PDA

View Full Version : What else would you do?



PAAI
02-03-2005, 10:07 PM
Sometimes I hate being a part of the industry that gives us the Oscar awards and Golden Globes. I don’t quite understand the Statues for people who fake it all day/night; Out of this world paychecks because they look good and lie even better. Don't get me wrong, many out there are truly talented for tugging at our heartstrings and creating emotion, which in turn gives our entertainment for the hour or two. I look at some of the people in the area around me that keep our area as safe as they can with the dwindling funds. I am talking about our emergency rooms workers, police and firefighters. These are the ones who should get some of these awards, better yet some of the Hollywood type money for actually keeping Real people alive and safe.
I guess I was watching too much TV tonight or something. Just irritated with the general news about health care costs, cities and agencies going on with less, libraries closing, schools consolidating and more. And yet, there are actors and athletes getting record size contracts every month in the news. Where does this divide in society end?
The worst part is me in the middle contributing to some of this. I am going to try and rationalize this so I can get some sleep. Sorry about the rant... I do feel better.
If you could work anywhere in the world or place of employment, where would you go?

Shadowman68
02-03-2005, 11:39 PM
I agree, I think there needs to be a salary cap on society. My god how much is enough, Look at Orca Winfrey, what is she worth 80B or some crap. I would bet if you took the top 10 percent of all high performance athletes and artists in the world and seized all their assets and savings you could pay off the US national debt. Funny how salarys keep rising, cost of living keeps rising, yet with all this money floating around governments cant afford to pay police and nurses and teachers. I think if I had to do it all over again I would be a politician, That way I could lie my ass off, screw people over left and right, collect a heatlthy salary and live off an ocean deep pension. And people would love me for it.

MikeTech
02-03-2005, 11:42 PM
Orca Winfrey.

Thank you! That is the best thing i've seen all day!

Ghost
02-04-2005, 12:44 AM
Don't forget these stars, celebrities, ect... get their money from us.
Society pays the high prices of concerts, games, products, pay TV, DVD's, CD's, ect..., ect..., ect...

Stop going and/or paying for these things and you won't be supporting it. Instead donate the money you would have spent on those things and give it to organizations that support worthy causes, or give it directly.

Now of course the problem with this is... - How many of us separate our trash for recycling?... paper or plastic?... conserve water?... Give up gun rights so that not just any criminal can get them?... STOP having so many offspring so the world will stop suffering over population one day (the true root of all world problems)?... ect..., ect..., ect...

We as people have many issues with this: We don't want to inconvenience ourselves, we don't think we'll make a difference, we don't want to be sitting ducks to someone else not doing it, ect...

And no... I don't do or follow all of these myself. I would give up firearm rights if the government would completely ban them, until then the guns stay in my hands (to many crazy people in the world :mrgreen: ). I'm kind of wasteful with water (wouldn't be an issue if there weren't so many people). But... I do recycle, I only cook/order what food I'll eat completely (no waste), and I don't plan on having kids (plenty to adopt if the mrs. wants some)

uuuhhh, may have got a little to political with this one

'Disclaimer: The views of this post do not necessarily reflect the views of this forum or workers in the A/V industry'

Shadowman68
02-04-2005, 01:27 AM
I have a rant, what is wrong with society when a guy can drive around for an hour and not find a single drug store open after midnight to get some cough medicine for his ailing family, but can drive for 10 min or less and run into 3 stores selling porn 24hrs a day. ( I was going to say 'come across 3 stores' there but the humor in that would negate my point)

and Amen to Brad, you hit the nail on the head. We are the propagators of our own demise.
p.s. Im one of those guys that has 4 bags of garbage every week, I waste water with half hour showers and underground sprinklers, but I do have a composte bin in my back yard, havent figured out where to plug it in though.

