Why do British/Europeans hate businessmen/capitalism?

[JMapleton]

I do not think this is meant for PN. This is a social question.

It seems to me, that when the average American is asked to view their stereotype of a "rich person," they immediately think of people like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, or some other businessmen.

When people in Europe think of a "rich person," it's either a celebrity or a member of the aristocracy, like a Baron or a Lord.

I often read the BBC news site because I like how their news is very geographically balanced, unlike United States media outlets that mostly focus on emotional news and US based news, rarely mentioning what's going on outside of the country.

But when I visit the business section of UK news sites, the quality of reporting is usually very poor. They mostly talk about "office politics" issues and issues that effect the daily worker and they do not mention actual business news (ie, company or investment news).

It seems specifically British people very bitter towards businessmen and it's almost "uncool" to be an entrepreneur in the UK.

I once read on a Ferrari forum and one member from the UK who moved to the US noted the differences in attitudes he had between people in the UK and the US. In the UK, he said, people are more like to cut you off or insult you if you're driving a Ferrari, whereas in the US people respect you and instead of insulting you, they're more likely to ask you how you earned enough money to buy a Ferrari.

 

[tommo123]

some of us (speaking as a brit) don't have a problem with capitalism, just the american style of "i can get this if i fuck over all these people and steal their life savings, it's legal so it's ok" capitalism. even if the legality will be fixed later by bribing/lobying to fix it

 

[ConradGoodmanIT]

I don't think your perception of Brits is accurate at all.

On the whole we embrace capitalism, but dislike greed and ego.

We also dislike investment bankers who take risks with taxpayers money and then lose it all, creating a banking crisis!

 

[dastral]

It seems to me, that when the average American is asked to view their stereotype of a "rich person," they immediately think of people like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, or some other businessmen.

When people in Europe think of a "rich person," it's either a celebrity or a member of the aristocracy, like a Baron or a Lord.

Unlike the US which worship the "Self Made Man" & "American Dream" (thus Money) i think europeans are much more jaded/suspicious because after hundreds of years of Monarchy/Dictators they realise that you can't really get "that rich/powerful" without screwing up thousands and thousands of persons.

I do not know how you got the idea about the Baron/Lord, but you have to admit that the "Rich & Famous" are above the Law. See OJ Simpson vs Random Black Guy...

Capitalism in its most modern form is an abomination :
- You start a business, fail, get closed down and have creditors, no free pass (normal)
- Banks invest/gamble billions and have a "get out of jail card" (WTF ?)

It's sickening, yet because they are "too big to let them fail"....
So the "Ford T Model capitalism" with good wages has become a Greed Fest.

Europeans are also much more social(ist) and consider that 50 people with 1 Million, is much better than 1 Person with 50 Million and 49 with nothing.

So there is a social pressure to "succeed but not too much".
Which in the US is more like "as long as it's legal, do it, no limits".

 

[AViking]

Swedes don't hate businessmen or capitalism. What perplexes them though is the lack of social benefits and the desire by the vast majority of the population to have a country where it's dog eat dog and only a very select few succeed. The US has a shrinking middle class and all the money is going to the top which doesn't appeal to people here.

Mostly though it's just not so materialistic over here. If you truly want to understand the difference in mentality first you need to understand whether or why you value material goods over other things like free time, access to healthcare, pension plans, education, etc.

Ultimately though in the US nobody likes taxes since they are so poorly spent and collected.

In Sweden being an entrepreneur or business owner is considered very prestigious. It's how you make money here. Most people make roughly the same amount of money if you're middle class and working at a company. To get out of that you have to get to the top and that's done by running your own business for many. Of course it's all relative though. The average salary in Stockholm is like $55,000 a year which is pretty good if you want to compare to many places in the US. You would have to be unskilled or uneducated to make less but to make more you have to step it up.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Which in the US is more like "as long as it's legal, do it, no limits".

Luckly this is changing in the US. The new Capitalism is "Do it, no limits. If you get caught just make sure you are too rich to go to jail."

 

[deal-seek-101]

If you get caught just make sure you are too rich to go to jail.


Ha Ha...true saying

 

[bononos]

.......
I once read on a Ferrari forum and one member from the UK who moved to the US noted the differences in attitudes he had between people in the UK and the US. In the UK, he said, people are more like to cut you off or insult you if you're driving a Ferrari, whereas in the US people respect you and instead of insulting you, they're more likely to ask you how you earned enough money to buy a Ferrari.

The problem is not with British/Europeans but rather the attitude of Americans who tend to believe in the myth of free wheeling capitalism and Europeans are more knowledgeable about history and economics. Given that social mobility in the UK is about the same as the US, British are simply being blunt, not pessimistic about their general situation.

And I don't find the reporting on the financial section to be 'very poor'. It has a good mix of things that might be of interest to the salaried worker instead of purely investment news and stock hype.

