Sky News is trash. Tests the waters with spot for Nazi Cottrell, immediately regrets it.

Remove this Banner Ad

Do you also agree that someone born to a billionaire (Rupert Murdoch for example) has vastly more opportunity than someone born to a disabled, impoverished, heroin addict, in a ghetto or slum somewhere?

Not on account of anything the person has done. Just on account of circumstance.

Would you agree with that statement?

In this example the government has still provided equal opportunity, its the parents who have not provided equal opportunity.

The way the human species works is our parents make decisions for us until we are able to do so for ourselves.

The examples you have given are extreme on both sides, for the bulk of the population if you work hard at school and make the most of your education, go and get a good job, work hard, save and invest you will do well.

The key message I get out of your examples is that some people have kids who should not have them.
 
What; like entrenched social disadvantage, patriarchy and sexism?

If you really want equal opportunity, then when we consider that a white man born to a wealthy family has 100 times the opportunities of a minority woman born into poverty, we really should be redistributing some of that wealth from the wealthy to the poor, so the opportunities of both those two people are equal.

Once you level the playing field (so everyone has equal opportunities, regardless of their parents wealth, gender or background) we can judge outcomes.

The only colour capitalism cares about is the colour green, money.

If you run your own real-estate agent where you get a % of each commission yourself wouldn't you just be hiring the best people possible ? I mean if your not hiring the best person than you are shooting yourself in the foot and making less money.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

In this example the government has still provided equal opportunity, its the parents who have not provided equal opportunity.

The way the human species works is our parents make decisions for us until we are able to do so for ourselves.

The examples you have given are extreme on both sides, for the bulk of the population if you work hard at school and make the most of your education, go and get a good job, work hard, save and invest you will do well.

The key message I get out of your examples is that some people have kids who should not have them.
I’m really fascinated by this so called social disadvantage suffered by different people. What will really be interesting is when the high debt bearing socialist countries around the world are cut off from debt financing when the second GFC hits. Mal will have to stop doing what he does. Anyone who is reliant on welfare or so called equality measures will cope worse than those who are self-reliant!
 
The only colour capitalism cares about is the colour green, money.

If you run your own real-estate agent where you get a % of each commission yourself wouldn't you just be hiring the best people possible ? I mean if your not hiring the best person than you are shooting yourself in the foot and making less money.

It would be easier to just commit fraud, bribe a politician, send a few boys around to meet the opposition, collude with the opposition who already have a few boys...
 
From common sense in one thread...

Anyone can be a CEO, easiest job ever.
Oh not this s*** again... So that you can enlighten us all as to your intricate understanding of the position can you outline exactly what a CEO's position description looks like? I'm after an easy job and just want to make sure that I'm not over qualified....
 
Oh not this s*** again... So that you can enlighten us all as to your intricate understanding of the position can you outline exactly what a CEO's position description looks like? I'm after an easy job and just want to make sure that I'm not over qualified....
The hard-left are 99% funded by tax dollars, whether that's welfare or a public sector job. Suffice to say, they have NFI about the stresses and challenges of being a CEO in the private sector.
 
The hard-left are 99% funded by tax dollars, whether that's welfare or a public sector job. Suffice to say, they have NFI about the stresses and challenges of being a CEO in the private sector.

I’d suggest most people would be unaware of the responsibilities of being a CEO.

You just keep the hits coming.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Oh not this s*** again... So that you can enlighten us all as to your intricate understanding of the position can you outline exactly what a CEO's position description looks like? I'm after an easy job and just want to make sure that I'm not over qualified....

fatboygolf.jpg
 
This response, whatever you thought it meant, doesn't alter anything in my response.

My response is based on your opinions without checking facts.

The posting which contained your bigoted white man reply was an insight to the confirmation bias that exists in your reasoning
 
The hard-left are 99% funded by tax dollars, whether that's welfare or a public sector job. Suffice to say, they have NFI about the stresses and challenges of being a CEO in the private sector.
Any source or facts to back up a statement that most people would consider completely ridiculous?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I’d suggest most people would be unaware of the responsibilities of being a CEO.

You just keep the hits coming.
I was the CEO of a company that grew to 21 employees. At this point I handed the responsibility on to my 2iC who was a workaholic, doing 70+ hours every week. The left seem to believe that any lazy fat cat can run a company, as demonstrated by the posts above. Nope, it generally requires incredible work ethic and skill.
Any source or facts to back up a statement that most people would consider completely ridiculous?
I said hard-left, not the left. Most of these are professors (or their kids) in sociology departments. Perhaps we could do a survey on bf sometime on who is on the supply-side and the demand-side of tax dollars.
 
