Flanderian

Connoisseur
Well, one can see why he needed all the money he could get.
To afford her bar bill? :drunken_smilie:

So we can conclude that Dick was dating his daughter(!)? :icon_scratch:;)
Or her friend!

Cute couple. Just think of all of the cordovan LHS those of us here bought to bring these two together.
I'd say I wanted to talk with him about that shirt and tie, but I understand the authorities already have it off his back.
 

richard warren

Senior Member
Actually things cost what they do, absent government interference, based on what people want to pay for them. The factors that go into production are then priced based the final price to consumers.

If somebody at Alden’s steals money from retained earning, it’s just a loss to them just as if the money has been stolen in cash by armed robbers when they sent somebody down to the bank to make a deposit. Nothing to do with pricing.

Actually this whole business demonstrates the benefits of hiring good looking people of a certain type, who do not have to steal from you to get...female attention and at least if they do to get high class...attention.
 

Steve Smith

Super Member
Stealing to buy luxury goods and support a lavish lifestyle...I just don't get it. Exactly what is it that he was chasing? And did he think he could steal $15 million and there would never be a day of reckoning?

It doesn't make sense to a logical thinker. About 15 years ago some people in Raleigh, NC were convicted in a fraud scheme in which false parts invoices were sent from a supplier and paid by people working the the education system's transportation department. The invoices were paid and the supplier split the money with his accomplices in the school system.

What has stuck in my mind after all of these years was that during the recovery of the fraudulently acquired assets it was discovered that one of the people involved in the scheme had used a pretty good chunk of the money to buy and fill up a storage unit with Beanie Babies. Beanie Babies. Get a felony conviction, get fired from your job, and bring shame upon your family...so you can buy Beanie Babies.
 
Last edited:

Fading Fast

Connoisseur
Stealing to buy luxury goods and support a lavish lifestyle...I just don't get it. Exactly what is it that he was chasing? And did he think he could steal $15 million and there would never be a day of reckoning?

It doesn't make sense to a logical thinker. About 15 years ago some people in Raleigh, NC were convicted in a fraud scheme in which false parts invoices were sent from a supplier and paid by people working the the education system's transportation department. The invoices were paid and the supplier split the money with his accomplices in the school system.

What has stuck in my mind after all of these years was that during the recovery of the fraudulently acquired assets one of the people involved in the scheme had used a pretty good chunk of the money to buy and fill up a storage unit with Beanie Babies. Beanie Babies. Get felony conviction, get fired from your job, and bring shame upon your family...so you can buy Beanie Babies.
I don't get it either, but it happens again and again. Sure, you're on the verge of losing everything or your child needs an operation you can't afford, so you steal - not right, hope I'd never do it, but I get it.

But most of these stories, as is yours, are not acts of desperation. I worked for a brokerage firm in the '90 and an option trader was caught stealing several hundred thousand dollars (cost the firm several million because he buried the stolen money in bad trades).

He used the money to rent (not even buy) an expensive apartment, take an expensive vacation and buy a bunch of expensive stuff like clothes, watches, etc. Okay, so a kid about my age then (late 20s), had a good job, good pay and a promising future that he threw away to buy a short-term fancy lifestyle.

He had to know it would end and he had a good chance of getting caught, losing everything and going to jail. WTF.
 

drpeter

Senior Member
Actually things cost what they do, absent government interference, based on what people want to pay for them. The factors that go into production are then priced based the final price to consumers.

If somebody at Alden’s steals money from retained earning, it’s just a loss to them just as if the money has been stolen in cash by armed robbers when they sent somebody down to the bank to make a deposit. Nothing to do with pricing.

Actually this whole business demonstrates the benefits of hiring good looking people of a certain type, who do not have to steal from you to get...female attention and at least if they do to get high class...attention.
Interesting that you think she is high class. Is your opinion based on the way she looks or dresses, or is there additional information you have about her that indicates that she is high class? Just curious -- I have no idea who she is, hence my question.
 

drpeter

Senior Member
I don't get it either, but it happens again and again. Sure, you're on the verge of losing everything or your child needs an operation you can't afford, so you steal - not right, hope I'd never do it, but I get it.

But most of these stories, as is yours, are not acts of desperation. I worked for a brokerage firm in the '90 and an option trader was caught stealing several hundred thousand dollars (cost the firm several million because he buried the stolen money in bad trades).

He used the money to rent (not even buy) an expensive apartment, take an expensive vacation and buy a bunch of expensive stuff like clothes, watches, etc. Okay, so a kid about my age then (late 20s), had a good job, good pay and a promising future that he threw away to buy a short-term fancy lifestyle.

