Gordo's insidius reach (oh, did I spell that right?:)

[expat]

He is no hero but I admire his ideas and his way of working. Cannot agree with the rich parents thing - he didn't make a mistake - he didn't pay the import duty on records he was bringing in from Europe. That was his choice and he should have taken the rap for it because he broke the law. However, I refuse to accept that those that make genuine mistakes are penalised if they don't have rich parents. I believe that people make their own opportunites.

I have a wry admiration for his fluffy-bunny everyone's-favourite-capitalist image, which I think serves him well but I do not see that he deserves. When he first started selling records in the 70s (at least that's when I started buying them from him) they were cheaper. It's decades now since Branson sold anything at a better price than the competition, but everybody seems to think that he does, or that he is in the (for example) Freddie Laker, or even Alan Sugar, league in bringing us something we wouldn't have had (affordably) if it weren't for him.

It's just not so. Beats me.

[John Galt]

That is my point, the legal system allowed him to escape prosecution and continue in business, whereas people without the rich parents would be meeting bubba.

So, in other terms, the chap without the rich parents would not have taken the risk of fiddling the VAT and hence would not have had the opportunity to create a large profit to plough into other businesses.
i.e. the legal system holds those of a lower social class back.

You cannot say who would take what risks - if that applied you would have every rich kid in the country in the same position as Branson. Rich or poor - you have no guarantee either way that your business will succeed or fail. It may be easier if your family is rich - if they are inclined to help you out and that may not be the case - but ultimately it has nothing to do with success or failure

[Mailman]

I was reading an article in that hallowed financial paper called "The Metro" and some group had released a study on the differences between children who have rich and poor parents.

Basically children of rich parents end up being more successful because thats the environment they have always lived in while children of poor parents arent so successful.

On the other hand children of poor parents had more quality time with their parents while the rich ones only occassionally interacted with their parents.

Anyway...all this talk about taxing the rich sounds like socialism gone mad! Yeah...lets tax the rich so they take their wealth elsewhere OR find ever mind ingenious ways of avoiding tax!

Mailman

[threaded]

It may be easier if your family is rich - if they are inclined to help you out and that may not be the case - but ultimately it has nothing to do with success or failure

It only has to be slightly easier to make quite a lot of difference, I'm not saying having rich parents is like tossing a two headed coin, it is the equivalent of being handed loaded dice.

When it comes to success or failure in business the only thing I have seen is that the successful tend to have a go at a lot of different things and hence are more likely to cut and run when the going gets tough. i.e. successful because they dump the failures, not because they spot a winner. Again this is where being part of a rich family helps, as all the siblings try different things the successful ones tend to absorb the less so, hence the family stays rich.

[John Galt]

It only has to be slightly easier to make quite a lot of difference, I'm not saying having rich parents is like tossing a two headed coin, it is the equivalent of being handed loaded dice.

When it comes to success or failure in business the only thing I have seen is that the successful tend to have a go at a lot of different things and hence are more likely to cut and run when the going gets tough. i.e. successful because they dump the failures, not because they spot a winner. Again this is where being part of a rich family helps, as all the siblings try different things the successful ones tend to absorb the less so, hence the family stays rich.

Threaded were you savaged by a coronet at a young age or something?? How would you define success in business?? You don't succeed by cutting and running at the first sign of trouble but you don't let one failure stop you trying - maybe this is a truer reflection of what you have seen?

[NoddY]

...It's decades now since Branson sold anything at a better price than the competition, but everybody seems to think that he does, or that he is in the (for example) Freddie Laker, or even Alan Sugar, league in bringing us something we wouldn't have had (affordably) if it weren't for him.

It's just not so. Beats me.

Branson has generated an asset out of thin air = a powerful brand. This is what I meant when I was suggesting creating new forms of assets (as an alternative to selling your labour and converting). It's no coincidence then that such brands are defended vigourously and protected in law.

[wendigo100]

Branson has generated an asset out of thin air = a powerful brand. It's no coincidence then that such brands are defended vigourously and protected in law.

Is that why lower-class schoolgirls can not call themselves virgins any more?

[threaded]

John Galt: Yes, but the young of poor families are strictly limited to the number of goes they can have, generally one each. Whereas the rich can afford to bail the children out multiple times. Again, if you want to throw a six, being allowed to do it as many times as required is an advantage.

And as to the personal attack, no, I come from a very wealthy family, which I know is why I'm so successful without even having to try. I'm just trying to be realistic. I can see the artificial barriers put up to people from other backgrounds.

[NoddY]

Is that why lower-class schoolgirls can not call themselves virgins any more?

'Lower-class' girls are brought up to believe they are fundamentally bad people. That they should be grateful for their lot and that they are lucky. With self-worth so low perhaps it's no wonder they seek solice in anyone who can give them any attention - usually men for sex in return.

Middle class girls are brought up to believe they are fundamentally good people. That the world is theirs for the taking on plate. With self-worth so high it's no wonder they believe they can defy their body clocks to 'work hard' and 'play hard' and but remain childless.

[expat]

'Lower-class' girls are brought up to believe they are fundamentally bad people. That they should be grateful for their lot and that they are lucky. With self-worth so low perhaps it's no wonder they seek solice in anyone who can give them any attention - usually men for sex in return.

Middle class girls are brought up to believe they are fundamentally good people. That the world is theirs for the taking on plate. With self-worth so high it's no wonder they believe they can defy their body clocks to 'work hard' and 'play hard' and but remain childless.

What on earth is a bit of insight and huiman understanding doing here?