The Indispensability Problem

Discussion in 'Economics & Trade' started by LafayetteBis, Dec 3, 2018.

  1. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,430
    Likes Received:
    614
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    From the Economist*: Key-person risk is alive and kicking

    Excerpt:
    America, hell-bent since inception to Make a Quick Buck, does not have Europe's long-term vision/understanding that "time takes time". Everything, literally everything, is NOW orientated - whether its the latest thingamabob for the young or megabucks for the not-so-young.

    What's the bother? The bother is the fact that any country axiomatically orientated towards the accumulation of Wealth cannot avoid Income Disparity - and the US is certainly no exception. Certainly, we cannot all have the same income. That silly notion found its timely death along with that of autocratic Communism. (China is "communist" in name only.)

    But, on the other end, not all of us can make a quick megabuck, though such may indeed be our fondest dream. The problem derives from the fact that, "A quick megabuck is precisely what the American mentality is today!" Which means what?

    These info-graphics rather than words -
    As regards Wealth:
    [​IMG]

    As regards Total US Income:
    [​IMG]

    Does the above characterize the world you want to live in? Because the statistics behind these graphics are correct, and the consequence to our way of life as a country is awesome. Whyzzat?

    Because in order for the above to happen, those at the top garner all and those at the bottom earn next-to-nothing. That situation can only lead to one consequence inevitably.

    Civil disobedience. (And that's a kind-phrase for what could happen awesomely ...)
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2018
  2. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    6,413
    Likes Received:
    1,752
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I guess this is in some sense an example of failure in the markets. Or at least inherent failure prone in organisational bureaucracies.

    Even my grandma who was Conservative as could be recognized that big company CEOs were swindeling shareholders out of millions by giving themselves excessive salaries and bonuses.

    Let me say that 400-900 thousand total compensation would be reasonable for the CEOs of these big companies, but they're getting ten times that, often more.
    What it is is legalized fraud.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2018

Share This Page