He had to know it would end and he had a good chance of getting caught, losing everything and going to jail. WTF.
Two comments:

As for the obsession with Beanie Babies, Dave Barry once said that there is a very, very, very thin line dividing collecting from madness! Collectors often cross that line and will risk reputation, jobs and jail in order to possess some object that they fancy. As a collector of first editions, I know that there are bibliomanes who will stop at nothing to acquire a book that becomes an obsession to them. The same is true of stamps (another one of my hobbies). Not as extreme, but a friend and member in good standing of one of my philatelic societies told me that he had re-mortgaged his house to acquire a rare stamp. This might sound crazy (and his wife thought he was, although she went along with it), but this stamp is probably a sound investment that will increase in value.

Stealing money, on the other hand, seems natural in a society that values wealth over almost everything else in life. Consider: Our very word for a person's financial standing is "net worth". Worth is defined as value, and a person's worth would, in a reasonable, balanced world, be about character, integrity, decency and other such qualities. But it is also used to mean how much money or assets the person possesses. So now, a person who had a very high net worth in terms of wealth and assets could very well be a cad, a person of no character or integrity. And vice versa.
 
Last edited:

Fading Fast

Connoisseur
Two comments:

As for the obsession with Beanie Babies, Dave Barry once said that there is a very, very, very thin line dividing collecting from madness! Collectors often cross that line and will risk reputation, jobs and jail in order to possess some object that they fancy. As a collector of first editions, I know that there are bibliomanes who will stop at nothing to acquire a book that becomes an obsession to them. The same is true of stamps (another one of my hobbies). Not as extreme, but a friend and member in good standing of one of my philatelic societies told me that he had re-mortgaged his house to acquire a rare stamp. This might sound crazy (and his wife thought he was, although she went along with it), but this stamp is probably a sound investment that will increase in value.

Stealing money, on the other hand, seems natural in a society that values wealth over almost everything else in life. Consider: Our very word for a person's financial standing is "net worth". Worth, is defined as value, and a person's worth would, in a reasonable, balanced world, be about character, integrity, decency and other such qualities. But it is also used to mean how much money or assets the person possesses. So now, a person who had a very high net worth in terms of wealth and assets could very well be a cad, a person of no character or integrity. And vice versa.
I hear ya, but the one thing I wonder about is does our society really value wealth over everything?

The US has very robust charities, healthier churches than most other Western countries and progressive taxes that support many social programs. It all could be more, but it isn't bad at all by comparison.

And our culture - or newspapers, TV shows, movies, etc. - constantly deliver a message promoting charity and not valuing money over relationships or helping others. Business men are almost always shown as villains. Also, many shows have a plot line where somebody has to choose between their personal passion or family versus a job that pays more. The message is, 100% of the time, choose your passion or family.

I'm not saying we live what the culture preaches, but it certainly preaches charity and family and persona passion over the selfishness of singularly being focused on money and stuff.

My nephews (in or just out of college) were taught and encourage to participate in charities in a way that my (grew up in the '70s) generation wasn't. I have my issues with some of the ideology behind this, but our schools are not telling kids to just go out and earn more money.

Again, maybe we don't live these values, but you can't pick up a paper, go to a school graduation or watch a TV show or movie without having this message of charity/family/passion-over-money all but screamed at you.
 

drpeter

Senior Member
I hear ya, but the one thing I wonder about is does our society really value wealth over everything?

The US has very robust charities, healthier churches than most other Western countries and progressive taxes that support many social programs. It all could be more, but it isn't bad at all by comparison.

And our culture - or newspapers, TV shows, movies, etc. - constantly deliver a message promoting charity and not valuing money over relationships or helping others. Business men are almost always shown as villains. Also, many shows have a plot line where somebody has to choose between their personal passion or family versus a job that pays more. The message is, 100% of the time, choose your passion or family.

I'm not saying we live what the culture preaches, but it certainly preaches charity and family and persona passion over the selfishness of singularly being focused on money and stuff.

My nephews (in or just out of college) were taught and encourage to participate in charities in a way that my (grew up in the '70s) generation wasn't. I have my issues with some of the ideology behind this, but our schools are not telling kids to just go out and earn more money.

Again, maybe we don't live these values, but you can't pick up a paper, go to a school graduation or watch a TV show or movie without having this message of charity/family/passion-over-money all but screamed at you.
I see what you're saying, but I would disagree in some respects. In America, the bottom line always is money.

You raise the possibility that the reality underlying the message may diverge from the message. I don't think we practice what we preach. I think our constant messaging about giving tells us something critical about our society. A society that truly valued things like integrity and decency (or true charity for that matter) would not need to propagate, incessantly, a message about charity or urge people to give, would it now? I agree that there is a great deal of giving by wealthy people, and also that people are varied in their charitable giving as well as their motives for doing so. However, I think we harp a lot on charitable giving because, wittingly or not, it helps to obscure the fact that we value our own wealth over and above everything else. Perhaps we should compare our giving to the amount of money that, legally or illegally, goes into the hands of the wealthiest among us. The income disparity between the rich and poor is almost feudal in the United States, don't you think? And as the economist Thomas Piketty has pointed out in a recent book, that kind of disparity is a dangerous trend for the world.

