Oldag75 said on December 2, 2005 22:49:

People are fascinated by money, and that is natural – because it can be traded for things to make your life better, and everyone wants his/her life to be better.

The old saying “Money is the root of all evil” emerged from times when wealth was created by the labor of slaves – subjects serving kings, serfs serving feudal lords, and so forth. The riches brought into being for Czars and Emperors came from the forced toil of underlings whose produce was merely confiscated from them, while they themselves lived in poverty.

“Money,” today, is a tool of exchange – a piece of paper which represents value that has been brought into being by human application. You legitimately receive money because you have made someone else happy... you have performed work for him, or you have made something that someone else desired, and traded it for his money. The “root” of money is people’s productivity... which is not “evil” at all.

Here is the problem: FAR, FAR, FAR too many people in the world obtain money without performing any sort of productive action in exchange for that money. They do not “make” money... they don’t “make” or produce something of value – rather, they merely “get” money. (And, unfortunately, lots of it.)

The church gets money by threatening people with afterlife hell if they do not tithe. Politicians get your money by enacting laws – mere words on paper – that confiscate your produce, and promise prison if you fail to comply. Lawyers get money by creating all sorts of “legal” rigmarole that sucks your money away from you. Thieves get money by demanding it from you at gunpoint. Beggars get money by simply asking for it. Looters get money by sneaking in, and merely taking it. Cheaters get money by committing fraud.

Legitimately rich people are admirable; they have invented something valuable, developed a service or product that people have purchased freely in trade, both parties going away happy from the transaction. I, for instance, am extremely happy that I have contributed to Per Gessle’s wealth by voluntarily purchasing his fine music. Millions of us have freely traded our money (for which we have worked) for the songs Per has written (upon which HE worked). All of us have gone away happy from the trade.

Next time you write a check, ask yourself whether the recipient is MAKING the money you are giving him – whether he has created true value in your life – or whether that recipient is merely GETTING that money from you, because you are forced to pay it.

(Think about Britain’s so-called Royal Family. They are wealthy beyond belief because their ancestors plundered the produce of the British citizenry. Is there anything on Earth... any product, service or act a British “Royal” might perform for you, for which you would voluntarily pay your money? My plumber, a high-school drop-out, has given me more happiness than Prince Charles EVER will... thus I am totally willing to pay that plumber $70 per hour. He is infinitely more honorable than any king I can think of.)

LittleSpooky said on December 3, 2005 06:09:

I’m trying to figure out how the hell Santa Claus fits on that list.

The story I was always told as a child was that the elves made the toys in the toy shop. Now... if they are made, where does the money come in? Granted... perhaps it’s needing to purchase the supplies to make the toys.

Yet that still doesn’t explain the fact that Santa doesn’t hold a regular 9-5 job, bringing home a paycheck... at least.. not from the stories I grew up with.

Some people need to get their stories straightened out before they make dumbassed lists like this...

pardek said on December 3, 2005 17:00:

what about Mac Moneysac... hes the second one after good old Duck! ;-)

Oldag75 said on December 3, 2005 21:45:

Santi wrote:
@Oldag: The problem with music industry is not that you contributed to Gessle’s wealth. It is that a tiny part of your money went to his pocket or any of the musicians and artist who co-work with him, while most of it went instead to some fat bald man with a cigar in his mouth who inherited loads of money so that he did not have to work and who actually hates pop music. That’s the problem.

Yes, that is (sort of) one way of looking at the music/money business. Another factor to consider is that most people, even if they are able to write great songs and form a great band, have absolutely NO knowledge about recording that music, mass-producing the CD, and promoting the CD through advertising/radio. Use of that knowledge entails costs and risks – think of how many songs/groups simply bomb, and don’t generate any listenership or revenues. It is true that music executives have exploited ignorant band members – a woman writes a fantastic song, but the only way she can get it marketed is to sign a contract enabling her to keep only eight percent of the revenues it MIGHT generate. MIGHT.

On the Roxette DVD, Per Gessle mentioned that he was fortunate to enter the big-music industry after he had some commercial experience of his own... he grinned, and stammered a little, and said something along the lines of, “We weren’t going to let ourselves get, uh, screwed.” Knowledge is always power.

It’s probably not fair to categorize all record executives as fat, bald cigar-smoking guys who inherited their wealth – that description applies more appropriately to unproductive, dishonorable wealthy heir-slugs like Ted Kennedy who never produced a single thing in their lives for which others would voluntarily trade their money. Record companies take risks with their products; they can lose a bundle on any given artist, if the public doesn’t like his work.

Just so I won’t be blasted for adducing information not consonant with this string, I seem to recall that Scrooge McDuck lived in a big mansion, and one entire floor was kept knee-deep in money... and people could wade around in it, enjoying the sensation. That scenario emerged during the American Depression (1930s), when there was so little cash in circulation that everyone developed unrealistic ideas about money and rich people and business. P.S. I happily look forward to reading any “essays” anyone posts here, enjoying this free-marketplace exchange of ideas, regardless of whether they robotically stick to the subject or not.

kachina008 said on December 4, 2005 03:44:

It seems I’ve been accused of being a conformist and reprimanded all in one fell swoop... LOL!

to be honest, I haven’t read your little essays Oldag, and I dont think anyone else has either, except Santi, who is too nice not to :D The topic was light-hearted, not a heavy-handed discourse on world issues. Just exercising my right to enjoy the free marketplace exchange of ideas, which you, Oldag, have many a time abused, if others’ ideas do not conform to yours.

kachina008 said on December 5, 2005 15:41:

LOL majdy ;D I know

Majdy said on December 6, 2005 21:52:

yup! that’s my pix :)