Conquer Club

Some people seem to hate CEO, business owners in general, and even business's themselves. Some people seem to hate politicians, and the government. Lets see what the numbers look like with this cute little poll.

I thought they were all the same person! X(

How about all of those are professions where people value essentially the same things -- power and money.
How about there are a good many people who value other things and who are just plain tired of being told that anyone NOT going after power and money is a lazy bum.

THAT is what a lot of this anger nowadays is really and truly about.

PLAYER57832 wrote:How about all of those are professions where people value essentially the same things -- power and money.
How about there are a good many people who value other things and who are just plain tired of being told that anyone NOT going after power and money is a lazy bum.

THAT is what a lot of this anger nowadays is really and truly about.

I agree actually, but the two (public/private) should definitely NOT be mixed.

john9blue wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:How about all of those are professions where people value essentially the same things -- power and money.
How about there are a good many people who value other things and who are just plain tired of being told that anyone NOT going after power and money is a lazy bum.

THAT is what a lot of this anger nowadays is really and truly about.

I agree actually, but the two (public/private) should definitely NOT be mixed.

Sorry, but that is precisely the type of arguments I meant.

You get one life. You don't get a public one and a private one. They are the same

You can fight CEO/Business by not buying their products. But even when you threaten to remove politicians from office they still pass bills contrary to the will of the people. Give me a greedy company any day over a corrupt politician!

jay_a2j wrote:You can fight CEO/Business by not buying their products.

Businesses today are mostly for selling stocks, not products.

When all that is offered is the same basic garbage, there is no choice, not really.

They are both pretty bad but I would have to go with politicians.

Neither. They are all people and as a group no more evil or good than the rest of us.

PLAYER57832 wrote:Sorry, but that is precisely the type of arguments I meant.

You get one life. You don't get a public one and a private one. They are the same

So you are willing to give financial control to the same people who can force you to do shit at the point of a gun?

Baron Von PWN wrote:Neither. They are all people and as a group no more evil or good than the rest of us.

Of course. However, the profession is another matter. And, people act within their profession.

Also, a lot of the very worst evils are always perpetrated by people who are truly trying to do good. People who know they are doing bad, are mostly just insane. Even Hitler believed he was doing good. He was twisted, sick, but had he not believed in the utter "correctness" of what he did, he would not have succeeded.

john9blue wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Sorry, but that is precisely the type of arguments I meant.

You get one life. You don't get a public one and a private one. They are the same

So you are willing to give financial control to the same people who can force you to do shit at the point of a gun?

I don't give ANY control to people who might try to force me to do stuff at the point of a gun. Except the control to kill me.

I would prefer not to give control to people who think nothing of twisting every rule they can to get a few more hard-earned pennies from our pocket. However, right now, they have the control and it seems that most of the country is willing to cede their values to them.

the gov't makes the rules that biz and lawyers must follow, and enforces it with imprisonment or death at the barrel of a gun, all while getting a chunk of your paycheck before you even get your paycheck.

The government creates jobs, but those jobs do not create wealth. They only create income. There is no room in a government job for "new, bright ideas". Individuals and corporations come up with the ideas, and the ones that are beneficial to government are the ones the government hires/funds.

Private industry creates jobs than can create wealth. If you are in the private sector, and you notice something, a niche or a more efficient way to serve a customer, then you may by all means start your own business and creates jobs and can create wealth and provide better for their families. and more greedy taxes are paid too..

PLAYER57832 wrote:
I would prefer not to give control to people who think nothing of twisting every rule they can to get a few more hard-earned pennies from our pocket. However, right now, they have the control and it seems that most of the country is willing to cede their values to them.

I love how liberals bitch about companies taking their "hard earned pennies" when they HAVE a CHOICE to give to them, yet won't speak an ill word about the government taking their pennies via TAXES (of which they have no say)!

The worst is when one is the pocket of the other.

I could've sworn these two were similar (By business, we mean the ones at the TOP of the TOP).

Let's look at Dick Cheney with the help of wikipedia:

Cheney was Assistant to the President under Gerald Ford. When Rumsfeld was named Secretary of Defense, Cheney became White House Chief of Staff, succeeding Rumsfeld. He later was campaign manager for Ford's 1976 presidential campaign.

From 1978 to 1989, he was serving in the House of Representatives.

He promoted Wyoming's petroleum and coal businesses as well, and as a result, the federal building in Casper, a regional center of the fossil fuel industry, is named the Dick Cheney Federal Building.

He was Secretary of Defense from March 1989 to January 1993, during which he directed the invasions of Panama (BRAVO!) and Iraq. That position also allows him to decide what projects get scraped and which one's survive (a big plus when dealing in business). Also, Cheney was chairman and CEO of Halliburton Company from 1995 to 2000.

While serving as vice-president, he did his best in promoting the war and beefing up the powers of the president, while protecting his investments in the Vanguard Group, a company that runs a few detention centers.

