Inequality in US may spur ‘terrible civil war’, says hedge fund billionaire
- Thread starter thecoder
- Start date
A Point Of View: How China sees a multicultural world- https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20083309
"
I was on a taxi journey in Shanghai with a very intelligent young Chinese student, who was helping me with interviews and interpreting. She was shortly to study for her doctorate at a top American university. She casually mentioned that some Chinese students who went to the US ended up marrying Americans.
I told her that I had recently seen such a mixed couple in Hong Kong, a Chinese woman with a black American. This was clearly not what she had in mind. Her reaction was a look of revulsion. I was shocked. Why did she react that way to someone black, but not someone white? This was over a decade ago, but I doubt much has changed. What does her response tell us - if anything - about Chinese attitudes towards ethnicity?" - https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20083309
"
I was on a taxi journey in Shanghai with a very intelligent young Chinese student, who was helping me with interviews and interpreting. She was shortly to study for her doctorate at a top American university. She casually mentioned that some Chinese students who went to the US ended up marrying Americans.
I told her that I had recently seen such a mixed couple in Hong Kong, a Chinese woman with a black American. This was clearly not what she had in mind. Her reaction was a look of revulsion. I was shocked. Why did she react that way to someone black, but not someone white? This was over a decade ago, but I doubt much has changed. What does her response tell us - if anything - about Chinese attitudes towards ethnicity?" - https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20083309
Yesterday on Bloomberg Radio, one of their reporters was in the studio previewing an article he's preparing to make the case for giving the big bank CEOs a lot more salary and cash in various forms. Predictably, liberal heads exploded right there on air and the gasping wouldn't stop.
He made several great points - that these guys were giving up billions in potential profit at hedge funds or other ventures to run the banks; that the opportunities for wealth they are creating (especially for those that are "marginalized") through various bank programs is unparalleled and a direct result of their knowledge, leadership and connections... and on and on.
Logic and basic economics has lost the battle with the virtue signal.
In order to get their heart rates down after that shocking episode (I'm sure the reporter will be fired he continues advocating for higher pay for bank CEOs) twenty minutes later another guest arrived to discuss the employment picture. She stated with absolute certainty that what she's seeing in the job seeking world is little to no concern about pay, benefits, working hours or flexibility - but that everything hinges on the company's demonstrated commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion. Further, that much of the hiring difficulties being experienced by employers today is a direct result of their lack of commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion. The studio then erupted with love and admiration for this "amazing guest sharing all of this incredibly important information with everyone."
Welcome to Meta. It's everything Zuckerberg dreamed it would be.
He made several great points - that these guys were giving up billions in potential profit at hedge funds or other ventures to run the banks; that the opportunities for wealth they are creating (especially for those that are "marginalized") through various bank programs is unparalleled and a direct result of their knowledge, leadership and connections... and on and on.
Logic and basic economics has lost the battle with the virtue signal.
In order to get their heart rates down after that shocking episode (I'm sure the reporter will be fired he continues advocating for higher pay for bank CEOs) twenty minutes later another guest arrived to discuss the employment picture. She stated with absolute certainty that what she's seeing in the job seeking world is little to no concern about pay, benefits, working hours or flexibility - but that everything hinges on the company's demonstrated commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion. Further, that much of the hiring difficulties being experienced by employers today is a direct result of their lack of commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion. The studio then erupted with love and admiration for this "amazing guest sharing all of this incredibly important information with everyone."
Welcome to Meta. It's everything Zuckerberg dreamed it would be.
Playing straight into China’s hands. People don’t realise how lucky they are. Yet media has everyone polarised, tearing each other apart. There is so much opportunity out there. You can learn almost anything for free thanks to the internet. You can reach billions of people either for business purposes, networking or just finding like minded friends. Financial markets more open to people than at any time in history. Credit is ridiculously cheap. We aren’t at war. Medicine never been so advanced.
But yeah, let’s all argue over who can be most woke or tear down the system and start a civil war. Pathetic.
But yeah, let’s all argue over who can be most woke or tear down the system and start a civil war. Pathetic.
The problem with this line of thinking is it presumes there are only five or six people in the world capable of running a bank successfully and we must pander to them as demigods. If current CEOs are truly "giving up" billions in potential profits then they can feel free to leave their much less risky comp to pursue their billions; don't let the door hit their ass on the way out. There are hundreds if not thousands of equally knowledgeable, connected people, many far better leaders, who would be happy to do the job at a fraction of the comp.
Can you comp the head of BofA $1M a year? Obviously not. Do you get a better leader by paying them $25M than say, $7M? Or if you raise it to $100M do you magically end up with a 4x better person? I'm curious to see the data supporting that assertion? Flag officers in the military make less than $250k a year and I can tell you from first hand experience that they too have the leadership, connections, and knowledge to be making far more if they leave. By your logic, we need to be paying our top generals and admirals $25M a year as well?
Last edited:
I agree with a lot of what you are saying. But missing one point. It’s about having that expert leader versus them going to another firm or another industry. Those outstanding leaders in the military on a couple hundred grand a year are every bit as good as a CEO at many companies but if the state was paying 5 million a year for people to lead government departments you would have even more people going there rather than off to the private sector. And with the bank CEOs is a CEO on 20mill twice as good as one on 10 mill. Probably not. But do you lose the 10 mill guy to a tech firm offering him 20 mill then yes. It’s a market. It’s dictated by what the alternative options are.
For sure. I think the underlying question is if the increased skill you get scales enough with the increased pay to make it worth the extra pay. I remember making your argument as a much younger man with people like Jack Welch as my example. I've since changed my tune, with people like Jack Welch as my example.
We have a giant blind spot amongst Americans when it comes to the wealthy and their competence. Hustling for higher pay is not necessarily a measure of one's competence except perhaps negotiation.
Sometimes applying supply and demand to such things is short sighted. Surely they're asking for more because they're in short supply? so goes the theory. It reminds me a bit of the defense industry, where new players will struggle for gamed contacts allocated to those in the club.
Last edited:
Hey I think disadvantaged people of color have had enough of you people shipping them around.