Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bald Eagle who wrote (11372)	4/30/2002 5:41:40 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Do you think Bill Gates would have started Microsoft knowing he would never make more than one of his shipping clerks? Do you think the bankers and investors who put money in along the way would have done so knowing that anything over a few thousand a year would be confiscated? I worked for a startup about 20 years back. I worked strictly for stock- -no pay. Which helped that cash-poor company. Several years ago they IPOed and it paid off. Do you think I would have done that for nothing? Perhaps you should work on a time machine. You appear to long for Soviet Russia. These are the basics of the engine that made America we are talking about. Would you actually destroy that engine?

To: Bald Eagle who wrote (11372)	4/30/2002 5:59:19 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

Most people who amass great wealth get it from the fruits of others' labor. Could Bill Gates have become as rich as he is without having many thousands of others working for him? Many Microsoft employees have also gotten rich, and many others who have not have at least become reasonably comfortable financially through their Microsoft employment. They aren't Bill's slaves. They agreed to work for him, they were not forced to do so. And they agreed to work for him because they liked the opportunity better then the others that they also could have picked. Bill doesn't dominate them they could quit and most of them could find another decent job. Yes he is a lot richer then them, but I don't have a problem with that, and even if you do, I don't see how that makes Bill Gates into some abusive overlord who dominates through his money. Tim

To: Bald Eagle who wrote (11372)	4/30/2002 6:02:47 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

<<Could Bill Gates have become as rich as he is without having many thousands of others working for him?>> That's called private sector job creation.

To: Bald Eagle who wrote (11372)	4/30/2002 10:30:56 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21057

It can be a great incentive for an inventive person to know that (s)he can get great personal wealth and power from successfully setting out a whole process that included innovative ideas. This greatness of capitalism turns into a tragedy when it is used to found a dynasty who needs neither talent or luck to amass a fortune. The best path to wealth is choosing the right parents. Witness for example the parasitic worm Richard Mellon Scaife who's only talent is being an heir. cnn.com TP

To: Bald Eagle who wrote (11372)	5/1/2002 3:34:18 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Bill Gates is responsible for creating about 60 million jobs. What a shithead, huh?