 

[PingviN]

The simple answer is we don't, at least in Sweden. We expect everyone to pay their share of the taxes we've implemented to support our welfare system and we disagree with the idea that a CEO is worth 50 times what someone on the floor working is worth. Solidarity is etched in deep here.

We hold innovation in the highest regard, entrepreneurial spirit as well and we certainly don't hate people who succeed in their line of work.

 

[JMapleton]

we disagree with the idea that a CEO is worth 50 times what someone on the floor working is worth. Solidarity is etched in deep here.

Then why woudl anyone want to become a CEO if the CEO only makes say, 5 times the average worker? Do you know how little that buys these days if you're trying to live luxuriously?

Many (not all) CEOs work their butt of and relocate their families constantly to climb the corporate ladder. Why would a person do all that just to make $200k a year? It's not worth it.

Also, if regular workers are not motivated to become a CEO, that hurts the entire company.

 

[JMapleton]

Unlike the US which worship the "Self Made Man" & "American Dream" (thus Money) i think europeans are much more jaded/suspicious because after hundreds of years of Monarchy/Dictators they realise that you can't really get "that rich/powerful" without screwing up thousands and thousands of persons.

I agree. I also think European celebrities, particularly British ones, give rich people in general a bad name. UK Celebs behave with no class. American celebs are the same, but the UK ones are much worse.

 

[PingviN]

Then why woudl anyone want to become a CEO if the CEO only makes say, 5 times the average worker?

You're going to have to ask the CEOs, we have them. 5x the average worker is still a lot of money. I'm guessing a CEO makes somewhere around 3-14x what their workers make and they're not worth more.

Do you know how little that buys these days if you're trying to live luxuriously?

Maybe living luxurious isn't that interesting? We have other values than you do, I don't think you'd understand.

Many (not all) CEOs work their butt of and relocate their families constantly to climb the corporate ladder. Why would a person do all that just to make $200k a year? It's not worth it.

And they pay close to 45% in taxes as well. And still we have CEOs and well-managed companies.. Weird how that works. Maybe your CEOs are grossly overpaid, thought of that?

Also, if regular workers are not motivated to become a CEO, that hurts the entire company.

And still our companies are, for the most part, well-managed. I don't think tons of money (as compared to a lot of money) is that much of an incentive for someone who wants to climb the corporate ladder.

 

[JMapleton]

You're going to have to ask the CEOs, we have them. 5x the average worker is still a lot of money. I'm guessing a CEO makes somewhere around 3-14x what their workers make and they're not worth more.

Not worth more according to who? What information do you use to come to this conclusion?

A bad CEO can crash a company, a talented one can save it.

Someone has to make the large decisions about the direction of a company, they do not run themselves. Is the captain of a ship not important?

Why should they be paid so much? This is business. In America, we do not get up early every freakin morning and give up 75% of our waking hours just to "contribute to society." I want something for it. I want money. I want cars. I want houses. I want vacations.

I will not be FORCED to pay for the mistakes of others. I sympathize with the plight of others and any assistance I may offer the less fortunate should be my own choice.

You collectivize society. You may other people's problems my problem without my consent. That's theft and slavery.

 

[AViking]

And that will be the death of America too. Everything cannot be about money. Making $3,000,000 a year to run a company is not bad. It will buy someone anything they want.

US CEO's on average get 354 times as much money as the average worker. Not 50. The average US CEO makes about $6000 per hour.

The average worker in Sweden makes more money and the average CEO still makes a lot of money. Millions of dollars a year. You end up with a healthier society and a healthier economy.

If you look at salaries historically speaking you'll see that US salaries are shrinking for everyone but the top. All the money goes to the top. In 1980 a CEO made 40 times the average worker. In 2000 they made 525 times. Today we're down to a measly 354 times.

According to you if we go lower we won't find any good CEO's and it will hurt companies. That's a laughable argument and one that you clearly haven't put any thought into. The data is all against you.

 

[PingviN]

1. Not worth more according to who? What information do you use to come to this conclusion?

2. A bad CEO can crash a company, a talented one can save it.

3. Someone has to make the large decisions about the direction of a company, they do not run themselves. Is the captain of a ship not important?

4. Why should they be paid so much? This is business. In America, we do not get up early every freakin morning and give up 75% of our waking hours just to "contribute to society." I want something for it. I want money. I want cars. I want houses. I want vacations.

5. I will not be FORCED to pay for the mistakes of others. I sympathize with the plight of others and any assistance I may offer the less fortunate should be my own choice.

6. You collectivize society. You may other people's problems my problem without my consent. That's theft and slavery.

1. Clearly we fill the positions with competent people, if we didn't, they'd be worth more.

2. We don't share this focus on an individuals effort, it's a very American approach. A CEO is surrounded by people that help offering advice and opinion. Surely a CEO is the one making the decision, but a CEO (one individual) rarely "saves" a business. Exceptions exist, I'm sure, but in general, no.

