|
|
Post by BCizzle on Feb 12, 2015 0:29:55 GMT -5
I'm not saying what they should be paid, but I know what producing an item here in America costs paying people minimum wages and the small profit margins we have to go along with it. That's why companies that are able to shift work overseas. It doesn't make that practice right, but I can see why they try to do it. And please don't start with the corporate slime ball stuff. Yes, greed is real, but there really are many CEOs that don't take advantage of the system. Besides, it sends the message that one should be penalized for being successful. How stupid does that sound? It is a delicate balance in the end. And with all the outsourcing, it feels like companies want to pay as little as they can to make as much as they can. Is that right? Is it exploitation? Is that the kind of world we want to live in? Is it fair? Do we care if it's fair? (And what about rich companies that avoid paying taxes? Are they smart? Immoral?) I guess humans have been fighting over wealth for thousands of years and haven't figured it out yet. Survival of the financially fittest? Abu Dhabi is a horribly imbalanced country when it comes to wealth, plus they discriminate against women and gays. I hope we can agree they are a worthy target of hate. |
|
|
|
Post by kingnothing ~ Hardwired... on Feb 12, 2015 7:08:59 GMT -5
I'm not saying what they should be paid, but I know what producing an item here in America costs paying people minimum wages and the small profit margins we have to go along with it. That's why companies that are able to shift work overseas. It doesn't make that practice right, but I can see why they try to do it. And please don't start with the corporate slime ball stuff. Yes, greed is real, but there really are many CEOs that don't take advantage of the system. Besides, it sends the message that one should be penalized for being successful. How stupid does that sound? It is a delicate balance in the end. And with all the outsourcing, it feels like companies want to pay as little as they can to make as much as they can. Is that right? Is it exploitation? Is that the kind of world we want to live in? Is it fair? Do we care if it's fair? (And what about rich companies that avoid paying taxes? Are they smart? Immoral?) I guess humans have been fighting over wealth for thousands of years and haven't figured it out yet. Survival of the financially fittest? Abu Dhabi is a horribly imbalanced country when it comes to wealth, plus they discriminate against women and gays. I hope we can agree they are a worthy target of hate. Oh, I understand need for a delicate balance, I just don't think we should crucify companies for wanting to make as much money as possible if we're doing it because it appears that those at the top are super rich without having legit proof that they did immoral things to do it. And for the record, I can't agree that we should hate anyone or any culture. I sure as hell don't have to like how they treat gays and women, but as you said, it's a delicate balance. If we leave other countries alone and only focus on our own issues we could accomplish so much here. But then we appear selfish since we're still the only superpower with the resources to help less fortunate countries. That fuels the hate that some overseas already have for us to build up armies and come attack us, and that leads to civilian deaths and millions of dollars in rebuilding whatever is destroyed. Okay, that escalated quickly. I'll leave the hypothetical where it is. Hopefully you get my point about balance. |
|
|
|
Post by WalterF on Feb 12, 2015 21:45:18 GMT -5
Hes being a whiny bitch. Wwe isnt directly hurting him kr doing anything to him, so to rag on WWE for an area they are willing to do shows in is ridiculious. Wwe and the wrestling business are here to MAKE MONEY, that means being available to perform the most amount of places humanly possible, it doesnt mean WWE is supporting anti gay and antifeminism just because they pit on shows there. Thats like saying if i play w a band at a venue in the south that has many antigay suppprters that im
Supporting the anti gay movement simply by
Performing in that area. Rubbish ans whiny
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 4, 2024 18:38:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2015 21:49:23 GMT -5
Hes being a whiny bitch. Wwe isnt directly hurting him kr doing anything to him, so to rag on WWE for an area they are willing to do shows in is ridiculious. Wwe and the wrestling business are here to MAKE MONEY, that means being available to perform the most amount of places humanly possible, it doesnt mean WWE is supporting anti gay and antifeminism just because they pit on shows there. Thats like saying if i play w a band at a venue in the south that has many antigay suppprters that im Supporting the anti gay movement simply by Performing in that area. Rubbish ans whiny If you read this thread, you'd see why that analogy is idiotic. |
|
|
|
Post by WalterF on Feb 12, 2015 21:56:02 GMT -5
Hes being a whiny bitch. Wwe isnt directly hurting him kr doing anything to him, so to rag on WWE for an area they are willing to do shows in is ridiculious. Wwe and the wrestling business are here to MAKE MONEY, that means being available to perform the most amount of places humanly possible, it doesnt mean WWE is supporting anti gay and antifeminism just because they pit on shows there. Thats like saying if i play w a band at a venue in the south that has many antigay suppprters that im Supporting the anti gay movement simply by Performing in that area. Rubbish ans whiny If you read this thread, you'd see why that analogy is idiotic. I DID read the thread and my analogy is not idiotic, as you certainly are. WWE performs there, an entertainment company. Unless WWE directs any of their people to walk around saying they support treating women or gays poorly and support that countries values, they are simply there to provide an entertainment product.... Which matches my analogy, which is why it makes sense. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 4, 2024 18:38:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2015 21:59:57 GMT -5
