I said: It is amaing that there are so many so willing to rant against those that risk their capital and get rewards, but those who risk almost nothing (except their celebrity reputation) get a pass.a) who said they get a pass? Does every statement have to be accompanied by a bibliography and footnotes about special exceptions or a comprehensive list of "people who deserve ire"?I'd bet that if someone analyzed all the posts on this board for a year or more the number of anti-business posts compared to anti-media-celebrities is on the order of 10:1 or 100:1. I'm not even sure if you can find any anti-celebrity posts except as jokes.if I'm ranting, it's only against those think risking their capital means they are like god's gift to creationI don't know about other but I've never mentioned being god's gift. But, IMO, about 95% of the time any business success is mentioned, it gets turned around into he/she must have been taking advantage of the workers else how else could he/she have become so wealthy? The possible except is Steve Jobs ...and on other boards he's consider more than god's gift :) (even though he did verbally abuse employees according to many accounts).I say, let's just be fair about it. There are both good and bad employers/entrepreneurs...just as there are good and bad employees...and many shades in between. There is no need to completely polarize every discussion.Mike
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra