This is their line of work. Careers in architecture, engineering, design, products, are all passion driven. Once a project like this is finished you can guarantee that they're very reluctant to start on the next one right away. They don't have to do any 'charity' work because it is not in their interest, not in their job description. There are other people working on those already so to say this is meaningless is pretty ignorant.

Works like this is meaningful to us because it fulfills our passion and creativity and at the same time get paid for it. Trust me, I wouldn't want to be working on anything else other than design cars/products.

I hope you're being sarcastic.

Does that mean these trades people shouldn't be allowed to work on someone's vacation home? Or a custom car? Or apparently anything that doesn't relate to "the greater good?"

Amazing yacht design concepts from Jonathan Peace, Art Center Upper term student:

Illusion - 65m MegaYacht on Behance

http://behance.vo.llnwd.net/profiles...8e8897a957.jpg
http://behance.vo.llnwd.net/profiles...7be7f4bed1.jpg
http://behance.vo.llnwd.net/profiles...0cabb6babe.jpg
http://behance.vo.llnwd.net/profiles...83df6eb8f4.jpg
http://behance.vo.llnwd.net/profiles...7b662cf940.jpg

If this is what you truly believe then I feel sorry for you. In a city where everyone seems to be bitching about the cost of living, it is quite annoying to see people pursue these ridiculously over priced items when the rest of us struggle to make ends meet. Things like this make me wish for a bigger socialist government. For the price of this yacht you could buy 600 families houses in this city, you could probably feed an entire city for a decade in africa.... All because someone wants the priciest friggen boat in the ocean, which will employ people that could easily find a job in a far more important industry. Why do people want such pricey crap anyway? What is the real point? Honestly I find it difficult to relate to anyone who strives for excess. I'd be perfectly fine with a $150,000 yacht.

If you make $30,000 a year and buy a $30,000 car, why cant these people who make $500million a year buy a $500million boat? Why do they have to buy a $150,000 boat when you wont drive a $150 car? I bet you they spend a FAR larger percentage of their gross income on charity and giving back than you do? And they probably own companies that have created jobs for thousands of people.


Did you know that for $10,000 you can build a school in Africa or Haiti? There are well established organizations that lay it out for you, all you have to do is round up some friends and each donate 3 dollars a day for 3 months. Have you done that yet? Why not?

except a $150 car probably doesn't even run.
they give large amounts to charity because there's tax break incentives.

at the end I'd still say their money, their choice.

If someone spends millions in collecting cars they probably wouldn't get flamed on this forum. Just because their interest is completely different others can view it as a complete waste of $$

As the OP of this thread, I'm gonna steer this thread back to focus on yachts instead of other side topics.

-saw this yacht, the Atessa 4, docked near the North Shore night market on Friday night.

http://i42.tinypic.com/rmpnja.jpg

what's the point of anything in our existence?

warren buffet would consider your 150 000 dollar yacht excess. and he would find it difficult to relate to you and you're overly priced yacht.

you speak as if an utilitarian mindset is superior, but it is not. Thing's don't have to be useful or be able to be applied to be considered worthy of existence.

They are pushing boundries in terms of yacht technology/artistic value. etc. whatever.

think about it this way... it took, all of history and the existence known to man, up to this point in time, for someone to make enough money, and for the technology to be available, mindset, and everything else all lined up, just for this pinnacle of technology yacht to be brought into physical existence (where as previously it was only someone's imagination or on paper at best).

like any apex, technological, artistic feat... it takes an exponentially huge base, to support a tiny point. That is how we progress.

if you keep feeding the bottom of the pyramid and ignoring the top, there can never be any growth, because the bottom is always the same. Easily replaceable. easy to figure out. easy to run.

what was the point of going to the moon. think of all the effort, money, and all the events in all of history leading up to the point where we could... send 1 guy to space. 1 guy, to experience space, while it took earth 4.3 billion years to get to that point. why don't they just donate all that money to the poor instead?
poor ppl always gonna be poor, and there will always be poor people. you can never satisfy that pool. for every poor you take care of, 2 will replace them. for every opportunity wasted not climbing the ladder of technology or art, is opportunity wasted and perhaps missed forever. those areas always have to be lead by the few, but supported by the masses. it's the way it is.

the yachts innovation and symbolic meanings won't go to waste. and they won't be forgotten. there's your utilitarian perspective. the innovation and symbolic meaning of any apex feat is worth the hard work, or "suffering" of many. sorry, not WORTH... it's the ONLY way to achieve anything as far as i know.

:facepalm:

Better stop construction of the Bugatti Veyron, or any car that serves a function greater than getting from Point A to Point B, for that matter. Better stop construction of those multi-million dollar houses in Vancouver, not to mention everything in West Van and Whistler. After all, those are gross displays of pure excess, no? And who needs a winter home in Squamish or Whistler? Or a summer home in Kelowna or Cultas Lake? Who needs an iPhone or Samsung Galaxy when an old flip phone from last decade will still work? Hell, who needs a cell phone anyway? Just use a payphone. Who needs an $800 Seiko watch when a $5 special from Wal-Mart tells time just as well? Why buy an Armani suit when you can buy a super cheap one from Moores?

Why?