Ghost
02-04-2005, 03:07 AM
I have a rant, what is wrong with society when a guy can drive around for an hour and not find a single drug store open after midnight to get some cough medicine for his ailing family.
No Walgreens around huh
:lol:

Gary
02-04-2005, 08:16 AM
'Disclaimer: The views of this post do not necessarily reflect the views of this forum or workers in the A/V industry'


At least there's one thing in your post I agree with.

install1
02-04-2005, 04:01 PM
Just an observation, but because of those people with the huge salaries and celebrity are the reason I have a job. Those people hire me to put a theater in their houses and I take pride in doing those $200000+ jobs. Whether they are watching themselves on a 120" screen I don't care, I collect a paycheque, enjoy my work and get to feed my family all at the same time.

Gary
02-04-2005, 04:28 PM
Just an observation, but because of those people with the huge salaries and celebrity are the reason I have a job. Those people hire me to put a theater in their houses and I take pride in doing those $200000+ jobs. Whether they are watching themselves on a 120" screen I don't care, I collect a paycheque, enjoy my work and get to feed my family all at the same time.

I couldn't agree more, when I'm sitting across the table from a couple looking to spend that kind of money, the last thing on my mind is that they make to much. Their wealth allows me to make a pretty good middle class living doing what I love.

I get tired of hearing this statist, left wing, class warfare crap. If you could get 45000 people to watch someone teach class, then teachers would make what baseball players make.

Ghost
02-04-2005, 09:08 PM
I get tired of hearing this statist, left wing, class warfare crap.
I didn't say it :roll: I just offered possible solutions to it (and hinted why those solutions would never work)
I'm more concerned with the environment and world as a whole. Think of all the dangerous materials in the electronics we sell that eventually end up in land fills. I still sell it. :wink:

AudibleSolutions
02-05-2005, 09:40 PM
When I read the sort of nonesense embodied in the original post I am reminded of the pundit who opined that the gravest mistake this nation ever made was in not permitting the South to succeed.

If I were to make the suggestion that no corporation should pay its executives more that 500,000 how many of you would brand me a liberal or worse, a communist? How about if I suggested that no NFL team be allowed to make more than 4 million per team? Have any of you any notion that this is a capitalist society and that compensation is based upon supply and demand? Think woman will faun over you in the same manor that they do Leonardo DeCaprio ( or me )? Think you have some talent that millions wish to see and will pay very large sums for that privellge?Few in Hollywood make it to the top pay scales and those few who do may not be your cup of tea but evidently many more disagree with your opinion. Those folks receive large sums of money because those who invest in those films beleve those individual's involvement will cause people to pay to see it and result in that film making a profit.

I wounder if any of you red staters realize how close to socialism your thinking is? Anyone here weigh 240 pounds and run a 4.3 40? Hit a 96 mph fastball and a 85mph curve ball? How about try to go around a pro basketball player let alone hit a shot against one? Most of us have enough trouble convincing a client to part with his money let alone cause him to believe that we can embody some character in a movie. No one has any problem with the rediculous amounts of money corporations make. Nor are they troubled by consolidation of media outlets, executive vs employee compensation ratios, the size of Walmart and its power to coerce suppliers.

It is not that I disagree with your belief that certain professions and professionals should be better compensated. It is that I disagree with your antipathy towards the market and its ability to regulate prices and wages. Hollywood is a company town and has always conveyed great wealth on the lucky few who became stars. Of course, no one pays attention to the countless millions who try and fail to become stars and wind up parking cars or working in the resturant industry. Nor evidently to aggricultural middle men who rake in the profits from food production. Nor defense contractors nor Wall Street profits. Why is Hollywood singled out? Oh, politics again.

You dislike the politics of those in the movie industry so you resent how much some in the industry make. But are you driven to equal states of disequalibrium when the cable industry flexes its economic mussel and gets Congress to pass legislation in its favor or extracts some concession from local government? Personally I have not met many Police officers who I thought deserved the salaries they received. Commercial fishing is far more dangerous an occupation then police work and they are not nearly as well compensated nor as sated with doughnuts. Evidently you have never had to wait 3 hours in an Emergency room for treatment? And prey do not contemplate the wait if you have no insurance card.

