Originally posted by generalissimo
please, reply to the whole post, not just the parts you can answer with your cheap and baseless rhethoric you copied and pasted from "communism for dummies" or whatever other crappy book you read.
It is a bit rough to reject this argument on the grounds that there are a list of other arguments which are not covered. I liked what was said. Within your sweeping list of generalisations was your claim that
"the job you get (usually) depends on your level of education, those who work hard achieve more than others, its simple and its fair."
Working for a living is unlikely to make anyone rich, ever. For example, if you learned a useful trade like plumbing, then the way to turn this into wealth is to get other plumbers to do the work while you set up a business. That is a simple model but you get the point. In many businesses, the way to make money is to work in sales on generous commission. Again, the people doing productive work get what they earn, but if you are good at selling - or you are selling a product that has a ready market - then you can earn vastly more. If you are a teacher then over the years you will receive thank you cards from grateful pupils who have used your skills to get qualified and earn far more than you, as a teacher, ever hope to earn.
Regrettably, as you move up the ladder, you will find an increasing proportion of total jerks who make a fine living out of total waffle. It is unlikely that you will be managed by people better qualified than you are - depends on the business you are in but as a general rule, it is unlikely.
Maybe you will try the professions - say Law. You will discover that the costs of qualifying are such that they favour students with wealthy parents. You will then find that, while your excellent educational achievements get you in at the bottom, as you try to progress, the profession becomes less about law and more about building a client base - preferably achieved in social settings like a golf club. You will find it helps to be male, and it helps to have the self esteem that comes with a privileged background. Actually, you will find that every law firm values good legal work - but not much. Crap work will suffice for most purposes.
But surely the bigger firms are more professional and dynamic? Maybe not. If one thing exercises the minds of the financial world it is this - that it is very hard to get a firm to be run for the benefit of its shareholders. All the way along, people are distorting their work to selfish ends. They give investors what is expected - rarely do they give then much more; often they give less.
One of the greatest delusions is the belief that the people at the top are really capable and clever. Frequently, they share the same delusion about themselves. In fact, of course, we encounter a steady stream of business gurus selling total codswollop to the idiots in charge, who hope this will substitute for a proper understanding of their roles. Because they ride the tiger for a while then bail out or are pushed.
Most organisations rely on inertia, in which hard working people do what they always do without asking too many hard questions. As long as they think their wage is "fair" they do not question what is happening around them. "Fair" being a strange concept that means whatever you expect it to mean and nothing much besides.
Yes there are moments in the business cycle when some firms do something really clever. Henry Ford was clever for example. If entrepreneurship was really that general, then maybe Capitalism would live up to its own fantasies. Sadly, there is a cycle to all things in business and for every new, interesting business that emerges among us to general applause, there is a vast swathe of rubbish sinking into the mire. And that is where many of us are condemned to earn our crust.
what gives?
16 Nov '09 18:22
Back to Top