Jhm
Nothing wrong with it, when it was made because you worked harder or were smarter than all the other kids. I have nothing but admiration, and a little envy for the self-made. But I have a great deal of contempt for the many that did not earn this through hard work, but through a quirk of fate and accident of birth.
The majority of chief operating officers are hired help, yes they can become rich, but there is a difference between the rich and the wealthy, the rich work for the wealthy, the rich work in the means of production owned by the wealthy.
Look at our economic policies; regardless of political party, it insures that wealth will remain concentrated. Even under that great “socialist ill”, Social Security, the original eligibility age was set higher than the average age of death. Even today, earnings subject to the tax are capped, thus as a percentage of income this is a regressive tax. Further the type of income subject to the tax is limited. Income derived from rents, dividends, capitol gains, interest, and other unearned sources of income are not subject to the tax.
Congratulations on your ability to retire twice, no one accused you of taking anything from anyone, or being undeserving of what you have. The point is, that in my opinion, this country has embarked on a course of economic policy that will prove to be less beneficial to a great many private sector employees than would otherwise be necessary so as to insure the continued enrichment of trust fund babies, and those that own the means of production.
Perhaps you can explain the continuing concentration of wealth in this country, booming stock market, rising employment, contrasted with an increase in the number of people below poverty level, and number of personal bankruptcy fillings and loan defaults.
No Wal-Mart is not the cause, but a corporate culture the encourages the pursuit of income at the expense of employee welfare is not an ideal to emulate, with globalization this and the demands for returns on investment without regards to the human costs will insure an ever growing devaluation of the contribution of workers, so hopefully your retirement is secure, and good luck.
Beemanbeme
In my work I have contact with many workers over the age of 50, none are 6th grade drop outs, but many posses a skill set that is no longer in demand, because of ever changing market forces. Retraining past the age of 50 is a questionable proposition, an employer is unlikely to pay for it, and the odds of recouping the costs are marginal, let alone being hired when a twenty something has the same skill level. I hope you never find yourself faced with the problem, but considering the economic dynamics you very well might, hopeful whomever you vent to will be somewhat more sympathetic to you. A lot of people now work jobs they despise for benefits and because they have enough pride not accept a dole. I have no idea what you do or how old you are, but imagine being 50 plus and being pink slipped with no benefits, with years of experience in an industry that for all intensive purposes no longer exists here, like steel, or glass, or textiles or clothing or shoes, somehow I think your attitude would be some what more empathetic. Youth is an asset that diminishes daily and there is little opportunity to recapture it. When a person gives years to a company they are entitled to more than a watch, but this is an item that is not reflected on a balance sheet, it is an item that is non economic, it is a matter of ethics, which is sorely lacking in our corporate culture and government.
Life is no joke but funny things happen
jon