Do I think Tom Cruse is worth 20 million dollars per film? How the hell should I know? But if his films make those who invested in it a ton of money and they believe that their return on investment is made more secure by his involvement who am I to disagree? Do I think ARod is worth 240 odd million? No. But if that is what the market will bare then that is what he is worth. Do I believe in salary caps? NO! They violate the basic tenant of capitalism that says supply and demand determine salary. If an owner is foolish to pay more money in salary to its employees than it makes that is his right. Anyone could be a police officer or fireman. Few of us have the abilities to be movie stars or proffesional athletes or brain surgins. Did you realize that during the depression movie attendance set records? Think people are crawling over themselves for your autograph? These Hollywood folks you despise are also the same folks you pay to see. You think they are little different in ability than you are but I am sorry to tell you that it is untrue. They are special which is why they get the girls and the cash. No one is stopping you from becoming a film actor and using your fame to promote your favorite cause.

Alan

Shadowman68
02-06-2005, 04:07 AM
Are you sure your not Bob Goodenow?
First of all I like capitalism, but as I tried to state, when is enough, enough. Does a guy really need to earn a salary that will feed his next 8 generations?
We as a society put far too much emphasis on the beautiful people. Everybody wants to be like Mike.
Do I think A-Rod deserves his salary, hell no. Do actors and actresses deserve their salaries, hell no. Does a simple beat cop that stops some nut job that just broke into your house, kicked your ass and took your daughter hostage deserve his salary, mmmm I think so.
Do you think for a minute that if the lead hand in any factory called into work and demanded more money, that he wouldnt get his ass handed to him on a plate. Dont you think it is detrimental to a sport when the 300k a year coach cant get his players to listen to him because his is financially inferior to them?
I have a thought, Pay the players what ever they want. But make them responsible for the towels they use, the 1st class air fare from event to event, the 4 star accomodations, their equipment, charge them a dollar for each drink they get on the bench. Let them see what it actually costs to pamper their manicured asses.
I dont think there isnt a man or woman alive that deserves 20 plus million a year, unless of course he found the cure for cancer, aids, hepatitis, ebola, could rescue a baby from a burning building and still hit .650 in a single season. Then I might rethink it.
Far be it from me to be a cynic, but come on here, something is wrong with a society when we value the services of the beautiful over the services of those that fight for that comfortable blanket of safety, health and freedom that you rock yourself to sleep under every night.

But, like I said, we are are the propagators of our own demise. We are the fools that spend a dollar a litre on gas, or buy those stupid pills that help you digest fats, but also cause a river of 10w30 do drip out your A-Rod. We are the fools who elect corrupt public officials or pay 15 bucks to watch a movie or 75 bucks at a sporting event to sit so far up you cant read the numbers on the backs of the jerseys. We are the fuel to the fire.

If I had it my way, Martha Stewart would spend the next ten years in a real prison, not some executive country club, and when she got out, she would have no choice but to work the fry counter at mcdonalds, not be rewarded with a reality tv show. Jean Chretien would have been branded a traitor and publicly shot and pissed on (Canadian humor) for sacrificing the sanctity and future of my beloved country for his own career.
Do you think that these rich and undeserving would actually donate to a charity if they didnt get tax breaks or publicity?

Are these beautiful people more special than anyone else, I dont think so. With enough steroids, liposuction, dental enhancements and personalized training along with a 90 million dollar contract from Nike, hell I could be one of Americas national treasures and the women will faun over me like they do Alan.

Do I think these beautiful people deserve the money they make? Absolutely not. Am I going to turn down their money if they want a Theo Kalomirakas designed theatre in their 5 million dollar mansion? No chance in hell, in fact I might charge a bit more.
Do they serve any purpose in society? Some. I like to turn on the tube and get a few giggles or watch and cheer on my favorite teams in between the myriads of ads for sodas, shoes and drugs that are inherently bad for us as they are good. And occasionaly I shop at Wally World, in fact if it wasnt for Cathy lee Giffords sweat shops I wouldnt have this lovely pair of jeans, so Thanks.

