For the CEOs, they may have run their company into the ground, but they were not compensated the way they were when they were returning huge returns. There are some golden parachutes out there, but they are one thing necessary to attract and retain talent in this job market.
Sorry, but golden parachutes are no more than corporate socialism for connected fat cats. Where is the incentive to perform if you are compensated handsomely win or lose (which they are)? And if they work so well at attracting top talent, why are so many companies run by them in the toilet?
And by the way, I believe in God. Just not in an "us versus them" god. And I do believe we were created in God's image. The problems start when we begin to affix human qualities like jealousy and vindictiveness to God. Man in God's image - good. God in man's image - misunderstood and bad.
Sorry, but golden parachutes are no more than corporate socialism for connected fat cats. Where is the incentive to perform if you are compensated handsomely win or lose (which they are)? And if they work so well at attracting top talent, why are so many companies run by them in the toilet?
And by the way, I believe in God. Just not in an "us versus them" god. And I do believe we were created in God's image. The problems start when we begin to affix human qualities like jealousy and vindictiveness to God. Man in God's image - good. God in man's image - misunderstood and bad.
Are you arguing that the majority of top companies are run by a lack of talent? Isn't that counterintuitive (the answer is yes)? Golden parachutes are there due to the competitiveness of the job market due to the lack of top talent, and it is a benefit like health care is a benefit. The top didn't just show up there (except in a few cases), and the incentive for continued high compensation keeps them there. There is no such thing as a "fat cat" except in union literature.
When did I "affix human qualities like jealousy and vindictiveness" to God? I'm sensing a straw man.
If empathy is innate and neurological, do you believe it is present in sociopaths, and how do you explain survival of the species with the proliferation of them, as well as their own survival and often prosperousness? You believe that morality is arbitrary, that the means justifies the ends. God is not the deterimner of good, He is good. He is the means and the ends. He is Reason.
Nature makes mistakes, by design. Natural selection at work. Sociopaths do not proliferate, society has a natural tendancy of culling them from the herd, or they cull themselves, as they are not capable of surviving on their own.
Nature makes mistakes, by design. Natural selection at work. Sociopaths do not proliferate, society has a natural tendancy of culling them from the herd, or they cull themselves, as they are not capable of surviving on their own.
True on the first part, but they do proliferate. Many have noted that Clinton displayed sociopathic tendencies. If self-interest is one's only motivation, and the individual is very intelligent, motivated and able, I'd argue that they would proliferate far more quickly than if they had a conscience. Lucifer, see "Dogs".
You lost the audience when you projected this statement "You believe that morality is arbitrary, that the means justifies the ends. I never said or implied that. Morality is a result of our brain's convergence due to evolution. It settles on what's best for the species survival, otherwise the species would die off. Sociopaths do not thrive. I can't say I know a single one of them personally. Natural selection would not permit sociopaths to survive [to dominate]. They would end up killing each other off. I do believe that behavioral therapy and medication can keep them in line sometimes. One form of behavioral therapy is religious indoctrination. You may now return to your original programming.
Sorry if it seemed I implied that you affixed those qualities to God. You most certainly did not. But many religious leaders do, or rather they focus on those passages from the old testament that would imply such. One of my issues with the literal translation of the bible is the many instances where the old and new testatments contradict each other. If Jesus came to teach as well as to save us, and I believe he did both, then a Christian in the truest sense of the word would have to discount those passages in the old testament that are in direct contrast to Christ's teachings as maybe not divinely inspired, or maybe written on a day with a spotty spirititual signal from the big guy.
It's regrettable that you feel like those "who have a belief in a higher power have been jerked around and indoctrinated with idiotic religious programming and crap when they were impressionable children". I was 21 years old when I made an investigation and a decision believe the claims of Christ. I understand "my natural self" more clearly than ever now.Your screen name implies a belief in the Bible no?
That is exactly how I feel. After I matured I realized I had been brain washed as a child. I now feel truly free to live my life my way after breaking away from religion. I consider myself to be a recovering Christian.
I believe if you find religion brings you peace and comfort, embrace it, but don't try converting others. Your faith is your concern, not mine or anyone elses and especially not the governments. You don't want the government in your religion and the government sure doesn't want to be in the religion business.
