Douglas Rushkoff vs. Wall Street

[Albert Rolls]

So we (or the lefty protestors, as I'm personally just sitting at home raising my kid and hitching my wagon to a higher-education market that's pushing students through regardless of how good or bad they are to get their financial aid dollars for as long as possible and paying adjuncts and MAs to teach so that the salaries can be kept down) should all shut up, go home, and accept that the way things are going is the way they should go. Writers, by the way, don't get bonuses; they get royalties. If they sell enough copies to be owed more royalties than the advance, they get more money but not a bonus, just the royalties owed them. Of course, they could get a huge advance and not sell any books. Maybe one could describe that huge advance as a bonus for past performance. But then isn't the bonus sort of the product of a failure?    

-----Original Message-----
>From: alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com>
>Sent: Oct 6, 2011 8:22 PM
>To: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>Subject: Re: Douglas Rushkoff vs. Wall Street
>
>> And what is it the wall street bankers want - and get?
>
>We all have the right to make a profit. Bankers don't have a monopoly
>on profit. Apple makes profits. Intel. IBM, MMM, MCD, Mrs. Martha's
>Baked Goods, Paul, Ringo, Gaga. Banks invest tons of money so that
>they may have a profit in the future. Of course, they need short term
>and long term profits. Some banks and some investment banks pay some
>of their employees with bonuses. Bonuses are often tied to long term
>and short term profits, sometimes to specific business ventures within
>a large firm so that one group may get a bonus while another group
>gets none. If the Yankees win the World Series, the players get a
>bonus. If Pynchon seels more books, he gets a bonus. Bonus pay is
>usually contractual. But a bonus has nothing to do with fees charged
>to kids who run up their credit cards or default on student loans.