MrJukoVette said this in post #16 : The class wars, the greedy rich and the generous, liberal poor. Scott, stop reading Marx.
Try looking at the percentage of disposable income spent on charity. Personally, I rarely give to charity, but it is a well known fact that during events such as children in need, band aid, etc etc, the people who pledge the highest percentage, (and who are the highest percentage of pledgers), are amongst the poorest people.
I can only sugggest that you do not actually know any rich people, since rich people become rich by not giving away their money, probably due to another amusing fact. Lower middle class people, (those people who are not quite on the bread line, but are not far off) are generally the right wing, republican type voters.
Basically, it is down to chav's like you that we have to put up with the likes of Bush.
scottc said this in post #19 : ...rich people become rich by not giving away their money...
Oh really? Is that how it works? You've got an awfully simplistic view of the way of things. Let me ask you this: if Bill Gates makes $4M per day and gives away $3M per day to charitable causes of his preference, does leaving him with an income of "only" $1M per day mean he is no longer rich because he is "giving away" his money? It's not an absolute requirement to use your brain through life, but I'd advise it. Try imagining for a moment that you don't know everything about everything and see if the above makes any more sense to you.
Oh really? Is that how it works? You've got an awfully simplistic view of the way of things. Let me ask you this: if Bill Gates makes $4M per day and gives away $3M per day to charitable causes of his preference, does leaving him with an income of "only" $1M per day mean he is no longer rich because he is "giving away" his money? It's not an absolute requirement to use your brain through life, but I'd advise it. Try imagining for a moment that you don't know everything about everything and see if the above makes any more sense to you.
You seem to be under the impression that anyone with money will give money to charity. This is absurd. If you believe this, you do not know any rich people. I would be willing to wager that I have to meet on a daily basis more wealthy people than you. The people that I meet on a daily basis as clients, are generally the stingiest people you could come accross. I have met many a millionaire, and every one of them is expecting the other guy to pick up the tab. This is a general trait, and if you can't take that, then remain in your own little bubble. I have friends that have nothing, and they are far more willing to buy the drinks than any millionaire I have met.
scottc said this in post #21 : You seem to be under the impression that anyone with money will give money to charity. This is absurd. If you believe this, you do not know any rich people.
You're right. This would be absurd. Making assumptions is, by nature, absurd. You are officially today's Master of the Obvious.
quote:
I would be willing to wager that I have to meet on a daily basis more wealthy people than you. The people that I meet on a daily basis as clients, are generally the stingiest people you could come accross.
Oops there you go: making assumptions. Since you don't have any idea what I do on a "daily basis", you have no grounds for placing a wager. In fact I am currently working for two people who perfectly match your description. One of them averages an income of $1.6M per month. Unbelievable money to us middle-classers. Does he kick down anything? Bonuses? Better sallaries? Hell no and don't hold your breath.
Yes, these people are out there.
quote:
I have met many a millionaire, and every one of them is expecting the other guy to pick up the tab. This is a general trait, and if you can't take that, then remain in your own little bubble.
That's nice for you, but your personal experience out in Euro-land does not represent the culmination of wealthy people around the world. You are guilty of "profiling" which is the process of judging people according to a model of assumptions that gets people into trouble quite often due to inaccuracies of the assumptions.
quote:
I have friends that have nothing, and they are far more willing to buy the drinks than any millionaire I have met.
That's nice too, but meaningless in the scope of your assertations. It doesn't matter if you meet a hundred millionaires a day for the rest of your life. If you assume they are all the same you'll never see anything different. Personally I have met, know and have family who are wealthy and are exactly the opposite of what you describe. You're trying to sell me on the idea that they don't exist when I know for a fact that they do. So how do you like them apples?
So you work for 2 rich people. As a job, I have the responsibility of entertaining MD's. I have met the leaders of companies including Shell, BP, Orange, Sun Life, Google, Phillips Petrolium, and numerous others. Guess what? Many, many of them are American's. In my career, I have worked for HSBCIB, ABN Amro, Deutsche Bank, Credit Suisse First Boston, and my current employer.
I would say that American rich people are generally the most stingy in the world. You say that you "know" your 2 employers. Do you know them to such an extent that you go out with them to dinner?
Now when it comes to generalisations, you claimed that, given the fact he was rich, he obviously would not be trying to save a few bucks. This is a stupid assertation. This simply shows the fact that you do not know anything about rich people. People who do not become rich by giving money away.
Bear in mind that you originally stated that "because he is rich, he would not be trying to save a few bucks".
You were making the (rather stupid, and rather ignorant) sweeping statement. How do you like them apples.
scottc said this in post #23 : Bear in mind that you originally stated that "because he is rich, he would not be trying to save a few bucks".
Here's where you're wrong, turkey. I did not say that "because of A, then B must be". I put out the possibility. It is a possibility that you denied as impossible. You're just, plain wrong. It doesn't matter one bit to me who your clients are; they don't earn you brownie points. I simply mentioned two of my clients because you once again made ignorant assumptions about me when you have no position to do so. So kindly jump off a bridge or something. SEE YA.
I agree with Sean that there are rich people who are greedy and those who aren't. Scottc mentioning the drinks remembered me when i went out with my friend and we met a group of guys who were my friend's friends who are rich as hell. So anyways, everything was fine, we had fun and then waitress brings the bill - $800 something. Before i could get some money out of my pocket, somebody already paid the whole bill leaving some huge tips. I decided it would be more appropriate to keep my "fair share" with me.
Point being is, not all rich are greedy and not all poor are generous.
Here's where you're wrong, turkey. I did not say that "because of A, then B must be". I put out the possibility. It is a possibility that you denied as impossible. You're just, plain wrong. It doesn't matter one bit to me who your clients are; they don't earn you brownie points. I simply mentioned two of my clients because you once again made ignorant assumptions about me when you have no position to do so. So kindly jump off a bridge or something. SEE YA.
Here is what you ACTUALLY said.
quote:
Maybe he did it to save $2/hr. Maybe he did it ot help out a poor lady with whom he empathized and wanted to help out. My guess would be that nine times out of ten, when it comes to people who are financially well off, the latter would be the case. Saving $2/hr is the kind of thing a gas station in Southern California or Arizona would do.
NINE TIMES OUT OF TEN. That sounds a bit more than a "possibility" to me. A "possibility" is winning the lottery. A "possibility" is being struck by lightning. A 90% possibility is not a possibility at all. It is an almost certain probability.
Now who is giving the "ignorant assumptions"?
BTW, the "possibility" of me "jumping off a bridge or something" is around about the same as your "possibility" of Bernard Kerik employing an illegal immigrant to "help a poor person out".
It's called "opinion" and "conjecture". Look it up if it's confusing.
Actually nevermind, you win, scottc. I didn't realize I was dealing with the Master of the Universe. You can have your pissing contest all to yourself.
12-12-2004 02:56 PM
