MIKE STH
Member
Registered: Feb 2000
Location: Moved to Clie Land
Posts: 331 |
But how would the redistribution of wealth be "the right thing"?
As an example, a man(or woman) creates something out of nothing, markets it and receives fair compensation for it's value. As our society uses money as a form of barter, we will suppose that the person becomes wealthy from their efforts. Wealth is the reward. Meanwhile, Joe Schmoe (apologies to anyone named the same) sits at home and laments the short deck he has been delt. He cites his lack of care as a child, his social status, his location, every excuse with the exception of the truth which was that he never applied himself. He believes that the world owes him by virtue of the fact that he exists. He begrudges the wealthy individual because "they had all the opportunities" or "they earned it on other's backs". But, again, the wealthy individual had applied themselves.
Meanwhile, society is telling the wealthy individual that he should be supportive of the whiner "because you have no heart". Society proclaims that the wealthy individual "owes" the lackey a job, position, house, $$$ etc. The wealthy individual supposes that he must be wrong because everyone is telling him so, so he relents and hires the whiner. Naturally, the whiner having no skills and no ambition, does not advance the corporation or product, he just sits back and collects his stipend believing that it is owed him (as he has learned throughout his life). Finally, the corporation is overrun with whiners who are receiving compensation for nothing,(read ENRON) this results in the truly productive employees questioning their offerings and they leave and withdraw their ideas and energies. Guess what happens next? The corporation collapses and no benefit is afforded to society as the product is withdrawn, the economic influence is absent and the growth/employment opportunities evaporate. Not only does the wealthy individual stop making their product, but they become disenchanted and disengaged and withdraw their economic force from the market.
Not only does the wealthy individual lose money, they also lose faith in the system that rewards lackluster performance and disciplines productivity. Other segments learn from the example and the trend continues.
This is happening daily. There should be no dishonor in applying oneself and being productive. Why do we reward those that chose not to do, yet punish those that perform? Joe Schmoe has no right to any portion of the rewards that were granted for service and product because he did not produce�.he only consumed. What lessons are we learning and how can we reverse this trend?
*** Keep in mind that I am referring to honorable people that produce a viable commodity or service and back it up to the best of their ability. They make no excuses and take full responsibility for their actions and repercussions. That in no way is offered as a defense for those that try to cheat an honorable profession by shortcuts, lies and innuendo like the players in the Enron debacle. Remember ~ there were surely honorable people at Enron putting forth their best efforts daily. They learned that those that were rewarded accumulated wealth for the wrong reasons. The sad part is that dishonorable people were able to fleece honorable people of their life�s rewards.
quote:
Originally posted by LaughingMan
I think what is happening here is that we are so concerned about efficiency (do things right) that we have forgotten about effectiveness ( doing the right thing). And I think the incidents that happened at Enron, Worldcom, Tyco, and other similar establishments have taught us how dangerous this "every man for himself/herself" mentality can be.
__________________
"Stupid Handspring."
|
05-19-2003 12:24 PM
Email This Page to Someone! |
Receive updates to this thread
]