Slashdot Mirror
The Almighty Buck
The NYT Magazine this week focuses on a topic near and dear to its heart: money. Stories about the dotcom boom, priorities, the cult of Wall Street. Some of the stories are interesting, as with this comparison of how far a dollar goes depending on where you live. Some are disturbing, like this one on CEO salaries. And several are (unintentionally) humorous, like this one about bankrupt Etoys and this one, by a rich writer who believes everyone else is rich too.
It's true.
Fact is, we spend more than most people in the world make. We're a consumptionist society. We invented disposable plates and cups and diapers and everything else. Sake of convienience, isn't it?
I agree with his article where it describes the 'poor' of the US as wanting things they can't afford. Poor here is defined as "earning between $17,000 and $34,000 a year."
I don't make much more than that, and I've got all of these computers, and an XBox, and a Dreamcast, and...well, not to get too far into it, but I've bought a lot of crap I don't need, but I want. I have nobody but myself to blame.
But don't hide under a rock and take this article as a joke. I've started to think about what the hell I'm spending all of this money on long before I read the article.
Next time you buy 3 DVD's at Best Buy, take a step back. Do yourself a favor.
It sounds to me like he thinks every American is rich. He has a point.
How many color televisions and refrigerators are owned by the typical poor person in America? How many color televisions and refrigerators are owned by the typical Bangledeshi?
How many times per week does the typical poor American get to eat clean food, versus his Third World counterpart?
Health care may not be free, but *no* injured person is turned away from an emergency room.
Poor people today don't have to worry about many problems that would have killed even rich people 75 years ago, so I think the author is justified in regarding virtually all Americans as rich.
Not to deny that these people are poor, but don't fall into the common trap of believing that a dollar number represents some objective thing.
A dollar isn't a dollar. A dollar is what you can *buy* with it.
When I lived in a Mexican fishing village I rented a house for $4/mo.
A lobster was less than a dime, as was a bushel basket of tomatoes or a 10 lb. watermelon.
Industrially manufactured goods are beyond the reach of many people, ( so they still have active communities instead of watching television), but the necessities of life are always inline with local incomes.
It's called the free market. Prices of locally produced items are local *variables,* and baring disaster and famine, food and shelter is often *cheaper,* ( in the real buying power), than it is in more "developed" countries.
I have never lived among more sociable and *happier* people than those with a self-sustaining local economy. True poverty is a lack of food, clothing, shelter and community, *not* lack of money.
KFG
Shit, dude, it doesn't matter how much you have, you'll always be wanting a little more. Psychological studies have shown that people's happiness levels is relatively set, and while major events may elevate or depress their overall happiness (such as winning the lottery for happiness or death of a loved one for misery), before too long people are back to their previous happiness levels. So, even if you think you'd be damned happy and things would be great if you won the lottery and became a millionaire, that happiness would be relatively short-lived, I'm afraid. Essentially, you'd find other shit to bitch about.
I could not justify my existence if I were a turkey farmer. Would I terminate myself? Undoubtably, yes.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
* Good CEOs are very scarce.
* Good CEOs build companies and produce profits.
Therefore, good CEOs are worth a lot of money.
There's two problems with this:
1. Even poor CEOs are paid extremely well.
As seen in the article Edward E. Whitacre has led SBC for the past 12 years, his results? Below average growth. Now he may have done good things for other companies in the past, but he's simply been mediocere for SBC, yet doesn't receive a mediocere CEO salary.
When the board actually does wise up and fire a CEO, the exCEO receive multimillion dollar severence packages. And what did they do to earn this? Balance sheets with wonderful red accents.
2. When a company does well, those in the company should be rewarded. From top to bottom. But this isn't what happens. In 1999 CEO salaries increased 37%, while the average worker's salary increased a measly 2.7%.
Between 1990 and 2000 CEO pay has increased 571%. By comparison, the US's GDP over the same time period only increased 3.7% anually, or 37%. Since average corporate performance couldn't possibly outstrip the GDP growth by 15 times, something is wrong. Think of it this way. If the minimum wage increased along at the same rate as CEO salaries, a janitor would be making $25.50 an hour, instead of a measly $5.15.
There are very real economic issues to be considered. I suggest you read up about how The Market actually works. For starters try United for a Fair Economy.
We as Americans are vaguely aware that we are better off that most people in the world. I thought I 'got it' before I travelled a bit. I know I could have been the one who posted how hard it is to raise a family in New York.
No.
I tell you truly: a homeless person anywhere in the US is far better off than the average African. We are so steeped in wealth, what one person I met called "an embarrassment of riches", we have no perspective.
We truly do not understand what poor means. Not a clue. The average american roughing it in the great outdoors brings more stuff in his backpack than the average african ever owns.
No running water. No electricity (ha!). No roof. No car. No bus. No sidewalks or pavement. No shoes. Nothing.
Disease is rampant; 80% of the population is HIV positive in Malawi. The average age is 15.
If the world is getting you down, take a trip to Malawi. It will change your perspective.