Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/05/11

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] THANK YOU Phil we MUST change
From: Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com (Frank Dernie)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 09:16:33 +0100
References: <2226427.1336698669720.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <CBD1EAF8.141FD%chris@chriscrawfordphoto.com> <20120510223548.685dc9ad@linux-pfy5.site> <B95ADF47-71D0-4272-A668-FB8FF745BA8F@teleport.com>

Phil, I don't thing the decent life was something "permitted" with all due 
respect.
Before money can be spent somebody, somewhere nearby, has to make it. 
However much we value our Police, Doctors, Bankers (!), Nurses and so forth 
whilst they earn a salary, and work for it, they create no new money.
Somebody who takes a lump of clay and makes a vase of a brick out of it 
creates wealth.
Somebody who takes tons of iron ore and makes pig iron creates wealth.
Somebody who takes pig iron and refines it into steel creates wealth.
Somebody who takes steel and makes washing machines out of it creates 
wealth, and so forth.
Unfortunately, since the creation of this wealth makes one close to the 
price people will pay for it you can't, generally, get away with taking and 
paying vast salaries and remaining competitive in the market place, so there 
is a limited number of people who make money creating wealth, and it 
generally a messy business.
So there are few takers for these crucial careers.
OTOH if you work (financially) miles from the retail price of products you 
can be paid lots of money, even when the contribution to wealth creation is 
small. These jobs are rarely as messy either.
These jobs are in great demand.
So we end up in a system where a banker, who takes money which one 
individual has, but is not using, and makes it available to another 
individual who has no money but needs some for something. The fee they pay 
themselves for this is, IMHO, wildly out of proportion with the value of the 
service they have provided, but they control the fee, and they are so far 
from directly effecting retail prices that it seems not to matter. These 
people do -not- create wealth, they facilitate those that do.
The system is rotten. The people who are crucial to wealth creation are not 
valued. Many rich people, who are nowhere near as important to the economy 
as is publicised, have so much power over the government they always get 
what they want.
When the USA (and the UK) was rich we had industry creating wealth. This 
created wealth could then be spent on things we value/want, like photographs 
:-)
Now neither country has much in the way of wealth creation, the money pool 
is not being replenished as it used to be, so there is no way we can live as 
well as we used to, neither the wealth creators nor those that relied on 
them for their high standard of living.
It is interesting to note that during the period when there was considerable 
wealth creation going on and filling the money pool the top tax rates, here 
and in the USA were 90% or so, so, yet again the rich, who end up in a 
majority of powerful government positions look after their own short term 
interests, and that of their friends. To the detriment of the general 
population and their country.
IMHO
Frank
I have posted this on the forum...


On 11 May, 2012, at 03:45, Mark Kronquist wrote:

> 
> On May 10, 2012, at 7:35 PM, Phil Forrest wrote:
> 
>> Agreed. I just graduated college, have some loans to pay even though
>> the GI Bill helped me out (but no, did not pay for my entire education
>> as most Americans think it does) and just last week I had the pleasure
>> of moving out of my apartment because I couldn't afford rent. But I
>> didn't move into a new place of my own, instead I had a few friends
>> help me store the items that I kept and now I'm couch surfing. Still
>> unemployed and I apply for jobs just about every day and follow up on
>> the ones I've applied for as often. Job hunting is my job now.
>> 
>> I still have an M9 because I'm holding out hope that there might be a
>> job somewhere in the nation that I can find that will be in
>> photography. The GI Bill paid for that camera as my one big educational
>> write off, that's why I have it. I don't think I'll be able to live long
>> without being a photographer. Sure, some will say my priorities are
>> messed up being homeless and owning an M9 but this has come on kind of
>> quickly and in the case that a media type job does come along then I
>> have to have a camera. There are less expensive alternatives, yes, but
>> I'm not selling my entire Leica kit of a few beat up and scratched
>> lenses plus my M9 so I can buy an older Nikon or Canon DSLR and lay out
>> a few thousand on glass needed for work. I'm either in or I'm out, no in
>> between. 
>> 
>> My case as a journalist is one that we're reading about more and more.
>> College graduates, post grads and PhDs taking jobs in entry level
>> retail, wait staff or the like just to keep feeding themselves. I just
>> applied to work at a bakery and I'm going to an open-call interview
>> tomorrow for an $8/hr job that I'm competing for against recent high
>> school graduates.
>> 
>> So no, I don't see how many folks in my generation will be able to
>> invest in a Leica kit down the road. The economy of this country and of
>> the world is completely different from before 2007 and vastly different
>> from what it was more than a decade ago, let alone 40 years ago. 
>> 
>> 10 years ago most would have bet that Leica would have gone under
>> before Kodak, that's why I mentioned Kodak. Kodak failed to keep up
>> even though they were at the forefront of technology in digital
>> capture. They just didn't market it well. But I never thought I would
>> see the day that Kodak would go under. Meanwhile Leica is still around
>> but somehow is bringing out cameras and a standard lens at prices
>> higher than a year's tuition at almost every public college in the US.
>> Leica can still fail. So there are people out there swinging the value
>> of my education or Chris Crawford's two degrees around their shoulder.
>> Now with the monochrome version we know that most of the users will be
>> rich hobbyists or professionals that can afford to have several M9
>> bodies, one color, one B&W. But Leica is further alienating themselves
>> from their future market because more and more people are starting to
>> have to live like me. $8/hr part time at a bakery is the job I'm really
>> hoping to get right now because it's available. Here. Now. 
>> 
>> The world is a different place now but luckily we're living longer so
>> we can work a decade or two more and maybe save up for a used M9 and a
>> legacy computer in our twilight years.
>> 
>> Yeah, I'm angry.
>> 
>> Phil Forrest
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, 10 May 2012 22:01:20 -0400
>> Chris Crawford <chris at chriscrawfordphoto.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> You have your head in the sand if you think that, Doug. The world has
>>> changed, and my generation will never be permitted the decent lives
>>> our parents had, no matter how hard we work.
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> http://philipforrestphoto.wordpress.com/
>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/philforrest
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



Replies: Reply from chris at chriscrawfordphoto.com (Chris Crawford) ([Leica] THANK YOU Phil we MUST change)
Reply from lew1716 at gmail.com (Lew Schwartz) ([Leica] THANK YOU Phil we MUST change)
In reply to: Message from wildlightphoto at earthlink.net (Doug Herr) ([Leica] Leica Monochrome)
Message from chris at chriscrawfordphoto.com (Chris Crawford) ([Leica] Leica Monochrome)
Message from photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Phil Forrest) ([Leica] Leica Monochrome)
Message from mak at teleport.com (Mark Kronquist) ([Leica] THANK YOU Phil we MUST change)