JoeTheBro said:
Hahah, you're just proving my point with everything you say! Let's think of making money as a game. You keep playing with a friend over and over and he keeps on winning. Instead of admitting he is a better player or your strategy sucks, you accuse him of cheating. At least in America and the majority of the world the game is fair and the winner doesn't cheat. If he did he may win a game or two but he'll usually get caught before making big money. A major concept in business is if you set out to make money you will do ok. If you set out to make strong relationships and please the consumer you can do far better. If Scrooge was real, he would have been a horrible business man. (I do realize I'm going off on a tangent) |
The previous comment did not prove your point at all. You have failed to put together a convincing argument using the previous post.
Personally, I couldn't care less about money. Does this mean I am lazy? Does this mean I waste my money? Of course not. It is highly dependent on the individual. Many people take home low-end or average wages (and are not resentful of the psychopaths making stacks of cash - in some instances - by unscrupulous means or through exploitation of the poorest, least educated people - whilst believing they are helping via competitve advantage and trickle down) and work very hard because they have genuine passion for what they do. They may work for a charity, be a teacher or a nurse. They might love tending to gardens or building houses and so on.
Money and the market is not free, its full of manipulation and propaganda and often more thought for the bottom line than compassion. When your position is on the line you are more likely to let your own ego be swallowed by the group ego to satisfy the needs for the corporate entity - be it a business, media group or trade union. This is what leads to psychopathic and immoral behaviour. It doesn't have to be economically based, though psychopathic behaviour is seen more commonly at the big money end according to quite a bit of research.
I do agree that businesses 'pleasing' the consumers will do better than those that do not. That, of course, is the front end. However, falling into Godwin's law, Hitler won man of the year, had a successful Olympics in 1936 and pleased many 'consumers' - does this mean all was lovely in the background, for the average Karl working for the German corporate entity? Does this mean all wealthy people are immoral? Perhaps not, but then it is a matter of perspective.
Yes.
www.spacemag.org - contribute your stuff... satire, comics, ideas, debate, stupidy stupid etc.







