does one "quote" from memory? :lol:

[masta.z]

Originally posted by j2k4@13 April 2004 - 10:44

We all aspire to wealth, don&#39;t we?

no


i personally aspire to be comfortable and happy...

[Shiranai_Baka]

About U.S. wasting resources, I pretty much agree because I live in NY, and well, people here LOVE to drive their cars even though the public transportation seems to be pretty much everywhere.