locally grown

[eppie]

Yes, many more might aspire to those ranks. But they don't count -- they end up being the shoe salesmen and cab drivers, or some other useful profession. It's not as if banning sports, movies, and rock and roll would cause the people that would have tried for those fields to become scientists and engineers. There is the question of aptitude, of interest. The fields you demonize are not drawing the intelligent people away from more useful careers.

--Pete

Well,
I think they do count. This was my point to begin with when we talk about sports and pop stars. I think that people that try or aspire becoming one and fail will make less of their life compared to when their focus was different.
The other case about eg investment bankers is different. Here you have intelligent people that study hard and find a good job. However by becoming an investmentbanker the choose not te become a scientist or engineer but instead live of other people and bailouts.

[eppie]

However, we capitalists know that what is missing is the cruel motivation of the wolf howling at the door, or the drive to lift oneself up from a tiny urban house on the busy road to a nicer one with a shady backyard, or the dream of retiring from the hula hoop factory with enough savings to live out our remaining days in medium comfort and little worry.

But here you are describing a complete one sided story. I was not talking about professional athletes, popstars, or people moving around other peoples money getting paid, I was talking about them getting paid 100 times more than the average joe.


The quoted paragraph is the standard argument for capitalism and against communism, and although there is some truth in there it doesn't describe what I was argueing for.

My whole point started from this kind of saying that people often use, but I took it a bit further. Our society and capitalism has gone from the Netherlands in the 17th century that applied capitalism to become the richest country in the world, without having the resources that other countries had to the situation now where the only goal is still personal gain but where for some reason it became normal to pay some people very much for very little contribution to the world. In understand the economics behind it (a prof. sportsman can get his high salary because of the popularity of the game and the huge advertisement incomne that goes with that). But the whole incentive of doing big earnings when doing something that helps mankind further (discover a new medicine) is not really working the way it should.

[kandrathe]

But here you are describing a complete one sided story. I was not talking about professional athletes, popstars, or people moving around other peoples money getting paid, I was talking about them getting paid 100 times more than the average joe.

Ok, look at it this way. The higher the skill, and the longer the experience, the fewer people there are who can do that job. Pro Athlete or Rock Star salary can be directly tied to "box office draw", so the owner of the team can decide what it is worth to have a star pitcher, versus a string of good relievers. If you compare a baseball team like the Minnesota Twins (who have a comparatively small salary outlay) to the big venue cities like New York or LA, you would find that the big cities go out and grab all the "headliners", but a little team like ours uses its farm teams, and good strategy to compete (and pretty well) with big city teams. It is interesting, since the Twins seem to generate many star players. Once they are recognized as "good", eventually they are on the way out to become the competition.

If you look at a CEO of a huge multinational corporation. At the time a company needs a new CEO, there might be 3 or 4 desirable candidates on the planet, so they get paid according to the laws of supply and demand.

Ok, take a doctor. Many doctors are "general practitioners" so they get the "average pay for doctors" which is still good, because there is a high barrier for entrance into the field. But, there are fewer specialists like say brain surgeon, so the brain surgeon can demand a higher rate of pay, if the hospital wishes to engage his services.

I'd say the average Joe makes the pittance of a salary because he doesn't have enough experience with a desirable skill that is in short supply.

[eppie]

I'd say the average Joe makes the pittance of a salary because he doesn't have enough experience with a desirable skill that is in short supply.

I know the why, I know and agree why people that are good in something should earn more than average people. I just think that there are too many relatively useless professions that have to high incomes attached.

Do you like to watch baseball more because you know A-rod makes 10 miljon per year? I happen to know that many americans love college sports more than professional sports. College sports brings more hapiness to peoples lives, but professional players make much more money because of more sponsoring possibilities.

I love to watch sport, I love to listen to good music, I almost went in to the derivative trading business after I graduated from University, I love nicely deisgned things, I just think the high incomes associated with tehse professions have a negative impact on the potential of a society (intelectual decline, followed by economical decline).

(and I wasn't talking about surgeons or CEO's of multinationals)

[kandrathe]

I just think that there are too many relatively useless professions that have to high incomes attached.

Isn't it a question of an underlying freedom? Should you be free to sell your skills to the highest bidder doing whatever it is that you desire? Most of the time that answer is yes, however there is a line into the criminal that is discouraged by society.

[--Pete]

Hi,

I think that people that try or aspire becoming one and fail will make less of their life compared to when their focus was different.

I agree, but that was not my point. The ones actually seduced into trying for such professions are seldom the ones who could have become doctors, inventors, scientists, etc. They are different personality types. So, someone who tries to be, say, a professional soccer player and fails becomes a taxi driver instead of becoming a famous restaurant chef. Net difference to the human race is indistinguishable from zero.

--Pete

[kandrathe]

I agree, but that was not my point. The ones actually seduced into trying for such professions are seldom the ones who could have become doctors, inventors, scientists, etc. They are different personality types. So, someone who tries to be, say, a professional soccer player and fails becomes a taxi driver instead of becoming a famous restaurant chef. Net difference to the human race is indistinguishable from zero.

I'm working with a former minor league baseball player, a former VP at Best Buy, and now owns his own management consulting company.

It's that self actualization thing again... I was offered a position at Bemis once, but in my due diligence I decided I just couldn't get past the "world class toilet seat" thing. Now, I'd certainly consult for them, but to actually make toilet seats my career? Nope. I couldn't do it. Although, I did work for another manufacturing company for awhile that used to make toilet seats 100 years ago. I have the same problem with some of the defense industries. I would help build platforms, like fighter jets, or aircraft carriers, but I'd rather not make cluster bombs, and anti-personnel munitions. I have some friends who design guidance systems, however, and I don't think any less of them.

I think in this age, in many career's, it's hard to determine if your work really has any redeeming social value.