This discussion also reminds me of a different kind of hypocrisy we practiced a lot over the last century. We believed in democracy and we wanted to encourage democracies everywhere in the world, and have them follow our model, because we were the leaders in this effort as the oldest democracy. Or so we claimed. Well and good. But meanwhile, when it suited us, we systematically overthrew democratically elected governments and installed dictators who would be friendly to us. I won't repeat what FDR said about Anastasio Somoza since it involves invective, but you can look it up! We supported tyrants who did our bidding and we helped them brutally suppress dissent in those countries. These overthrows and support of dictators helped American businesses and corporations enormously over the century. Over time, more of us have come to realize these features of our civic landscape, and are becoming aware of the messages we disperse, and the reality that may be lurking beneath those messages. I believe we are in such a moment right now in our country.

Lest I be accused of being critical about my own country, let me say that these kinds of hypocrisies, not always related to money or the export of ideologies, are found in many other nations and societies as well. There is so much of it in my old country, India, I despair that things will ever improve there. Especially with the new Hindu fundamentalists who have power. But I'll not go down that particular lane for now!
 

Fading Fast

Connoisseur
I see what you're saying, but I would disagree in some respects. In America, the bottom line always is money.

You raise the possibility that the reality underlying the message may diverge from the message. I don't think we practice what we preach. I think our constant messaging about giving tells us something critical about our society. A society that truly valued things like integrity and decency (or true charity for that matter) would not need to propagate, incessantly, a message about charity or urge people to give, would it now? I agree that there is a great deal of giving by wealthy people, and also that people are varied in their charitable giving as well as their motives for doing so. However, I think we harp a lot on charitable giving because, wittingly or not, it helps to obscure the fact that we value our own wealth over and above everything else. Perhaps we should compare our giving to the amount of money that, legally or illegally, goes into the hands of the wealthiest among us. The income disparity between the rich and poor is almost feudal in the United States, don't you think? And as the economist Thomas Piketty has pointed out in a recent book, that kind of disparity is a dangerous trend for the world.

This discussion also reminds me of a different kind of hypocrisy we practiced a lot over the last century. We believed in democracy and we wanted to encourage democracies everywhere in the world, and have them follow our model, because we were the leaders in this effort as the oldest democracy. Or so we claimed. Well and good. But meanwhile, when it suited us, we systematically overthrew democratically elected governments and installed dictators who would be friendly to us. I won't repeat what FDR said about Anastasio Somoza since it involves invective, but you can look it up! We supported tyrants who did our bidding and we helped them brutally suppress dissent in those countries. These overthrows and support of dictators helped American businesses and corporations enormously over the century. Over time, more of us have come to realize these features of our civic landscape, and are becoming aware of the messages we disperse, and the reality that may be lurking beneath those messages. I believe we are in such a moment right now in our country.

Lest I be accused of being critical about my own country, let me say that these kinds of hypocrisies, not always related to money or the export of ideologies, are found in many other nations and societies as well. There is so much of it in my old country, India, I despair that things will ever improve there. Especially with the new Hindu fundamentalists who have power. But I'll not go down that particular lane for now!
I respect but don't agree with several of your views nor with Piketty.

I also respect AAAC's policy and acknowledge that I went too far in my post, so I think we should stop here.

That said, thank you for the civil discourse - it is rare these days. Best, FF.
 

drpeter

Senior Member
I respect but don't agree with several of your views nor with Piketty.

I also respect AAAC's policy and acknowledge that I went too far in my post, so I think we should stop here.

That said, thank you for the civil discourse - it is rare these days. Best, FF.
And thank you for the respectful disagreement. I too agree that we should stop here. These topics are a bit beyond the AAAC themes, and I would not want to cause any offence.
 
Last edited:

Peak and Pine

Connoisseur
Damn. I was enjoying this.
But we're in Trad Land, though by my standards, which are group recognized as abysmally low, nothing written prior came close to jumping the offense fence, still, a guy can dream can't he? O for the dust-ups of old.
 
Your email address will not be publicly visible. We will only use it to contact you to confirm your post.

IMPORTANT: BEFORE POSTING PLEASE CHECK THE DATE OF THE LAST POST OF THIS THREAD. IF IT'S VERY OLD, PLEASE CONSIDER REGISTERING FIRST, AND STARTING A NEW THREAD ABOUT THIS TOPIC.