Is Deliberately Starving Millions of the Populace to death A Good Thing

StevieJ

fc123 wrote: »

If I am really honest with myself....would I work as hard and take the personal financial risks that I do every so often plus the hassle and responsibility to those we employ directly or indirectly if I took home the same as someone who works 9-5 PAYE in something fairly straightforward and stress free?
No, I wouldn't. I would just do 'enough' to get by and enjoy the free time.

So why do people like Branson, Buffet etc work so hard? any rewards they do earn do not add one jot to them or their families standard of living just another 0 on their balance sheet.

vivatifosi

StevieJ wrote: »

So why do people like Branson, Buffet etc work so hard? any rewards they do earn do not add one jot to them or their families standard of living just another 0 on their balance sheet.

Branson and Buffet are prime examples of people for whom a one size fits all approach to wages won't work. They are both very good at reading how to work a situation to their advantage, at seeing the market and taking advantage of it. If they were born in a communist country without recourse to owning the means of production, in my mind they'd either be a) looking for a way of escaping, or b) finding a way to get to the top of the party apparatus. Back to my point about human nature making true communism impossible as some will always be more equal than others (thanks Orwell).

I do see that there are things wrong with the inequalities of the capitalist system, but am more interested in finding ways to work within it to right these and to give people support, to work against the self-interest which is inherent in both capitalism and human nature; rather than changing the economic system, which will not happen. For example, I'm really interested in the work of Grameen Bank, which provides micro-finance for poor families in Bangladesh, or the work of Nobel prize winner Amartya Sen and his writing on development economics, which should get more of a mainstream hearing. Sen's work in particular in this area will become vitally important when we have wealthier countries ensuring their future food security by buying up tracts of fertile land in less-developed countries. There is much work to do there.

lostinrates

vivatifosi wrote: »

Agreed. And I find Jordan a vile woman. But if you honestly think that people like me, fc, and anyone else who runs their own business (and in my case work 3 other jobs as well because of the downturn) are willing to earn the same as everyone else when we are the ones taking the risks, putting out butts on the line, keeping our skills out there, you are crazy. If I had to earn the same as everyone else, not be rewarded for going the extra mile, frankly I wouldn't run my own business, couldn't be arsed and would be contented to do the bare minimum.

If you think it works that well in non-capitalist countries take a good look at Cuba, where those that are well trained (such as doctors) earn less than those with access to hard currency through their jobs as cleaners and bar-tenders in Western hotels. It can't all be down to American blockades, workers in the former Soviet Union and Eastern bloc countries also earned less. You can't expect an egalitarian utopia. Human behaviour, under whatever system - capitalism, communism, feudalism, fascism, won't allow it.

I'm skimming the thread (sorry) but read the first paragraph of this and had to say how clear and to the point it is.

You then have a situation where different things can happen:

the ''go getters'' now coasing have a lot of capacity to go get..thy might just get board and become a bit weird or they might look for ways to work outside the system to. I think a (outward appearing) communist system is possible: I don't think all the people in the system will play by the communist rules, and there will always me a multi tiered society: if not in wealth, in comfort, in ability, in a plethora of ways.

StevieJ

vivatifosi wrote: »

Branson and Buffet are prime examples of people for whom a one size fits all approach to wages won't work. They are both very good at reading how to work a situation to their advantage, at seeing the market and taking advantage of it. If they were born in a communist country without recourse to owning the means of production, in my mind they'd either be a) looking for a way of escaping, or b) finding a way to get to the top of the party apparatus. Back to my point about human nature making true communism impossible as some will always be more equal than others (thanks Orwell).
.

My point was why do these people work so hard now when the utility of the rewards they achieve for themselves (now) are absolutely negligible? I am trying to assess the motivation for working hard.

lostinrates

StevieJ wrote: »

My point was why do these people work so hard now when the utility of the rewards they achieve for themselves (now) are absolutely negligible? I am trying to assess the motivation for working hard.

The financial rewards?..obviously. Doesn't mean the stimulating efforts of being able to afford to have many work interest are rewarding. Business wise increases are worthwhile, even if on a personal scale the difference is minimal.

I think some people, like theose you raise, just love to do well. and good for them. Hw do we get people who like to succeed taking care of the country? Wy was Branson's bid over the banks not successful? (I don't know, not leading)? I don't think even the majority of successful entrepreners, leaders, head of their fields have the same...gusto?, as this very very small percentage of people.

StevieJ

lostinrates wrote: »

The financial rewards?..obviously.

I wouldn't say it was that obvious.

lostinrates

StevieJ wrote: »

I wouldn't say it was that obvious.

that was a lirism.....it doesn't say it with the emphasis on words a normal person would read it with...I suppose financial should have been in italics and the word personal should have been in there too really, I was being scatter brained...

Generali

StevieJ wrote: »

So why do people like Branson, Buffet etc work so hard? any rewards they do earn do not add one jot to them or their families standard of living just another 0 on their balance sheet.

I don't know about Branson but Buffet is well into his 70s and is into a 10 year process to give away 90% of his wealth to the Bill and Melissa Gates Foundation. Most of the rest is being given to his children with the instruction that the money is to be given to causes where the money can make a big difference.

He claims to "tapdance my way in to work".

Degenerate

StevieJ wrote: »

Potato bight and high taxes on Corn were the main culprits.

Potato blight only caused a famine because the peasant population were entirely dependent on potatoes for food. The reason that they were dependent on potatoes was that the plots of land they were granted by landowners to grow their own food (in return for working on the land) had been progressively reduced in size to the point where only the nutrient-dense potato could produce enough food. As the famine took hold, many of the absentee landowners continued to export their plentiful wheat crops while the peasants starved. All capitalist decisions.

Generali

Degenerate wrote: »

Potato blight only caused a famine because the peasant population were entirely dependent on potatoes for food. The reason that they were dependent on potatoes was that the plots of land they were granted by landowners to grow their own food (in return for working on the land) had been progressively reduced in size to the point where only the nutrient-dense potato could produce enough food. As the famine took hold, many of the absentee landowners continued to export their plentiful wheat crops while the peasants starved. All capitalist decisions.

The system they were operating under would be best described as mercantilist. If there was free trade, food could have been imported to avert the famine. I'm not trying to support the Laws in place at the time in any way, just making the point that they were trying to support the pre-capitalist system rather than being capitalist.