If you read this thread, you'd see why that analogy is idiotic. I DID read the thread and my analogy is not idiotic, as you certainly are. WWE performs there, an entertainment company. Unless WWE directs any of their people to walk around saying they support treating women or gays poorly and support that countries values, they are simply there to provide an entertainment product.... Which matches my analogy, which is why it makes sense. Sigh. You compared the south, which has some racists/bigots, to an entire nation where people are jailed for being homosexual. It is not remotely the same thing. Thus, the analogy is not a good one. |
|
|
|
Post by WalterF on Feb 12, 2015 22:09:53 GMT -5
I DID read the thread and my analogy is not idiotic, as you certainly are. WWE performs there, an entertainment company. Unless WWE directs any of their people to walk around saying they support treating women or gays poorly and support that countries values, they are simply there to provide an entertainment product.... Which matches my analogy, which is why it makes sense. Sigh. You compared the south, which has some racists, to an entire nation where people are jailed for being homosexual. It is not remotely the same thing. Thus, the analogy is not a good one. Actually, it is quite good still. Just because the ruling against gays is OFFICIAL in certain places and the discrimatory process is held more UNOFFICIALLY in certain other areas, doesnt make it a world of difference and both situations are dealing w the overall issue of discrimination and negativity. Your getting caught up in the details when it is unimportant.... Basically ur being a pain in the ass for the sake of it. There are areas in this and other industrialized countries where it would be just as dangerous for a gay person to walk around in public. Assault, and other actions could take place in a way that would similarly damage or impede on that gay persons life. If its on or off record, my point remains, by playing or performingin an area that officially supports or unofficially supports negative or percieved negative policies, you are not aligning yourself with those values by Simply entertaining there. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 4, 2024 18:38:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2015 22:14:08 GMT -5
Sigh. You compared the south, which has some racists, to an entire nation where people are jailed for being homosexual. It is not remotely the same thing. Thus, the analogy is not a good one. Actually, it is quite good still. Just because the ruling against gays is OFFICIAL in certain places and the discrimatory process is held more UNOFFICIALLY in certain other areas, doesnt make it a world of difference and both situations are dealing w the overall issue of discrimination and negativity. Your getting caught up in the details when it is unimportant.... Basically ur being a pain in the ass for the sake of it. There are areas in this and other industrialized countries where it would be just as dangerous for a gay person to walk around in public. Assault, and other actions could take place in a way that would similarly damage or impede on that gay persons life. If its on or off record, my point remains, by playing or performingin an area that officially supports or unofficially supports negative or percieved negative policies, you are not aligning yourself with those values by Simply entertaining there. No no. It still makes sense for Young to be upset. Try putting yourself in his shoes. Sure, it's a business, and a pretty sizable market, so I get why WWE is still going there and think Young is overreacting. However, if my company is touring the world and I have an opportunity to visit places I may never otherwise get to see, and one of the places legitimately does not allow me to go or else be imprisoned, and thus missing the tour (not sure if it's only the one location or not) then I'd be pretty pissed about it. The analogy doesn't work because while he's allowed in one place, he's legitimately not allowed in the other. If he wants to work a show in Alabama, he can, he'll probably get some ridicule from drunk rednecks, but he won't get imprisoned for who he is. |
|
|
|
Post by WalterF on Feb 12, 2015 22:21:58 GMT -5
The analogy still works as the analogy does not apply to the detailed, specificity of the rules or discrimination but to the overall place of blame, basically to show that the entertainer does not adopt the policies of those it entertains. That is what the analogy speaks to.
As far as Darren goes, I dont blame him for being a bit ticked, BUT, he IS being whiny. He works for the top wrestling promotion, prob makes decent money, and is fortunate in mostly all aspects of that situation. To rag, publicly on your company for performing in a place for a few dates that doesnt align or support your beliefs is pretty controlling and overly righteous. WWE isnt punishing him, taking away a push, robbing him of a great potential angle. They are protecting him and the Divas from potential danger or threat; which is professional. If one of the Divas whines about this; theyd be just as whiny, but they didnt and Darren did.
|
|
