I think that is awesome! Just a prank photo IMO. But who cares. He can spend the money the way he wants too. I would trick my dog out like that if I could drop that kind of cash and not think about it.
mystigo wrote: »
<h1 style="border:0px;clear:both;color:rgb(17,17,17);margin-bottom:0px;margin-top:0px;padding-bottom:0px;vertical-align:baseline;">A dog with one watch always knows what time it is.
A dog with two watches is never quite sure.</h1>
Wow NetMage beat me by literally seconds on this:
My joking thought was "this is why they worked so hard to get Mickey Mouse's movements in perfect sync across different watches".
Tough call on such wasteful spending. To me it's all about %ages.
Maybe his family has given $10-Billion to help others, so the few million they blow doesn't impact that, and they'd still be considered hero's.
Or they won't help anyone ever and they're thought to be "bad people".
There really isn't enough info from one data point to judge any $ transaction.
Go ahead, run for President and make it your platform that the government decide and TAKE from one group and give to another. See how far that'll take you.
No need. The U.S. government has already decided that it's OK to take from one group and give to another. Been that way for well over a century now.
pioneer01 wrote: »
My dog is jealous
<img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="59394" data-type="61" src="http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/59394/width/200/height/400/flags/LL" style="; width: 200px; height: 356px">
Jeez... we know there are starving kids in China, slave labor in Apple sweatshops but in the end it's his money to spend it as he see's fit.
Assuming that his family came to that money legitimately, which is highly doubtful.
The richest 400 people in the world have as much wealth as the bottom 50% of the world. Think about that. 400 people have as much wealth as 3.5 billion.
While there have always been both very rich and very poor people, the middle class in most developed countries are getting totally screwed. They haven't received a raise in real terms in 30 years. Since the middle class is the bedrock of most societies, this can't keep up. In capitalist societies, most people are willing to accept that there are going to be rich people, either by their own personal successes (CEOs, movie stars, rock stars, athletes) or by coming from rich families. But they're not willing to accept that an ever-increasing number of people are becoming rich because the system and the laws are biased in favor of the rich. And with so many people still suffering in most societies, someone who so blatantly displays such waste of wealth (like the $5000 trash can) or expresses disregard for the non-rich ("Only little people pay taxes") is going to be roundly criticized, legitimately, IMO.
This is total b.s. since most of the tax money taken from anyone goes to the military (54% of discretionary spending in the 2010 budget), not to another income group. The next highest figure was 6.4% for health and human services.
And the highest marginal rates paid by the rich have substantially dropped over the years (aside from a recent increase in capital gains rates). So if anything, you could say in recent decades that the U.S. Government is taking money away from the people with lesser income and giving it to people with more income. And that's aside from corporate welfare, since most of the Fortune 500 companies pay little or no Federal income tax in recent decades.
During the Eisenhower administration, the highest marginal rate was 93%.
During the Johnson and Nixon administrations, the highest marginal rate was 70%
By the 2nd Reagan administration, it dropped to 50%.
Clinton dropped it to 39.6%.
Bush II lowered it to 35% where it remained during the 1st Obama administration (it was supposed to be temporary).
It's now back to 39.6%.
So who is taking money from who and giving it to who?
Really why would you want to see more idiocy in this world?
Sarcasm of course - although judging from some of the benighted reactions here, people are trying really hard to defend such a ridiculous attitude (particularly bearing in mind that a dog has absolutely no use for an AWatch, or any watch for that matter).
People post pictures of their dogs wearing clothes, glasses, etc. A watch is no different. Just laugh and move on...
joogabah wrote: »
Funny to watch so many stumble over themselves to make sure they state their approval of this rich asshole's privilege to not so subtly insult other people as being worth less than his dog. Got to defend personal accumulation of wealth above all else because we are free to think for ourselves and are in no way encumbered by ideology!
Alright genius what is your solution?
You can rant about how things are not fair but things are what you make them. Spending money is someone's right. You would like to spin it as most didn't really earn the wealth legitimately but the fact is the majority did. The fact that they looked at a system and took advantage of said system is not a crime nor is it wrong. There are plenty of great paying jobs out there for the middle class. At least the ones that want to put an effort into it. Pointing the finger is your fastest and most secure way to not going anywhere or being anything.
Yea. Or 4 watches because the rear legs need them too so it can be a proper 'watch dog'.
I don't know you. But it's a good bet that just by being on this forum that you've probably amassed greater wealth than 90% of the people on this planet. So how much of your wealth goes toward relieving the suffering of your fellow humans? Those who live in glass houses...
It's one thing to live comfortably because you can afford it. It's another to guy two gold watches for a dog.
You do see the difference, right?
If I had the kind of money to throw around, wasting it on jewelry for a dog that likely is less comfortable wearing it, then yeah, I would be doing a lot more to improve the community in which I live.
I won't apologize for having a moral compass.
bearing in mind that a dog has absolutely no use for an AWatch, or any watch for that matter).
I'm currently using a Tagg GPS tracker for my dog. Worth every penny. It's waterproof, has GPS, a fitness tracker, reports ambient temperature, and stays charged for up to a week. Granted it's not a watch per se, since it doesn't tell time, but it does do most of the other things the ?Watch does. Prior to getting this Tagg tracker, I seriously considered placing an old iPhone on my dog so I could "locate my iPhone" and find her during a period when she was finding ways to get out of the yard.While I would probably pay more for an Apple dog collar, over the $100 I spent, I doubt Apple will get into the business. Though considering they are pandering to the fashion community, many of whom are devoted to their canines, it wouldn't be that big of a stretch, so dog and owner could have matching wearables.
Nor for a bountiful sense of self esteem, I see.
who's to say he doesn't donate money or help out the local community in other ways. What if... *shock* this was a joke photo and the watches weren't actually for teh dog? bit harsh to make judgement on whoever this guy is based on one photo posted to the internet.
You're correct in that the watches may have been for people and the dog photos were a joke. And it's also true that this person might be a wonderful man who donates much of his money. The problem is that with so many people suffering (and I'm not just talking about peasants and the like), including people in the so-called "middle-class" around the world, it shows complete insensitivity of their plight. It reeks of real estate magnate Leona Helmsley's "only the little people pay taxes" arrogant remark. So I really don't think the criticism is unwarranted.
My criticisms are based on the contents of the article. I'm not speculating or hypothesizing other scenarios that may or may not be true.
It's the same as getting angry at a person when you hear of his crimes. When you discover the crimes were not committed at all, then you are allowed to change your views on the situation. If the circumstances are not as described, then that changes everything, doesn't it?
But yeah, I was admittedly too harsh in my comment that he is a disgusting excuse of a human being. It was a knee-jerk reaction to yet another example of frivolous spending during a time when so many have so little.
For having a moral compass? Proud of it.