Steve Jobs asked to keynote CES 2010 in January [Updated]

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 78
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by John.B View Post


    If Shakespeare teaches us anything, its that the human condition doesn't change.



    a large part of the world is much different from then. In his time, there was little change from century to century. People's condition didn't change. But it's changes very much in the last 100 years in most western countries, as well as some everywhere else.



    Quote:

    If Carnegie was right back then, it would still hold true today. I suspect he was spouting platitudes to justify his earlier treatment of his fellow man. He almost would've had to, in order to sleep nights.



    Well, all is not what it seems.
  • Reply 62 of 78
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    There were so few regulations on business in those days, that almost anything could be done. If you weren't ruthless, you would be buried. There was no choice.



    But he observed his workers, and didn't like what he saw.



    Because they weren't like him, is my guess. One of the main reasons we ended up with antitrust laws is because of people like Carnegie and Rockefeller.
  • Reply 63 of 78
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,718member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    a large part of the world is much different from then. In his time, there was little change from century to century. People's condition didn't change. But it's changes very much in the last 100 years in most western countries, as well as some everywhere else.



    My guess is that being a member of the Carnegie fan club has to be a fairly lonely experience. To the point of being solitary.
  • Reply 64 of 78
    irelandireland Posts: 17,569member
    It's easy to give away $100M+ when you have it. If he gave away all his money, like the Irish American guy did, then I would sit up and take notice. You can be sure will be keep a nice tidy sum for himself, I.E. Millions. It's not how much you give charity which makes you remarkable, but how much you leave yourself with in the end.
  • Reply 65 of 78
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    If he gave away all his money, like the Irish American guy did, then I would sit up and take notice.



    I hope you're not referring to Andrew Carnegie, the Scotsman.
  • Reply 66 of 78
    irelandireland Posts: 17,569member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    I hope you're not referring to Andrew Carnegie, the Scotsman.



    No. Chuck Feeney. Self-made billionaire who gave it all away. He gave basically all of it away, kept a miniscule amount for his family. He doesn't even have a car.



    I'm paraphrasing, but this was something that he said: "Give me a steak sandwich and a place to sleep and I'm good."
  • Reply 67 of 78
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    No. Chuck Feeney. Self-made billionaire who gave it all away. He gave basically all of it away, kept a miniscule amount for his family. He doesn't even have a car.



    I'm paraphrasing, but this was something that he said: "Give me a steak sandwich and a place to sleep and I'm good."



    A great story -- thanks for mentioning it.
  • Reply 68 of 78
    irelandireland Posts: 17,569member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    A great story -- thanks for mentioning it.



    Just saw him talking in a video, he reckons he gave about $5B away so far, with around $3B left until it's all gone. He's 78 now. His main philanthropic interests these days are higher education, specifically medical research and education. He wants to find solutions, not just throw money at problems. He seems very genuine, positive, humble and under the radar. No frills kind of guy.
  • Reply 69 of 78
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    Because they weren't like him, is my guess. One of the main reasons we ended up with antitrust laws is because of people like Carnegie and Rockefeller.



    Yup. All big business was done that way. Mining. Railroads. Shipping. Food processing.
  • Reply 70 of 78
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ;1457501


    My guess is that being a member of the Carnegie fan club has to be a fairly lonely experience. To the point of being solitary.



    That would be a bad guess about a topic you don't know much about.



    I'm not a "fan". He's an interesting, and important figure in this country. That's what makes reading his works and what's written about him fascinating. It's not simple, as you would like to think.



    I've also read a lot about Henry Ford. Also an important figure both here and in every industrialized country. But I'm not a "fan" of his prejudices.



    The world was a different place then. Different rules applied. By our standards, they were terrible, but not by what was expected then.
  • Reply 71 of 78
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    Just saw him talking in a video, he reckons he gave about $5B away so far, with around $3B left until it's all gone. He's 78 now. His main philanthropic interests these days are higher education, specifically medical research and education. He wants to find solutions, not just throw money at problems. He seems very genuine, positive, humble and under the radar. No frills kind of guy.



    He did wait until he was pretty old. Hw could have started twenty years ago. No one is altruistic. Everyone gets something out of what they do, even if it's just feeling happy about the praise, and what will be in the history books.
  • Reply 72 of 78
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,718member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    The world was a different place then. Different rules applied. By our standards, they were terrible, but not by what was expected then.



    That logic is commonly used in an attempt to defend the indefensible.



    The great men are always the ones who fought the injustices of their day despite the norms and "conventional wisdom" of their time. Apologists not required.
  • Reply 73 of 78
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by John.B View Post


    That logic is commonly used in an attempt to defend the indefensible.



    The great men are always the ones who fought the injustices of their day despite the norms and "conventional wisdom" of their time. Apologists not required.



    Oh, come on. You can't go back in history and change the way people thought.



    I already said that we (I) think it's terrible. You don't have to pull a politically correctness jab at me. That's just a slippery way out of understanding the world.



    What you don't seem to know is that throughput most of history, even the oppressed thought that the system was correct. That's very sad, but it's also true. There were times when there was no one who thought that it wasn't right. They were just unhappy that it happened to them.



    I suggest you do some serious study of history.



    We hope that times have changed for the better. But there are still places around the world where oppression is expected by the people living there. That's sad too.



    I certainly don't condone it.
  • Reply 74 of 78
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Yup. All big business was done that way. Mining. Railroads. Shipping. Food processing.



    Arguably, but some were far more ruthless than others. A handful of individuals from that period really stand out from the crowd as being exemplars of bandit capitalists. Even then it took a rare kind of personality to get joy out of not just beating, but crushing, your opponent.
  • Reply 75 of 78
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    Arguably, but some were far more ruthless than others. A handful of individuals from that period really stand out from the crowd as being exemplars of bandit capitalists. Even then it took a rare kind of personality to get joy out of not just beating, but crushing, your opponent.



    we have the same thing today, witness MS. but there are restraints that weren't in place back then.



    Again, no excuse from my "modern" perspective. But even those weren't out of the ordinary, just more successful. Instead of conquering countries, they were conquering business. Same personality type. The better they were at it, the more praise was heaped upon them.
  • Reply 76 of 78
    Hi everybody.I'm come back! Congratulation S.Jobs comes back!

    calcul pret assurance simulation taux emprunt immobilier - Taux emprunt immobilier. Comparez les offres d?emprunt immobilier, simulation emprunt immobilier, taux emprunt immobiliercalcul pret assurance simulation taux emprunt immobilier
  • Reply 77 of 78
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    we have the same thing today, witness MS. but there are restraints that weren't in place back then.



    Again, no excuse from my "modern" perspective. But even those weren't out of the ordinary, just more successful. Instead of conquering countries, they were conquering business. Same personality type. The better they were at it, the more praise was heaped upon them.



    From certain quarters, but even in their day, people like Carnegie and Rockefeller were vilified by the press and the public, enough so that their power and influence was overcome by Congress and laws were passed. If we have restraints in place today, it's because of these people and their excesses -- not in spite of them.
  • Reply 78 of 78
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    From certain quarters, but even in their day, people like Carnegie and Rockefeller were vilified by the press and the public, enough so that their power and influence was overcome by Congress and laws were passed. If we have restraints in place today, it's because of these people and their excesses -- not in spite of them.



    Rockefeller was really the one who caused most of the problems. But, you're right, Carnegie controlled much of the steel industry.



    It's interesting that in a few subway stations here in NYC, where the beams are exposed as the way the station was designed, beams have the name "Carnegie Steel" embossed into the steel.
Sign In or Register to comment.