_____________________________________________________________________

Dick Cheney's a politician and a businessman and there are plenty more like him. And, although there are businessmen (at the top) who have never had a career in politics, they still work hand-in-hand with politicians. So, how does one distinguish from these two monstrosities? Both seem too interconnected in my opinion.

Timminz wrote:The worst is when one is the pocket of the other.

Well put, that's exactly what I was saying earlier.

sorry for my ignorance, but why would you blame a company for hiring the best person possible, and that sometimes it is a person from the government? Should government employees be banned from the private sector? I agree there is a lot of corruption and power brokering in the "revolving door". I guess more stringent laws against corruption are in order. But private and public do not play by the same rules. They are the the same "sport" but not the same "game"

Phatscotty wrote:sorry for my ignorance, but why would you blame a company for hiring the best person possible, and that sometimes it is a person from the government? Should government employees be banned from the private sector? I agree there is a lot of corruption and power brokering in the "revolving door". I guess more stringent laws against corruption are in order. But private and public do not play by the same rules. They are the the same "sport" but not the same "game"

They may or may not be hiring the best person for the job, but it's more of a "you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours" kind of deal.

How does one fix this? It's a lot of gray area, and the law can be bent in their favor, so how does one deal with that?

But they go hand-in-hand, they help each other. They play the game and run the game, it's all up to them, Phatscotty.

When I think of "worst" as used in this context, I definitely think of "self-interested." And really, everyone is self-interested right? So, it's everyone. Including construction workers, teachers (I'm unbelievably angry at the anti-Christie ads in New Jersey made up by the teachers), police officers, lawyers, etc., etc., etc.

jay_a2j wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:
I would prefer not to give control to people who think nothing of twisting every rule they can to get a few more hard-earned pennies from our pocket. However, right now, they have the control and it seems that most of the country is willing to cede their values to them.

I love how liberals bitch about companies taking their "hard earned pennies" when they HAVE a CHOICE to give to them, yet won't speak an ill word about the government taking their pennies via TAXES (of which they have no say)!

I have plenty of say about our government. Only the wealthy and big stockholders really have much say about companies.

Get a grip jay. Or, simply look at the facts and not the opinions that too many seem to think pass for facts.

Well they both are, and they both aren’t. If that sounds confusing it’s because it is. Shock and horror there are nice and good CEO’s out there. Shock and horror there are nice and good government leaders out there.

Why and when are they evil? Well to address this I need to look at the definition of the word “federalism.” Wikipedia states: “The term federalism is also used to describe a system of the government in which sovereignty is constitutionally divided between a central governing authority and constituent political units (like states or provinces).”

The notion of federalism is an important concept in nations such as the United States. What is not immediately obvious to the casual observer is that it is also equally an important concept in any capitalist system as well. The opposite of the federal system presents problems in both the government and capitalist systems.

The first is the problem of the monopoly. While monopolies pose many problems, the biggest (from the point of view of the monopoly itself) is that competition is the primary motivator of innovation. Yes, there are exceptions, but for the most part, innovation and efficiency is only necessary when someone else is trying to replace them.

The second is the problem of “too big to fail.” When something is at that state, it is really “too big to succeed.” The threat of failure, like that of competition, keeps innovation fresh and people on their toes. The lack of either threat (and especially the lack of both threats) produces complacency and allows the tendency for people to … for want of a better word … do stupid things. Power corrupts and in turn leads to false self righteousness.

Governments generally are both monopolies and “too big to fail.” (This is why the Europeans are going crazy over the heretical notion that an American company (S&P) has downgraded Greek bonds to junk status. How dare they do that? Don’t they know that this is a “sovereign nation” they are dealing with? The government is clearly too big to fail, it is ever living. Never mind that few governments in Europe are over a hundred years old.)

Thus within both are the seeds of badness, because in many sense they share a common problem, “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

PLAYER57832 wrote:

john9blue wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Sorry, but that is precisely the type of arguments I meant.

You get one life. You don't get a public one and a private one. They are the same

So you are willing to give financial control to the same people who can force you to do shit at the point of a gun?

I don't give ANY control to people who might try to force me to do stuff at the point of a gun. Except the control to kill me.

I would prefer not to give control to people who think nothing of twisting every rule they can to get a few more hard-earned pennies from our pocket. However, right now, they have the control and it seems that most of the country is willing to cede their values to them.

Its the same with the proffession. CEO/Buisness in my opinion overall is neutral most are neutral some are good some are bad its the same with politicians/government. You can't just lable the two professions as "good" or "bad".

thegreekdog wrote:When I think of "worst" as used in this context, I definitely think of "self-interested." And really, everyone is self-interested right? So, it's everyone. Including construction workers, teachers (I'm unbelievably angry at the anti-Christie ads in New Jersey made up by the teachers), police officers, lawyers, etc., etc., etc.

especially in a greedy capitalist society. the only difference is that in capitalism people have access to wealth. almost everywhere else, the govt controls the wealth. therefore no person can ever get it on their own, they must know someone with authority or be a good weasel around the system