My apologies to all, this should not have gone this far.
I honestly dont care how a man makes his money as long as his check to me doesnt bounce. At the end of the day when its all said and done if a man can live with his actions and has no guilt or remorse, then who am I to criticize.

There are just sooooooooooo many things wrong with society.
I think we should go back to the days of the old west. When bad guys wore black, not Armani suits, and if some guy did you wrong it was ok to shoot him.
Opinions are like assholes, everybody has them.

Keith

OEX
02-06-2005, 07:26 AM
I can't believe I missed this thread.

First, as a society we put a value on all things. We, as a society, put high value on actors and altheletes. Not me though, I don't even stoop to watching sports. I may check the score of todays game but could care less. As for actors I could also care less.

As for the rich. God bless them. I love the fact they flaunt their wealth. My family has lived very well over the last 60 years iwiring their latest ego shack. I love it when they want plasmas in every room to impress their friends. IT MAKES ME MONEY! Let the rich spend their money and have it trickle down to the rest of us.

don't like the salaries of movie stars and atheletes. don't go, dont watch.

ejfiii
02-06-2005, 08:08 AM
Alan, sounds like you have your colors mixed up.

Shadow, no offense meant at all dude, but you contradicted yourself: your first 3/4 are about how you don't think people should make so much money, then you state:
I honestly dont care how a man makes his money as long as his check to me doesnt bounce.

As for me, I am a conservative. The free markets work. Limited government works. Personal responjsibility works. Freedom works.

AudibleSolutions
02-06-2005, 01:16 PM
I wrote what? Where did I write that all I care about is that the check does not bounce? Might we be projecting?

I wrote that Capitalism means that an employee has the right to earn what ever the market will bare. That supply and demand should regualate wages and that it is ironic that you red state hypocrates seem to object only when labor suggests that the invisable hand determine wage rates. You are all conspicuously silent when Corporations and individual stock holders are compensated disproportionately. Personally I am in favor of compensation reflecting effort as opposed to the luck of birth and inherited wealth or status.


Red staters seem to object to a salary cap on wages paid to labor but no one suggests that the profits earned by that business should then also be capped. If the invisable hand regulates one why not both? It is a funny kind of Conservatism that believes that Capitalism and freedom should only apply to some individuals but not others.


Unrestrained Capitalism is not socially beneficial to the majority. I know that Marx's Capital is both long and boring but some of you should find the Clif notes version and read it. Marx may not have had a clue how to remedy the ills of Capitalism but he was perhaps its most cogent critic. Business cycles have both social and economic consequences. Left to inself Capitalism will always lead to monopoly, frequenct depressions and a fair amount of dishonesty. This is why laws were instituted govening economic reporting of public companies, outlawing insider trading, and regulating the money supply ( and hence interest rates ). Since profits are sacred businesses will sell anything to anyone for a profit which means that terrorists and terrorist states and nation state competitors ( like China ) would have no problem obtaining any technology or product. Missil guidence systems, encryption algorithms, centriguges and sophisticated machine tools will all find sellers and buyers if left unregulated.

And yes, I belive that Bob Goodinoff is correct. Salary caps are inherently unfair and unfree as they restrict what the market will pay for labor while not placing the same limits on the profits earned by capital. I have no problem with an investor or owner being outrageously compensated for taking a risk as long as the same rules apply to labor rates. To be fair, nether case is utilitarian but no better method for allocating scarce resources has ever been invented so let supply and demand regulate both profits and wage compensation.

