Executive salaries

[spajohn]

Not so much, they paid him $3m to ferk off.

Isn't the plan to promote them to the competition so they screw their business too?! LOL

[rainman]

Isn't the plan to promote them to the competition so they screw their business too?! LOL

You might be on to something there...

[Dave Lobster]

Did you see the XT press conference? Heaps of man love but essentially ' You're my good mate Hamburger but you stuffed up now fuck off'. First class spin. Talk about fall guy.

He was on a fixed contract. Contract finished.. leave.

Possibly the biggest feck up was employing a french company to roll out a network. I bet Mr Nokia is rubbing his hands together.

[MisterD]

Possibly the biggest feck up was employing a french company to roll out a network. I bet Mr Huawei is rubbing his hands together.

Fixed for you

[davereid]

How did people ever get along without trade... but they did. As long as you have the bare necessities

I don't think human beings have ever managed without trade, it was there the first moment a caveman had a bit more meat than he could manage, and a pretty cave girl had a bit less.

Trade has allowed us to expand as a species way beyond what we could manage as individuals, with division of labour allowing us to what we enjoy, or are best at, while still contributing to society.

If it were not for trade, I would have to milk my own cow, kill my own chickens, make my own medicine, and I'd be walking everywhere because I'm not a good enough engineer to make a Kawasaki. (Actually, I'm not even good enough to make a honda - but thats a different subject.)

[mashman]

I don't think human beings have ever managed without trade, it was there the first moment a caveman had a bit more meat than he could manage, and a pretty cave girl had a bit less.

Trade has allowed us to expand as a species way beyond what we could manage as individuals, with division of labour allowing us to what we enjoy, or are best at, while still contributing to society.

If it were not for trade, I would have to milk my own cow, kill my own chickens, make my own medicine, and I'd be walking everywhere because I'm not a good enough engineer to make a Kawasaki. (Actually, I'm not even good enough to make a honda - but thats a different subject.)

Fair enough... trade was the wrong word to use... or maybe I should have stipulated the type of trade... i.e. financial trade...

I wouldn't mind (too much) if the Telecom guy had fucked up and he was only "trading" on his skills... but he's not... he's earning vast sums of money (paid for by us) to avoid fuckups... and from what I've been told, it was cost saving measures that led to XT having problems (there was no provision for failover)... utter incompetency and all to save a buck...

"with division of labour allowing us to what we enjoy, or are best at, while still contributing to society."... i fear that, right person, right job, will never exist in a financial economy... just take a look at the politicians ha ha...

[pete376403]

See the XT network broke again today - who is reynolds going to ask to leave this time?

[rainman]

I don't think human beings have ever managed without trade, it was there the first moment a caveman had a bit more meat than he could manage, and a pretty cave girl had a bit less.

Although there has been trade since forever, it's increased since the onset of organised agriculture, and was of necessity far more local until very recently. In the paraphrased words of Richard Manning: "Agriculture gave us surplus, surplus gave us wealth, and wealth gave us hierarchies that necessarily created an underclass."

Trade has allowed us to expand as a species way beyond what we could manage as individuals, with division of labour allowing us to what we enjoy, or are best at, while still contributing to society.

If it were not for trade, I would have to milk my own cow, kill my own chickens, make my own medicine, and I'd be walking everywhere because I'm not a good enough engineer to make a Kawasaki. (Actually, I'm not even good enough to make a honda - but thats a different subject.)

I think you fail to consider the concepts of "community", "tribe", etc. The idea that we are all individual economic units is a very recent one indeed. Most historic communities provided most of their local needs locally, distant trade was for luxury items or specific durable goods. Although milking your own cows, killing your own chickens, growing your own herbs, and walking everywhere (unless you had a horse) is pretty much how things worked. Not everyone in ancient times was a blacksmith or a tailor, but almost everyone would have been able to milk, butcher, and walk.

Specialisation has made us dumb. Globalisation has made us vulnerable.

[rainman]

he's earning vast sums of money (paid for by us)

Not by me, I moved all my services from that company a while ago.

[davereid]

The idea that we are all individual economic units is a very recent one indeed. Most historic communities provided most of their local needs locally, distant trade was for luxury items or specific durable goods. Although milking your own cows, killing your own chickens, growing your own herbs, and walking everywhere (unless you had a horse) is pretty much how things worked. Not everyone in ancient times was a blacksmith or a tailor, but almost everyone would have been able to milk, butcher, and walk. Specialisation has made us dumb. Globalisation has made us vulnerable.

I could still milk, butcher, grow my own veges, and walk everywhere if I wished. At least as long as I am fit. Its called subsistence existence, and its still very much in vogue in the third world. Its heavily associated with high rates of infant mortality, disease, misery and early death.