Because people want it. As Ulic said, there's always going to be poor people in the world. You can empty your entire bank account and not make a single noticeable dent. Sure, an oil Sheik may be able to build a couple hospitals for a city or fund a food bank for umpteen years, but they choose not to, just as I choose to spend my money on things I want and for friends I choose to buy things for. I earned that money so I'm gonna spend it however I damn well see fit.

And to play devil's advocate, since no one knows who the owner of that boat is, how do you know that the owner doesn't already donate millions of dollars to charity or funds hospitals or whatnot? Suppose it was Bill Gates who ordered the boat; he donates tens of millions of dollars to various things. Or perhaps this is someone's retirement vehicle, much like how some people sell their home and buy an RV to travel the world. Maybe some multi-billionaire decided to liquidate the majority of their wealth, build this thing, and donate the rest to various places around the world?

Just sayin'.

You forgot to list 'henchmen'.

And 'escorts'. ;)

He's using the $150 car to make a point, don't take it literally.

Yes, many people donate and get tax incentives but to generalize everyone under that heading is inappropriate. Many people also donate a large portion of their time (which they have "more" of because they are also effective time managers) and of course there are those that would donate large amounts tax incentives or not.

You criticize and I bet you are the type of person that has done NOTHING for the betterment of humanity. I could be wrong but what have you achieved so far in your life towards this altruistic goal? If you end up doing nothing but end up as an OAS/health care liability one day, then you can say you were no better.

We use to get this magazine in our store called A/W interiors and they had a yacht with a install done by A&B sound. it had 40 North American Direct satellite receivers and 20 South American receivers.

Commie.

Meh, I'm on the fence over this type of thing. I somewhat agree with Everymans, but not to that degree.

There is a fundamental problem with our society when a person can amass such wealth, when so many have none. Does one single person need to be that rich? Does that individual NEED that much wealth? All societies fail when there are too few haves and too many havenots, it's simply not sustainable. We have moved into that direction tenfold, the disparity level right now is the highest in human history. I'm not spitting hippy dippy bullshit here, but there has to be a better way we can as humans become more enlightened, and run our societies more fairly and balanced, no? We tend to put the wealthy on this type of pedestal, they are no different a sack of meat and bones than you or I. Does a man really need to have enough income to purchase $700 million yacht for pleasure? It's hard to say.

Anyways, back to the topic of this ridiculous boat none of us will ever own or sail on :)

So... who gets to tell the absurdly successful business man who's dedicated his entire life into getting wealthy, that hes hit the magical point where he isnt allowed to make money anymore because the 99% feel he has too much money and they don't have enough.



http://samoan-ninja.com/wp-content/u...ndHereWeGo.gif

Well, it seems like an easy way to become a billionaire these days is to go public with a business or buy a company a very expensive company and flip it for even more to another rich person. Not sure exactly how you can "limit" how much people are allowed to make. Are they supposed to retire after making X number of dollars? give up control of the companies they built? My mom's best friend's direct boss is worth about 10.7 billion according to Forbes. The guy's dad built a construction/hotel/casino conglomerate employing thousands of people. Should he have to shut down operations because he's making too much money or having his business seized? from a company he essentially built? money that he is earning off other well-off people who are patronizing his businesses and individual/institutional investors purchasing stocks in order to grow their own portfolios?

The wealth gap only exists and the disparity is greatest right now because 200 years ago almost everyone was poor (according to Harvard/Columbia professor and economist Jeffrey Sachs who specializes in poverty alleviation).

So, Redlines_Daily, you're busy failing half the posts in this thread. How about you speak your piece? ;)

...and post failed in 3... 2... 1...

To be honest, I don't want to be in the discussion, pretty much everything has been said already. I tend to fail if I strongly disagree with a post and thank if I agree. Nothing personal though :)

are you sure it's a problem that can be solved?

if everyone were equal, you would have other fundamental problems that will probably be at least equal to this problem.

do you NEED your ipod? do you NEED a car?
power is limitless, it's the whole point.

no, they are not the same. you can judge all people as equal physically (even that's not true, take for instance healthier people), but what counts is the mind. and the stuff you can produce and ideas you can come up with. that's how they either get wealthy, or maintain it. and it's why most people when they win the lottery, blow it all. because they don't have the minds to do any of what i just said.

it's only hard to say if you don't have the actual ability to go out and buy it.
and then it's still hard to say until you've tried it.

the only people that can judge, are the ones that can actually do it. the rest have no idea.

I agree with Ulic on this. Biologically all of us regardless of race are very similar but intelligence and ability are not spread out evenly (though I'm not implying wealthy = intelligent).

This is even referred to in discussing the concept of 'asset-based egalitarianism' (originally proposed by Thomas Paine) where despite providing people with a lump sum of money to theoretically give them a head start and somewhat level the playing field, this would still lead to an inegalitarian outcome as "differing abilities and talents to utilise financial wealth" may lead some to make poor choices.

Bump

Did anyone go to the Boat Show last week? There was a small Marquis there that was pretty incredible even though it was an older model 2008.

Sachs is a tad utopian in his logic..I recommend reading "The white man's burden" by William Easterly as a response to Sachs utopian proposal in his book "The End of Poverty".