Ish. My framework currently is that in a business where everyone expects high ethical standards (law, high finance, etc) the way to get rich is to be a total piece of shit. In industries where the standard is to be a total piece of shit (mine, car dealerships, retail, insurance sales, food) you can do really well by playing straight up and treating employees dramatically better than expected.
Basically being a contrarian is insanely strong if you can pull it off. Obviously this leads to every industry going through a cycle where its reputation fluctuates from really bad to really good and back again. I think finance is a really good example of an industry that used to have a really good reputation, but is rapidly descending into being seen as a bunch of thieves (where it isnāt already there, people in the know generally have a very low opinion of finance and the people in it). Itās entirely possible that playing the game straight would be a way to crush finance now.
IIRC you work in commercial banking. You should know that that fact might be coloring your impressions of business in general. The only reason I can imagine how many pieces of shit you probably meet in commercial banking is that I work in transportationā¦ where most of the people with large organizations are kind of monsters lol.
I think the wars over shelf space, advertising, and distribution around low grade dog food would be super fun. Itās looking increasingly likely that the high grade dog food business has been a complete scam over the last 10-15 years (the grain free thing was actually awful for dogs) so youāre really just talking about selling food for pets.
Itās a business IMO. Nothing particularly good/bad about it that Iām aware of.
If I was in a boardroom setting, buttoned up in suit and tie like some semi-functional monkey, and listening to overpaid consultants impart their wisdom on product placement, Iād jump out the window.
I mean weāve all played poker for money right? Are we really trying to examine every single thing we do to put money into our own pockets in the context of contribution to humanity?
At the same time point taken. Thereās a reason why Iām devoting some unstructured free time into understanding climate change. Itās not because I want to be a good person thoughā¦ itās because I think thereās going to be an ungodly amount of money in itā¦ and not because of stuff like shiny packaging.
Shiny packaging is what happens when an industry is all the way mature. Iāve already become moderately successful in one of those, but I want to do a big one from the ground up at least once before I die.
Iād say 5% of poker players ever made money. It was a rarity to find a graph at sharkscope that wasnāt a mangled mess, reflective of undisciplined experimentation with a fashionable-for-a-time hobby
Except the most successful insurance companies are run by total pieces of shit. I donāt know about the others, but Iām assuming the awfulness of the person is directly correlated with their success. Same as it ever was.
That would be why the industry has a terrible reputation now yeah. Iām talking about building a new firm in the space. Iām in logistics and yeah same storyā¦ at the same time if you want to grow an upstart one of the most effective way to recruit talent is to draw a large contrast between yourself and the existing players.
If the industry seems virtuous you can lure the sociopathic people by accommodating that where others wouldnāt tolerate itā¦ if the people running your industry are those people you can pull in the mission driven people who are at least somewhat disgusted by the sociopathic people by being different.
The problem is that there are two types of super successful competitive peopleā¦ the nicer ones (who tend to advance because of competence and the fact that everyone generally likes them) and the more bastard types who advance because they are competent and will do literally anything to get ahead. Generally the second group is larger but slightly less competent because it requires meaningfully less skill to pull off. Obviously the second group is also larger because the skill cutoff is lower.
Nobody is shaming the billionaires. Weāre shaming Pete for courting them in wine caves. If these people want to donate 2800 bucks to Pete, on their own and without getting 50 of their friends to do the same as part of their bundle, nobody would care.
You donāt get any credit for being a good guy when hosting a laughably opulent, tone deaf fundraiser for Pete āI literally spout bullshit GOP talking points on the regā Buttigeg.
Democrats taking big money has had enormous, tragic effects. Bill Clinton was showered in Wall Street money and repealed Glass-Stegall, howād that work out? We had the fucking votes for single payer and passed Mitt Romneyās health plan.
Defeating Trump isnāt a worthwhile strategic goal. Amelioration the effects of the last 40 years of public policy is.
Putting another big money backed neolib like Pete in is worse than losing to Trump. As toxic as he is, at least heās incompetent - - Stupid Hitler, if you will. 8 more years of Democrat neoliberalism will only cause more suffering and potentially set us up for another anti establishment wave carrying a Hitler Hitler into power.
And if we do, so what? What are they gonna do, take their money and go home? Good. Candidates for good or ill are beholden to their donors. Iād rather it be a million donors at $20 than like 10 bundlers.
Oh totally agreed. Being economically insecure is terrible for your mental health. Those happy people in places with less material wealth usually have more than enough money to cover their expenses. The worry about not being able to make ends meet is where the unhappiness comes from.
In the us most studies seem to show that you hit diminishing returns on happiness from income at 75k. Your own personal number is going to be based on the lifestyle youāre comfortable with.
Totally agreed here. These people arenāt giving money to support the Democratsā¦ they are giving money to subvert them, and when the Democrats get power it really shows.
Did I read boredsocial seriously believes that harden/lebron/etc are just better at getting ref calls versus the obviousness of they just let them get it more often because they are the stars of the league.