3. No one says a CEO is not important, I argue how important they are.

4. This is Sweden, we're not like you. But we have vacation as well, at least 5 weeks, put into law. We also have cars. And houses.

5. That's fine, no one is telling you to come live here.

6. No, no, it's not. As a society, we share the idea that the well-being of the collective adds to the well-being of the individual and the other way around. Anyone who doesn't share this core Swedish value is welcome to leave at any time they want. Taxes is not theft and taxes is not slavery.

 

[dastral]

Then why woudl anyone want to become a CEO if the CEO only makes say, 5 times the average worker? Do you know how little that buys these days if you're trying to live luxuriously?
Many (not all) CEOs work their butt of and relocate their families constantly to climb the corporate ladder. Why would a person do all that just to make $200k a year? It's not worth it.
Also, if regular workers are not motivated to become a CEO, that hurts the entire company.

As i pointed out, the US worship money, and everything is revolves around the idea "more money is always better" is an universal truth.

How much is worth the CEO of a company with 2000 people each making 50.000$ ?
1 Million ? 2 Million ? 10 Million ? 100 Million ?

I'm not saying he should be getting 200K, hell i'd even say a Million is probably not enough.
Now if he makes 5 Million a year, then i say he's making "more than enough".

Sure you could double his income thus "add even more luxury" but society would be better if Half of that 5M$ extra to "double his income" would be used as hardware/future investment, and the other Half as "bonus for the 2001 people of the firm".

And that's were the US & EU are very different.

 

[TheThirdMan]

Why should they be paid so much? This is business. In America, we do not get up early every freakin morning and give up 75% of our waking hours just to "contribute to society." I want something for it. I want money. I want cars. I want houses. I want vacations.

I will not be FORCED to pay for the mistakes of others. I sympathize with the plight of others and any assistance I may offer the less fortunate should be my own choice.

You collectivize society. You may other people's problems my problem without my consent. That's theft and slavery.

There are people who agree with you in britain and people who disagree with you. It's not really a geographical divide i don't think.

Some people value society and community.

One person earning millions is not exactly fair. It's not like you worked more for it. There's no real justification for one homo sapien earning millions and another earning a fraction of that. The teacher works no less than the banker, yet earns far less. Effort and time has almost zero effect on pay.

The reality is your wage in your professional life will be mostly decided before your birth, by virtue of the family you're born into and the education you will have. Sure, there are exceptions who will work their way up from poverty to become rich, but how do you decide if that money they earn is fair compared to the wage of others? Should a banker that works a 60 hour week earn a million, whilst a teacher that works a 50 hour weak earn 25k?

Your argument is fair if all started off equally in life, and had the same opportunities. It's abundantly clear that's not the case. The taxes and "mistakes" that you're "forced" to pay for are an investment into the ideal of society and community, in the belief that those less fortunate than ourselves deserve everyone's help. Your desire to accumulate shiny crap doesn't trump other's rights to basic needs. Because you happen to earn a huge amount of money, either by virtue of your birth, or by a sequence of hard work and chance, doesn't mean you worked that much harder than someone who has less than you.

I don't think you'll find any argument against capitalism being the best system- it's a great engine for progress and can empower the lowest in society. Your ideal of capitalism is only sustainable if you believe that all other had the same chances as you, but you are the more virtuous and therefore have the most money.

Perhaps the argument contrary to yours could be summed up thus: "A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in". Your argument is "Screw society, I want shiny crap."

 

[Broheim]

take a look at where Denmark is on this chart, and we have absolutely no problem finding qualified CEOs.

I will not be FORCED to pay for the mistakes of others. I sympathize with the plight of others and any assistance I may offer the less fortunate should be my own choice.

You collectivize society. You may other people's problems my problem without my consent. That's theft and slavery.

The American taxpayer totally hasn't been forced to pay for the mistakes of overpaid CEOs, amirite guise...

 

[JMapleton]

As i pointed out, the US worship money, and everything is revolves around the idea "more money is always better" is an universal truth.

How much is worth the CEO of a company with 2000 people each making 50.000$ ?
1 Million ? 2 Million ? 10 Million ? 100 Million ?

I'm not saying he should be getting 200K, hell i'd even say a Million is probably not enough.
Now if he makes 5 Million a year, then i say he's making "more than enough".

You're falling into the trap of guessing how much a CEO is worth.

How much are they worth? Market rate.

Whatever a company is willing to pay, that's what they're worth. Just like your job, my job, everyone else's job.

If a company offers them 100m a year, that's what they're worth.

 

[JMapleton]

take a look at where Denmark is on this chart, and we have absolutely no problem finding qualified CEOs.