I hear no one decrying the outrageous sums paid to less than competant business leaders. Nor do I hear anyone complaining about the outrageous sums made and paid to those on Wall Street. Why single out Hollywood or athletes? And what of the Hollywood studios who also earn tredmendous sums from motion pictures? Why single out worker compensation. Executive compensation is grossly out of whack when compared to employees in that business. I would limit the amount of saleries that could be deducted as a business expense but I would find it "undemocratic" to tell someone what they could or could not pay as part of a compensation package.

It is not more fare that well healed corporations can pay to lobby govenment to pass legislation favorable to it than for actors to use their celebrity to champion their favorite cause. Phosophical consistancy is important. Do you believe in Capitalism and free markets or not? Or should we move to a statist economy, probably facist, where government propotes the interests of large corporations at the expense of its workers.
If profits are unregulated so should be wages. Not that this would benefit me in any way. It is not as though anyone will pay me 20 million to impersonate a cyborg.

Keep shopping at Walmart until there are no other jobs left and the only employment opportunities left are working for 6.55/hour for them. It's called voting with your feet. Change the channel, shut off the TV, don't buy the tickets or purchase somewhere else. If these films did not make so much money for their investors with certain actors participating they would not be so compensated. It's called personal responsiblity, something you Red State hypocrytes seem to have forgotten.

Alan

Shadowman68
02-06-2005, 01:32 PM
I realize that now, I guess thats what you get for trying to wax philosphy at 3am when you are coughing up crap that looks like it came off the bottom of your shoe. Hey if anyone is looking for a cheap buzz, try a Dr. Pepper and 3 TBSP of Extra strength Benylin. :lol:
After re reading, I think what I was trying to say was, hmm what the hell was I trying to say? I think its that I dont agree with how much these people make, but as a business owner, I would be stupid to turn away that money if they walked into my store. Ya know, I think I would actually work twice as hard to get that business, so I too could use it as a marketing ploy to generate more revenue and keep my business alive. Is this the whole gift horse thing?
I dont know, really its a double edged sword. If you support these things your buying into all that is wrong with society, but if you dont, your on the street corner doing tricks or selling pencils.
We are all victims of our own creations.
Ask yourself this, if the money they had was from illegal activities, murder, drugs, money laundering etc. Would you still accept it? The sad answer would probably be Yes. We still have bills to pay and families that need food, clothing and shelter.

I do think whole old west thing was kind of funny though. Come on now, you smiled.

Keith

ejfiii
02-06-2005, 02:07 PM
Alan, sorry for the confusion but that quote was attributed to Shadowman as I was talking to him in the paragraph containing the quote.

What I don't get is the mindset that the hyper-successful should be punished by taking their successes from them. Whether its a person or a company it just doesn't make sense to me. I mean, isn't that the very foundation our country was built on? Deceitful business tactics are different and I don't condone them to become hyper-succesful.

Shadowman68
02-06-2005, 03:48 PM
Ejfiii, Alan;
Im not trying to take anyones success away from them. I have 3 friends who play in the NHL, I know how hard they work to keep in shape in the off season, I know the sacrifices they make, no holidays, away from family etc. I know the injuries, and the mental anguish they suffer to stay in or at the top of the game. But honestly, is Shaq, A-Rod, Holik, Federov, T.O or others really worth that kind of money. Sure they are marketable, they puts fans in the stands, their meer presence sells their game. They bring inspiration to our mundane lives, give us something to cheer for or at least look forward to. I dont think they are bad people for taking the money. If the owners are dumb enough to pay it then why not. You guys are right, its the basis for our society. Supply and Demand. But when is enough, enough? Does a guy really to need to make more money in 3 or 5 season than he could spend in 5 lifetimes.
Because the owners think so, they now need to jack the price of tickets, the price of the beer and concession items and associated novelties to compensate, and we as fans keep paying for it. Its a viscious circle. One that they are realizing is inherantly detrimental. That is why the NBA and NFL have salary caps and revenue sharing. To keep the owners spending in check to ensure the survival of the game. If an owner wants to go out and spend double his salary limit then he should be penalized for it.
Sure the people in the industry all profit from these things, and the money eventually trickles down into the smaller markets dollar by dollar.
I too am in favor of compensation reflecting effort. the reason we single out Hollywood and Athletes is because they are front and center in the media. All along I have stated that no man or woman is truly worth a salary could bank roll a small country.
Pharmaceutical companies dont want cures, cures are not profitable. They are not responsible to the public to find cures to cancer or aids, they are responsible to the board and the share holders to make a profit. Greed Greed Greed. Its all about the buck, whos got it and how can I make more. It all perpetuates into something else, kids getting shot because some other kid wanted his Michael Jordan Nike shoes, or my 6 year old nephew who died of Leukemia because the drug companies who receive billions of dollars a year in funding cant find a cure because if they did the demand for their product would drop and the CEO might lose his job and have to sell his private yacht .
As a business owner I know that without profit you go now where, profit drives all, money drives all.
Im not saying its wrong. Im just saying it isnt right. So Alan if this makes me a communist, facist, red state, pinko whatever, then use your mussels and stamp a red flag on my ass, strap me to your missil and shoot me off to China.

