On The Rich
Some absolutely despise the sheer existence of wealthy individuals and families while others adore them and are unhealthily obsessed with their each and every move.
We personally like to think that we stray somewhere in the middle and strive to take each person just as they are (rich or not), devising our own opinions and perspectives, nothing more, nothing less.
Whether it is someone who doesn’t have a single dollar to their name or someone who co-founded a billion-dollar technology company, we think it is paramount to take everyone as they are and do what you can to set aside any preconceived notions one may have held prior to encountering them for the first time.
All of this initially being said, there are some folks who opt to punish the rich for being, well, just that, whether it is through protesting in front of a major corporation’s buildings, spewing vitriol regarding the individual or entity anytime the party’s name is merely mentioned and while certainly don’t want it to seem as though we are clinging onto the wealthy, doing all that we can to come to their rescue and defend them, we still have our share of opinions regarding what is fair and what isn’t, and this is one of the rare instances in which we will touch on some of our opinions regarding a certain matter and the fairness (which, we willingly concede, is subjective on many levels to many individuals, which is absolutely fine) of a certain occurrence; our case study.
The Case
A short while ago, a superyacht reportedly owned by one of the members of America’s wealthiest family, Nancy Walton Laurie (a niece of the founder of the world’s largest retailer Walmart, making her, you guessed it, a billionaire, given her stake in the company through its stock) was docked in a port in Spain.
While it was docked, a handful of individuals (seemingly climate activists given the various reports and the context of the matter) approached the yacht (this was filmed, by the way), proceeded to spray the yacht with some sort of paint-like (it might’ve been paint, we just don’t know for sure) fluid onto the back of the yacht then holding up a sign that read “YOU CONSUME=OTHERS SUFFER” while the employees on the yacht attempted to clean off the paint and subsequently repositioned the yacht so as to distance itself from the activists.
With these facts, it might be appropriate to establish some other objective facts.
Facts and Thoughts
For starters, this was clearly an act of vandalism, which should be and is technically illegal.
Anyone who opts to damage someone else’s property should indeed be punished for their actions and the damage they end up causing, whether it was against a billionaire or not.
If you disagree with any of these initial statements, please inform us as to how you would feel if you were walking to your car to head to work in the morning and found that someone had intentionally painted it prior to your arrival?
Exactly.
You probably wouldn’t be thrilled and you probably would request some sort of follow-up or investigation to be performed by the relevant authorities.
Additionally, while we will certainly not explicitly express our opinions regarding climate change and sustainability in depth, as we think it is simply beyond the scope of the discussion of this article, we are absolutely comfortable in saying that we respect those who have their firm stances regarding these increasingly sensitive and contentious matters, however, at the same token we hold little to no respect for those who opt to inflict senseless acts of damage and destruction such as painting someone’s property in the name of climate change, which doesn’t really make much sense at all to begin with, from our perspective.
This might be an opportune time to break down a few of our thoughts related to the aforementioned message displayed on the vandals’ sign.
“YOU CONSUME=OTHERS SUFFER.”
First and foremost, we will concede that there is a lot to be said regarding how many companies (take a major retailer such as Walmart, for example, given the context of the incident) are quick to say that they (and society as a whole) need to take major stands in order to combat the current and future inevitable impacts of global warming while at the same time distributing and selling oodles of products that may or may not be improperly tossed or disposed of, say, into the ocean or onto the streets of their local community instead of being responsibly recycled or thrown away in a designated bin.
Nevertheless, let’s chew on this for a second.
Are the Walmarts of the world really the ones to be blamed for selling goods from essentially all categories (many of which are essential and relied upon by individuals and families all across the globe daily)?
It seems like it makes a lot more sense to ask the select consumers to reflect on their actions, as I have personally seen time after time folks in their cars or simply walking up and down the street finishing a snack or a beverage and instead of waiting two and a half minutes (tops) to find a trash or recycling bin, they opt to throw it on the ground and litter.
Additionally, do we really reasonably expect or would we even want to expect, as another random example, Mars Wrigley (the world’s largest confectioner home to famed candy brands such as M&Ms, Skittles, Milky Way bars, among plenty of others) to insert a sort of tracking device or activity monitoring mechanism on its products’ wrappers so as to ensure that its products are being properly disposed of?
That’s ridiculous, and people should just act as responsible stewards of the earth and take the extra minute and throw away their trash properly.
For the many that do not properly dispose of their wrappers, you technically consume and others potentially suffer.
You know, “YOU CONSUME=OTHERS SUFFER.”
That’s just how it is.
Just because someone has a large ocean vessel on which they travel shouldn’t make them an instant target, as people all across the globe take trips on ships quite literally all the time.
Sure, it’s very easy to blame the rich (and to me, it’s usually just a cop out, really, most of the time) and for whatever reason(s), many envy them, point and case probably the climate activists that were painting this heiress’ yacht.
However, as the late and great Sam Zell alluded to in an interview before his recent passing, the rich and their success(es) should be emulated and not despised merely because of their being successful (from a financial standpoint, that is, but money isn’t everything, people) and while it is absolutely fair to voice your opinions and perspectives surrounding climate and sustainability-related subjects, defacing someone else’s property in the name of climate change (while simultaneously wasting a handful of resources through the disposal of your paint, mind you) is just nonsensical and frankly shameful.
At the end of the day, we are attempting to tow a very fine line between not blindly supporting the wealthy given their success, but also simply being fair and objective as it relates to fighting for one’s cause (climate change, in this particular instance) in a logical fashion and not one that does more harm than good.
Some live luxury-filled lives and others don’t and some inherit large stakes of one of the world’s most valuable companies while most don’t.
Such is life.
If one feels strongly about reducing carbon emissions and perhaps the potential impact someone else will have through their personal yacht, having their own stance and voicing their opinions (in a respectful, nonviolent and legally abiding manner) is certainly acceptable, but we also feel the need to urge those in this instance and frankly others to take a step back and look at their own lives and what they can do to effectuate some sort of change instead of pointing their fingers and destroying property for absolutely no good reason.
This is the United States of America, the greatest, most innovative business hub ever.
Go make a real difference that benefits everybody without hurting anyone.
DISCLAIMER: This analysis of the aforementioned stock security is in no way to be construed, understood, or seen as formal, professional, or any other form of investment advice. We are simply expressing our opinions regarding a publicly traded entity.