We have progressed to the point where the poorest New Zealander can expect a lifespan longer than any of the third world medians. The poorest 5% of New Zealanders live longer, more comfortable lives, than the Kings of bygone centuries.

Our specialisation, skills and foreign investment made this possible. In particular the foreign investment made in NZ by the British, who took a stone age, subsistence level country from as poor as any in the world, to as rich as many, in only a hundred years.

[mashman]

Globalisation has made us vulnerable.

to whom though? Are we that affordable?

In particular the foreign investment made in NZ by the British, who took a stone age, subsistence level country from as poor as any in the world, to as rich as many, in only a hundred years.

If this is what has happened in a hundred years... we may well see ourselves indoctrinated into the official global employeedom within our lifetime. Should be fun to watch.

[slowpoke]

I could still milk, butcher, grow my own veges, and walk everywhere if I wished. At least as long as I am fit. Its called subsistence existence, and its still very much in vogue in the third world. Its heavily associated with high rates of infant mortality, disease, misery and early death.

Sorry, I think you are incorrectly assuming one begets the other, why does self sufficiency have to equal a subsistence existence? The minimal living conditions you describe are usually associated with civil/tribal wars, prolonged droughts and/or disasters etc. None of these conditions exist in New Zealand which has a benign climate (short term localised conditions not withstanding) and a relatively harmonious population.

I'm not saying self sufficiency is the way to go, but I can see there is a huge difference between having a hand to mouth existence in a crippled drought/war torn country forced upon you and having a country with agricultural mineral and resource wealth deciding to fend for itself.

[mashman]

Sorry, I think you are incorrectly assuming one begets the other, why does self sufficiency have to equal a subsistence existence? The minimal living conditions you describe are usually associated with civil/tribal wars, prolonged droughts and/or disasters etc. None of these conditions exist in New Zealand which has a benign climate (short term localised conditions not withstanding) and a relatively harmonious population.

I'm not saying self sufficiency is the way to go, but I can see there is a huge difference between having a hand to mouth existence in a crippled drought/war torn country forced upon you and having a country with agricultural mineral and resource wealth deciding to fend for itself.

What a way to live... and all of those mod cons too...

[davereid]

Fair enough... trade was the wrong word to use... or maybe I should have stipulated the type of trade... i.e. financial trade...

I dont have an issue at all with trade using money if thats what you mean - beats carrying a pig or a couple of chickens to the gas station.
But I get pissed off with non-productive money trading, that creates millions of dollars for some from others misfortune.

I'm talking about things like trading shares, not because you are interested in investing in the company who's shares you are purchasing, but because you are gambling that the value of the share will rise.

I also hate our weak wristed approach to poor investment companies. It should simply be impossible to take an old ladies money, invest it in dodgy apartments in Fiji, lose all the money, and drive home to your mansion in your Mercedes, while the old lady shivers under a blanket cos the gas is cut off.

[mashman]

I dont have an issue at all with trade using money if thats what you mean - beats carrying a pig or a couple of chickens to the gas station.
But I get pissed off with non-productive money trading, that creates millions of dollars for some from others misfortune.

I'm talking about things like trading shares, not because you are interested in investing in the company who's shares you are purchasing, but because you are gambling that the value of the share will rise.

I suppose the piece of paper, cash, replaced gold... maybe it too was too heavy/precious to carry too...

For me trading in cash or shares is the same thing... you still need cash to buy shares... and the element of gambling applies to both... both have markets that fluctuate when Obama sneezes and follows through... but you still need money to buy the shares (even share schemes at work are offered instead of/as well as cash)...

I also hate our weak wristed approach to poor investment companies. It should simply be impossible to take an old ladies money, invest it in dodgy apartments in Fiji, lose all the money, and drive home to your mansion in your Mercedes, while the old lady shivers under a blanket cos the gas is cut off.

Aye! but that's the problem with financial investment... unfortunately though we're told/encouraged to make our money work for us... and when people do and get fucked over... I say tough shit, you lose, game over, your own fault... same as me losing a fiver down the back of the couch... The govt then use tax payer money to bail out the failing companies/banks/businesses and then expect the company to do the honourable thing and pay it's investors... Naive is the only word that springs to mind... sure, give the gamblers a shitload more cash to lose...

What can ya do? other than throw the bastards in jail and take every single asset they own.

The only way it'll work is for people to offer their surplus for free, their skills for free, their time for free... and when I say free, i mean, i don't want it, if you can haul it, it's yours... if you need my skills i'm not busy and i'm free (ooo John Inman)... trading implies value... and as "strange" as it sounds, we should be trading on human kindness... you need, i have, it's yours, take it.