I was the CEO of a company that grew to 21 employees. At this point I handed the responsibility on to my 2iC who was a workaholic, doing 70+ hours every week. The left seem to believe that any lazy fat cat can run a company, as demonstrated by the posts above. Nope, it generally requires incredible work ethic and skill.

I said hard-left, not the left. Most of these are professors (or their kids) in sociology departments. Perhaps we could do a survey on bf sometime on who is on the supply-side and the demand-side of tax dollars.

Is the CEO of a company that grew to 21 employees really a CEO?
Sounds like a lot of red tape/bureaucracy to manage 21 employees.
 
I said hard-left, not the left. Most of these are professors (or their kids) in sociology departments. Perhaps we could do a survey on bf sometime on who is on the supply-side and the demand-side of tax dollars.
Every professor I know is an accomplished author and earns income from articles as well as books, and TBH half of them are from RMIT which is a private institution with a high ratio of international students (somewhere between 25% and 33% of enrollments at a guess). Even just that small segment of the working population would be hard to audit at arm's length. FWIW the most prolific of all of them is a staunch libertarian, definitely not of 'the left'.

I do agree that the government is too eager to hand funds out to some institutions - Adani getting 1 billion is only part of the story, the 60 years of water rights issued during a horrible drought in rural areas is a travesty considering we are now funding farmers on marginal properties, and $444m goes a long way towards solving other issues rather than just handing out to a foundation with no tender process for the funds.
Education spending is at least an investment.
 
Is the CEO of a company that grew to 21 employees really a CEO?
Sounds like a lot of red tape/bureaucracy to manage 21 employees.
How big a company have you personally managed? 0?

I found it too stressful at 21 employees to carry on, given life events. Those who manage companies numbering in their thousands are truly gifted, and deserve their wages.
 
Every professor I know is an accomplished author and earns income from articles as well as books, and TBH half of them are from RMIT which is a private institution with a high ratio of international students (somewhere between 25% and 33% of enrollments at a guess). Even just that small segment of the working population would be hard to audit at arm's length. FWIW the most prolific of all of them is a staunch libertarian, definitely not of 'the left'.

I do agree that the government is too eager to hand funds out to some institutions - Adani getting 1 billion is only part of the story, the 60 years of water rights issued during a horrible drought in rural areas is a travesty considering we are now funding farmers on marginal properties, and $444m goes a long way towards solving other issues rather than just handing out to a foundation with no tender process for the funds.
Education spending is at least an investment.
I tend to agree with the second half, but will do more research on the topic.
 
How big a company have you personally managed? 0?

I found it too stressful at 21 employees to carry on, given life events. Those who manage companies numbering in their thousands are truly gifted, and deserve their wages.
The point is that 'CEO' is an actual role. It's not just a nickname for the person at the top of a company...

...that's something you would know if you'd actually spent a good amount of time leading a company. Right?
 
Guarantee that if the company you work for had a CEO like that they'd be bankrupt and you'd be unemployed...

"Overall, the 256 CEOs who responded to this survey—working in a range of fields from agriculture to utilities—reported working a mean of 58.15 hours per week, which shakes out to around 10–11 hours per day plus nearly six hours of extra time on the weekend."

http://time.com/4076563/ceos-productivity/

But... But... But... CEO's do SFA and it's actually the rest of the workers that determine strategy, handle crises, deal with Boards and Shareholders and generally have a finger in every single pie of a business....

Perhaps more time researching and less time spouting s*** might be of some benefit?
 
I tend to agree with the second half, but will do more research on the topic.
Believe it or not I do think there is common ground with the so called left and right camps on here when it comes to government spending, the differences are the allocation of funds and beliefs on where it should be spent and cut.
 
How big a company have you personally managed? 0?

I found it too stressful at 21 employees to carry on, given life events. Those who manage companies numbering in their thousands are truly gifted, and deserve their wages.

Yeah nah, not a pissing contest.

Got nothing to do with the challenge of managing people.

CEO implies chief of a group of executive officers.

You don't need a group of executive officers to manage 21 people, that would be a hopeless waste of resources.

Are you Geelong_Crazy's dad?
 
The point is that 'CEO' is an actual role. It's not just a nickname for the person at the top of a company...

...that's something you would know if you'd actually spent a good amount of time leading a company. Right?

Excellent point.

The lollipop dude at roadworks calls himself a directional engineer not a lollipop dude.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top