Guest Posted May 14, 2012 Share #21 Posted May 14, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Corporations mostly think about their own benefit. Makes more sense than going bankrupt. Don't think Leica's products are harmful to anybody and don't understand why they should be considered objectable. No child labour, no polution. Can't afford any of the new M articles but no hard feelings here. On the contrary, I can imagine more (mostly unused) M9 and M8 bodies on the second hand market. In fact that was my personal experience: bought an M8 on 10th this month. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 14, 2012 Posted May 14, 2012 Hi Guest, Take a look here A new Record at Westlicht!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Joop van Heijgen Posted May 14, 2012 Share #22 Posted May 14, 2012 21st WestLicht camera auction 12th of May sets new records 2,160,000,- Euro for a Leica camera! All expectations of the 21st WestLicht camera auction were exceeded: For the 5th time the world record for the most expensive camera ever sold was broken at a WestLicht auction in Vienna with a winning bid of 2,160,000,- EUR including buyer’s premium. WestLicht Photographica Auction Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Messsucherkamera Posted May 15, 2012 Share #23 Posted May 15, 2012 Sort of makes the new Monochrom M and Summicron 50 ASPH prices look like bargians, doesn't it?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_dernie Posted May 21, 2012 Share #24 Posted May 21, 2012 D'oh! I knew that there were only supposed to have been 25 made but since the one that sold at Westlicht was No. 112, your No. 26 didn't register as dodgy. Pete. 30 serial numbers were allocated to prototypes, starting with 101. I don't think they made 30 prototypes and, being prototypes, they were not all the same and the last few were probably pretty well the same as the first production cameras. I have an anastigmat lensed camera which looks like a production camera (tubular viewfinder) which has a serial number between 120 and 130 which I bought from a dealer many years ago and believe is genuine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted May 21, 2012 Share #25 Posted May 21, 2012 Corporations mostly think about their own benefit. Makes more sense than going bankrupt. Don't think Leica's products are harmful to anybody and don't understand why they should be considered objectable. No child labour, no polution. Can't afford any of the new M articles but no hard feelings here. On the contrary, I can imagine more (mostly unused) M9 and M8 bodies on the second hand market. In fact that was my personal experience: bought an M8 on 10th this month. If you are going to look at this from an ethical perspective- you can't be halfhearted: there is a massive hole in your logic: 2.1m Euro wide... About 1.7 billion people are estimated to live in absolute poverty today... a 7 thousand dollar 50mm standard lens that costs maybe 18 times the annual yearly income of people living in Africa. Imagine if this wealth was invested in people and not in cameras? But then the same philosophical examination could be applied to the art market- or any area of luxury and speculation. And I have an M9- we are all conflicted in a capitalist society. Even a cup of coffee is full of ethical dilemmas if we are honest about it. I drink 3 a day- but I do get my beans ethically and roast myself... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabears Posted May 21, 2012 Author Share #26 Posted May 21, 2012 If you are going to look at this from an ethical perspective- you can't be halfhearted: there is a massive hole in your logic: 2.1m Euro wide... About 1.7 billion people are estimated to live in absolute poverty today... a 7 thousand dollar 50mm standard lens that costs maybe 18 times the annual yearly income of people living in Africa. Imagine if this wealth was invested in people and not in cameras? But then the same philosophical examination could be applied to the art market- or any area of luxury and speculation. And I have an M9- we are all conflicted in a capitalist society. Even a cup of coffee is full of ethical dilemmas if we are honest about it. I drink 3 a day- but I do get my beans ethically and roast myself... Suggestions? Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
someonenameddavid Posted May 21, 2012 Share #27 Posted May 21, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Suggestions? Cheers. Production and utilization of high quality goods ultimately benefits everyone because it employs the highest level of skilled craftsmen: in turn, these people provide for their families and create a generational culture of high achievement and technical excellence. This benefits the world generally by making things more reliable and longer lasting, witness the Mercedes cars and Japanese trucks that run forever in Africa. Conversely gambling and high priced addictive chemicals produce the opposite effect. Don't fire up the mis-placed guilt because you earned the right the money you earned in the way you chose. If you want to change the third world work for democracy and against human trafficking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted May 22, 2012 Share #28 Posted May 22, 2012 Interesting logic: but I am afraid I don't see Louis Vuitton bags, Montblanc pens, or 2 million Euro Leica's really contributing much to resolving global inequality... The trickle down affect seems (to me) more like an excuse for excessive wealth concentrated into the hands of a minority rather than an ethical means for redistribution of wealth... And while it is true I worked for my money, and many millionaires worked for theirs (many didn't mind you)- I doubt any of us ever worked as hard as a lady in India breaking rocks on a highway in 40 C heat for 2$ a day... As for Suggestions: I guess higher taxation of the ultra rich is one that comes to mind. I am one of those that believe that massive wealth should be accompanied by massive responsibility. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesk8752 Posted May 22, 2012 Share #29 Posted May 22, 2012 (snip)As for Suggestions: I guess higher taxation of the ultra rich is one that comes to mind. I am one of those that believe that massive wealth should be accompanied by massive responsibility. The thing I dislike most about Socialists is that they love to tell me how to spend my money, but most of them don't put their own money where their mouth is... Sorry if this offends your sensibilities, but I have the same right to express my opinions that you do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted May 22, 2012 Share #30 Posted May 22, 2012 no that's fine! I expected no less a reaction. But did I actually tell you how to spend your money? Perhaps I gave you a guilt trip? If I am a socialist then I guess you won't mind me calling you a reactionary? and you don't agree that wealth should come with responsibility? One of the things I like about the USA is the well established culture of Philanthropy in your country. Something that is sadly lacking amongst some of Australia's more notable Billionaires... However I don't think philanthropy should replace taxation as the prime means for ensuring social equity and fairness... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesk8752 Posted May 22, 2012 Share #31 Posted May 22, 2012 And you responded as I expected, too. We will just have to disagree about how (and if) personal wealth should be redistributed by others. Personally, I believe that I should be able to keep as much as I can, and make my own decisions about how to spend it, rather than trust a bunch of politicians seeking votes to do it for me. But alas! This is considered reactionary... We can currently see the long term results of socialism in the European PIIGS countries. Thanks, but no thanks! (I suggest that we not extend this dialogue here; it would be more appropriate in Barnack's Bar.) Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted May 22, 2012 Share #32 Posted May 22, 2012 Charitable guy I see, and a lot of faith in Democracy as well? Rather than abusing politicians why don't you hold them accountable for their use of taxpayers money? I guess corporations should run the world? Not sure how well that would work out... Greece has problems (many of which stem from the rich not paying taxes...) but the USA is not looking so hot either these days (again things may be better if the rich paid more taxes... rather than lobbying (corrupting?) politicians for more tax cuts). And God help you if you can't afford health insurance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabears Posted May 22, 2012 Author Share #33 Posted May 22, 2012 The Greek crisis is far more complex than these trivializations. Between others... Goldman Sachs cooked Greece books, banking fraud expands globally (Max Keiser versus a banker tool) - Democratic Underground How the Monsters at Goldman Sachs Caused a Greek Tragedy | Economy | AlterNet Goldman Sachs: the Greek connection - Business News - Business - The Independent or something like... The Greek Tragedy: Greece tries to crack down on fraud as mayor of Zakynthos faces revolt and more... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.