ejfiii
02-06-2005, 07:15 PM
I am sorry shadowman, we will just have to agree to disagree. You contradict yourself many times. You should just make your case by not going to movies and games. Not much else you can do. If everyone felt the same way you did and didn't go to the game/movie, maybe a difference could be made. But in my opinion your statements about the drug companies are out of line and incorrect.

AudibleSolutions
02-06-2005, 09:40 PM
Shaddowman,
I would recomend this book by one of my former professors, "All That 's Solid Melts into Air: The Experience of Modernity" by Marshall Berman. Amazon has it listed for $11 and it is surprisingly readable.

You may find his discriptions of Marx's criticisms of Capitalism surprisingly similar to your own. Then if you have trouble sleeping you could take on Perry Miller's classic, " The New England Mind," especially chapter 3. Of course I would recomend NoDoze if you actually wish to read the book. Otherwise it will work better than sleeping pills. You would be happy to note that our Cavinist forefathers shared your attitudes about profit. This from John Cotton ( 1641) "men [should] devote themselves to making profits without succumbing to the tempations of profit...." Or take to heart the way they regulated their version of the "just price " in the case of the merchant Robert Keayne. The theocrates in Massachucettes Bay, in 1639 fined and chastised Keayne for " buying as cheaply as he could and selling for the highest price he could get. " Yet within 30 years we see full blown capitalist ethos developed. [p37 and 41, The New England Mind]

Historically, there have been very few instinces in human society where allocation of resources could be fairly distributed by some rational method. And even in the cases of the few 18th century utopian experiments or the modern equivellents attempted in Israel early in the last century you find they only work so long as there is a dedicated group surfused with some ideological fervor. In the case of the Kibbutzim in Israel those values of " each according to his means, each according to his abilities " only lasted as long as those ideologically commited founders survived and disappeared as soon as they died. Selflessness is more difficult to sustain whereas self interest is far more " natural."

To paraphrase Oliver Stone, " greed is good. " It does motivate people into risking capital and taking chances. While the invisable hand is not as invisable as some would have it market forces are the best method of distributing resources man has invented in so far as everyone at least has a chance to make his life better. I might agree with some of your decisions on resource allocation but many others would not. How would you settle such a dispute? Disinterested market forces, while not always as disinterested as theory would have them, is still the best method man has devised. Any attempt my man to regulate those market forces always fails as do wage and price controls or salary caps. It may add to owner profits but only at the price of penalizing labor its fair share of the pie. You feel that some sum should be sufficient but do you extend that to all forms of human compensation? Corporations are legally individuals. Should their profits be limited? If so to what amount? Your sense of fairness may be different from mine. Would you like to see elected politicians making this decision? I for one would not.