You have far less companies to run. Denmark is smaller than some American cities.

The American taxpayer totally hasn't been forced to pay for the mistakes of overpaid CEOs, amirite guise...

Under socialist policies. Socialism was enacted to save these corporations and the only thing that happened was rich people got bailed out and everyone else was stuck with the bill.

Under a capitalist system, the system and the economy would have been allowed to fail, which is what should have happened.

But then again, under a capitalist system the problem would have never existed. It was caused by poor economic policy from the Fed Reserve.

 

[JMapleton]

One person earning millions is not exactly fair. It's not like you worked more for it. There's no real justification for one homo sapien earning millions and another earning a fraction of that. The teacher works no less than the banker, yet earns far less. Effort and time has almost zero effect on pay.

Not fair according to whom? Where do you draw the line?

This is where you fair. You start drawing lines.

Some people think $1m a year is fine. Some think $10m a year is fine. Some have a problem with anyone that makes more than $100k a year. Where and how do you draw the line? And what right does a group of politicians have to say what a person can and cannot make?

Capitalism is freedom. You have the freedom to fail or to succeed. You cannot bring out the best work ethic in people in unless you put that risk out there that if they do not work, they will be poor.

Scandinavian countries are not the "happiest" countries in the world, they are simply the most "content" countries in the world. There is a big difference.

They have a dull society. A society that worships the collective and doesn't respect or admire the individual. There are no heros there. No winners. No losers. It's "1984 by Orwell" It's "Anthem by Ayn Rand"

The US, although we have a "broken" version of capitalism, we as a society do respect and admire the individual. Until you respect and admire the individual, you will always be a slave to the collective.

Should a banker that works a 60 hour week earn a million, whilst a teacher that works a 50 hour weak earn 25k?

They each choose their own profession knowing what it pays. Why not?

 

[TheThirdMan]

Not fair according to whom? Where do you draw the line?

This is where you fair. You start drawing lines.

Some people think $1m a year is fine. Some think $10m a year is fine. Some have a problem with anyone that makes more than $100k a year. Where and how do you draw the line? And what right does a group of politicians have to say what a person can and cannot make?

Capitalism is freedom. You have the freedom to fail or to succeed. You cannot bring out the best work ethic in people in unless you put that risk out there that if they do not work, they will be poor.

Scandinavian countries are not the "happiest" countries in the world, they are simply the most "content" countries in the world. There is a big difference.

They have a dull society. A society that worships the collective and doesn't respect or admire the individual. There are no heros there. No winners. No losers. It's "1984 by Orwell" It's "Anthem by Ayn Rand"

The US, although we have a "broken" version of capitalism, we as a society do respect and admire the individual. Until you respect and admire the individual, you will always be a slave to the collective.



They each choose their own profession knowing what it pays. Why not?

If you can't see that one person getting $5,000 an hour is not fair compared to one person getting $8 an hour, then I'm not sure I can help you see for yourself how that's not fair.

The point is people don't have the freedom to fail or succeed. You keep repeating this whilst not addressing what people have said in this thread. As long as people don't have the same chances, it cannot be fair. It's great for the one with chances and the right start in life. It's not great for the child of a crack addict. Poor people can rarely "choose their profession" in the way well off people can.

Why do you think scandanavian countries have a "dull" society? When did you last visit?

 

[PingviN]

They have a dull society. A society that worships the collective and doesn't respect or admire the individual. There are no heros there. No winners. No losers. It's "1984 by Orwell" It's "Anthem by Ayn Rand"

How about: visit Scandinavia for more than 1 week. Talk to Scandinavians. Then diss our culture. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[dastral]

You're falling into the trap of guessing how much a CEO is worth.
How much are they worth? Market rate.
Whatever a company is willing to pay, that's what they're worth. Just like your job, my job, everyone else's job.
If a company offers them 100m a year, that's what they're worth.

You know very well this is false and the market is often bullshit.
The "Market" will try to pay the lowest acceptable rate possible, which is not really linked to the value or worth of the individual.
The "Market" may be tricked to pay enormous amounts for incompetent people.

Here is an example : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Léo_Apotheker

On September 22, 2011, the HP Board of Directors replaced Apotheker as chief executive, effective immediately, with fellow board member and former eBay chief Meg Whitman.[16] Though Apotheker served barely ten months, he received over $13 million in compensation: a severance payment of $7.2 million, shares worth $3.56 million, and a performance bonus of $2.4 million,[17] although the company lost more than $30 billion in market capitalization during his tenure.

Using the "Market" as an argument is bogus and everyone knows it.

 

[Broheim]

You have far less companies to run. Denmark is smaller than some American cities.

the Numbers I have seen suggest that Denmark has almost twice as many private companies per capita as the US does, at least publicly traded ones.