41–49 of 49 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks, I know how to get around them but I just don't think I will bother anymore. There is so much information out there that is just as interesting and freely available.
There's no paywall at the Washington Post...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not to spoil your fun but it's always great to be rich.
it's always great to be rich. To be pedantic - the French and Russian (and many other) revolutions didn't work out great for the rich.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's always great to be rich. To be pedantic - the French and Russian (and many other) revolutions didn't work out great for the rich.
They didn't work out so well for the poor, either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's always great to be rich. To be pedantic - the French and Russian (and many other) revolutions didn't work out great for the rich.
Lenin came from a rather comfortable background - his father had been "elevated" into the nobility for his work in the government bureaucracy.
Also, his brother was executed and the family was banished when Lenin was 17 (prior to him reading Marx).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely, only it's more subtle. When you work at a company that feeds you gourmet lunches, does your oil changes and laundry for you, arranges shuttles from your apartment to the office, etc., you begin to feel like you couldn't possibly live any other way. That is the dark side of perks. Another way to keep people stuck is to pay them too much, much more than they could ever earn elsewhere. They will then rationa…
You seem to be talking about different things. I read "golden handcuffs" as extending a line of credit to employees to support and _encourage_ living beyond their actual means. This is very very different from being pampered and spoiled as you describe.
"Golden handcuffs are a system of financial incentives designed to keep an employee from leaving the company. These can include employee stock options that will not vest for several years but are more often contractual obligations to give back lucrative bonuses or other compensation if the employee leaves for another company."
-- Wikipedia
I would like to hear arguments about how a doubled salary, thanks to profit-sharing, does not count as a "system of financial incentives designed to keep an employee from leaving the company."
It is merely the carrot and not the stick.
(Does nobody Google any more?)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They didn't work out so well for the poor, either.
Let's not conflate the French and Russian revolutions - they have absolutely nothing in common. And yes, the French revolution did work out very well for the poor, eventually. It was at the root of the development of modern democracy in the Western world.
I have issues with the word "absolutely". They had quite a lot of common - both were about overthrowing a system of government based on birthright, and the participants in the Russian revolution certainly tried to learn from the French revolution.
(One could argue that the Russian revolution was actually better for the poor in the short term than the French. Serfdom was immediately abolished, and it got them out of WW1. War had the biggest impact on the poor)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They didn't work out so well for the poor, either.
Let's not conflate the French and Russian revolutions - they have absolutely nothing in common. And yes, the French revolution did work out very well for the poor, eventually. It was at the root of the development of modern democracy in the Western world.
"Being smart is good but being lucky is better." This article is actually good.
"Luck is where preparation meets opportunity."