As to whether athletes and actors are really the most visible examples of frivolous wealth I ask you who is the richest man in the world? Bill Gates? His net worth is estimated at 48 BILLION . In the Fortune list of wealthiest individuals not an athlete nor entertainer is in the top ten. Here is that list,
1. Gates, William H III
2. Buffett, Warren Edward
3. Allen, Paul Gardner
4. Walton, Helen R
5. Walton, S Robson
6. Walton, John T
7. Walton, Jim C
8. Walton, Alice L
9. Ellison, Lawrence Joseph
10. Ballmer, Steven Anthony
http://www.forbes.com/2002/09/13/rich400land.html

George Lucas is the first " entertainer " listed at number 55 but he is hardly an entertainer. Steven Speilberg is number 80 but he is also an owner of Dreamworks and a movie producer. Indeed there is not a single entertainer or athlete in the Fortune 400 wealthiest individuals. So if the least wealthy individual has a net wealth in excess of 550 million and the only "entertainers " on that list are really producers or owners and/or studio executives why then criticize a well paid worker as opposed to the truely wealthy individual with truely obscene wealth?

Alan

Shadowman68
02-07-2005, 12:11 PM
I will check those books out thanks. Thats the beauty of these forums, they bring out some healthy banter. I enjoyed our debate. I dont really think I contradicted myself, (that much) in so far as trying to make my point. I showed my disappointment in the values of a society which I am a part of, but that I also have to live in. I may not like it, but until the advent of a utopian market, I still have to live here.

whdigital
02-08-2005, 10:48 AM
but I do have a composte bin in my back yard,

I had to read that sentence 3 times before I didn't see "composite" bin.... Gawd I need a vacation!

tomciara
02-08-2005, 12:05 PM
As for me, I am a conservative. The free markets work. Limited government works. Personal responjsibility works. Freedom works.

I'll sign up as #2.

Toronto122
02-14-2005, 01:15 PM
I can honestly say that working for the rich is a bitch. Many many people in the "upper eschelons" of society look down at the rest of us.

I used to sell BMW's. I had ALOT of clients buy cars, acting all high and mighty, and yet when you saw how much money they made, you'd laugh. I made more money that over half the people I sold cars to. But because I was "a car salesman" they felt it was ok to look/talk down to me. It's really no different in this biz. It's usually the wives of the clients that are hardest to please. To them I'm just an annoyance. Getting in the way of thier hectic social schedules.

Having ALOT of money is fine, there's no crime in making money. When is enough enough? I don't know. I know that a six figure income is enough to keep me very happy. Do I fly first class...no. Do I have a $1,000,000+ home, no. Do I need it...no. Does anyone need it...no. I have a client who's currently building an 18,000 ft2 cottage. COTTAGE folks, it's for the occasional weekend in the summer!!! Wouldn't 5000ft2 do just fine? 12 bedrooms??? WTF??? :?:

To me, it's all about keeping up with the Jones'. "Did you see Dave's new Aston? Well, It's ok, I guess...but I like my Enzo more..." What a ludicrous conversation.

I think what bugs me most is that I'm in debt. And what these people spend on one painting could set me up for life. I mean I wouldn't be rich, but it would take care of all my debts, give me a nice down payment on a home, and just take alot of stress off my life.

I saw a stupid plant stand the other day,,,$7500.00

I bathroom in a basement, that never gets used with an Alexander Calder (original) in it.

A WALL of Warhols...in a hallway, leading from a GARAGE!! I HATE WARHOLS!! It's garrish!!

$100,000 chandeliers are the norm in homes I go into.

We figured out that our clients, on average, has $550,000 worth of cars. This coming from a car junkie...

You want to know what else bugs me...that old addage "the rich get richer". No kidding. One of my clients, has 6 PVR's in his house, I had to call to authorize them, they had to put me through to someone else because "If I (the CSR) touch the account it'll deactivate all the gratuities". In other words, he doesn't pay for cable...And he's VERY wealthy. It's not fair.

But here I am, taking their money. I can't make them go away. I can't make them spread the wealth. They'll always be there, looking for someone to service them. Might as well be me. :twisted: