Nice guys really DO finish last... Nasty people earn $10,000 more a year, study finds

It is a common saying that nice guys finish last - and when it comes to pay packets, at least, research shows the genial really do end up at the back of the queue. A study which looked at the link between personality and wages has found that 'agreeable' workers earn significantly less than their meaner colleagues.

The gap is particularly telling when broken down by gender, with the difference in pay between mean and nice men almost $10,000 a year.

Agreeableness was defined as a tendency toward warmth, kindness and cooperation with other people. Men who were deemed to disagree the most made 18 per cent - or $9,772 annually - more than those seen to be more willing to agree.

Disagreeable women make five per cent - or $1,828 a year - more than women who are more willing to seek common ground.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

Interesting.....the title however is misleading.

Nice WOMEN finish last...they make the least of all 4 categories.

reply to post by David9176


My theory for that reason is simple: jerks and sociopaths are more likely to be management or executive material. They'd also be more likely to have less friends and be career oriented, wouldn't they?

It seems like nasty and incompetent people are always making the big bucks. I've seen a lot of incompetent managers and supervisors in my time. The smart ones are seldom promoted. Nice people get walked all over because they have a hard time saying "no."

reply to post by David9176


The reason is simple. Everyone is agreeable when feeling of "lesser worth". After awhile, some ppl get promoted/gets more pay rise due to better performance/arse-kissing the boss. With this comes a feeling of superiority. With this feeling comes a way of looking down at your colleagues, thus treating them differently, consciously or sub-consciously. This way of being treated might be perceived as "mean" or at least "meaner" by your colleagues.


A simple consequense of differential rewards which is natural in a market system, where everyone sells they goods or services at lowest cost, and therefore need to compete by efficiency to profit.

So indeed, the "nasty" people are bred as long as we have currency, and ways to compete.

Interesting, although you could have come to a similar conclusion even without this study release. 4 percent of the human population are psychopathic, typically born that way (although nobody knows why or how yet); these people lack any empathy, remorse, fear, love, or most emotion. They have no conscience. They only live satisfy themselves and their own materialistic ambitions because they lack the desire to live for the most beautiful things in life.

To them we are objects, targets; and they'll use every person they meet to further their success and sustain their lifestyle. A large portion of people in positions of power are psychopathic; both in corporative and political fields. Some classic examples of psychopaths are Stalin and Hitler. One could murder a billion people and literally feel no remorse; for them it's just business. And for them, business is ruining peoples lives because it's simply "fun".

They also consider themselves "gods". Although they are really only akin to parasites. Sad..

I think the real test would be to try and find out who is most content with life, truthfully.

I find it interesting that this thread has already gone the way of "that's because they're socio/psychopaths." As one reply has already stated, socio/psychopaths only make up less than 4% of the population which makes them fairly rare to come across. Also studies have shown that only a very small percentage of that 4% actually have a college education and are stable enough to rise to prominence without being undone by their own impulsive nature. So it is highly unlikely that YOUR boss is a sociopath.

The argument that the incompetent that hold positions of power got there because of their sociopathic mentality is just silly and sounds like jealousy talking. Although there are exceptions to every generalization, it would seem to me that being agreeable in the workplace only shows a lack of creativity, initiative, and backbone. That is why those who are constantly agreeing never really move up on their own, because they do nothing to merit success.

Fact: a man is only as valuable as the problems that he solves...
Psychopaths in the workplace

What ever happened to just "agree when you agree, and disagree when you disagree?"

I don't know if this study is really saying much of anything. Agree with WHAT? Seems too vague, but that's just my opinion.

reply to post by David9176


This can't be true, Why would I be so poor then?
I mean well, my other half claims I am the meanest person he knows. My mom says I have a mouth like a sailor and never was very lady-like...hell I should be rolling in dough!!!!

Greedy. selfish people tend to rise in Corporations. Fire the staff...get bonus (all about shareholders equity baby). Force the staff to work overtime for free and tell them this is the way to get ahead...good for you! Figure out ways to nickel and dime your customers...way to go!

The ability to operate without exposing yourself in a limited company allows the mean and selfish to rise to the top. The person that doesn't dream up things like "system access fees" and "service charges" and lying to the public about the tickets available for sale, so you can charge more at a premium site, falls behind. You can stand in a boardroom and tell everyone how they will have more money and bonuses by screwing your customers and get cheered on.

We have created a system that rewards nasty people with the advent of the modern corporation,

reply to post by David9176


That's alright so long as all we're after is the money.
Of course, there are other things, too. Compassion. Dignity. Humanity. Respect. You know...the things no one cares about anymore.

Originally posted by AnIntellectualRedneck
reply to post by David9176

 

My theory for that reason is simple: jerks and sociopaths are more likely to be management or executive material. They'd also be more likely to have less friends and be career oriented, wouldn't they?

Mine is that the more aggressive people are not afraid to speak up or do the things that will get them that extra money. Not afraid to step on a person or two.

So, yeah. Jerks will make more.

reply to post by Raelsatu

4 percent of the human population are psychopathic, typically born that way (although nobody knows why or how yet); these people lack any empathy, remorse, fear, love, or most emotion. They have no conscience. They only live satisfy themselves and their own materialistic ambitions because they lack the desire to live for the most beautiful things in life.

To them we are objects, targets; and they'll use every person they meet to further their success and sustain their lifestyle. A large portion of people in positions of power are psychopathic;....

They are also often very intelligent and can be "Charming" so they "Blend in"

My brother is one and is a VERY VERY scary dude. He is the president and CEO of a corporation and tried to kill me three times when he was a teen. Reading between the lines I am fairly sure he killed at least seven relatives a few days after changing their wills in his favor. This includes his own Father.

Unfortunately these are the people who rise to the top in politics and corporations because the are not held back by a conscience only by whether or not they think they can get away with the act.


John Kerry's military record gives a rare glimpse of someone who might fit this description. counterpunch has a write up. www.counterpunch.org...

...Admiral Elmo Zumwalt,told me --30 years ago when he was still CNO [chief naval officer in Vietnam] that during his own command of U.S. naval forces in Vietnam,just prior to his anointment as CNO, young Kerry had created great problems for him and the other top brass,by killing so many non-combatant civilians and going after other non-military targets. "We had virtually to straitjacket him to keep him under control", the admiral said....

From what is said including reference to writings from his own diaries he seems to have enjoyed killing and had no remorse. Sounds like a textbook case.

The key is...once you identify these type of people is to stay under their radar. Work behing the scenes. After three decades in the military, which is filled with Alpha personalities, I have found that, while not easy, it is possible to use these people’s personalities against them.

This can be used in the civilian world as well. We often call it politics. Not a lot of good people have the stomach to weather the storm and often seek greener pastures, rather than putting up with the stress of doing good.

In order to combat these types, you must have a "Alpha" personality as well, just not always confrontational. Pick your battles. If you like the company you work for…bide your time, watch your mouth and back and strike when the moment is right. Most time’s a simple comment brings these types down.

Good luck to all in this war we call “Life”.

yea what is weird is at my dads work, one guy there earns $50,000 a year, my dad doesn't even earn that much, and I'd kill to earn that much (I work for him at a carpentry shop) its not too common you hear of a carpenter earning that much a year (The amount is in Canadian funds) and yet they both don't get along.

they can keep their 10,000 I'd rather be poor and happy then a rich A-hole.

reply to post by crimvelvet


I really can't argue with you there...

Also, I am very sorry to hear about the horrible things that your brother has done to your family, but I am afraid that you have mistaken the message that I was trying to share here. If you read the article that was linked to my post, you would see that an intelligent and educated sociopath who is in control of their impulsiveness is the difference between Bernard Madolff and Casey Anthony. One was able to hold himself together and successfully ruin countless lives for a huge profit while the other was ruled by impulse to the point of self destruction for absolutely no perceivable gain.

What am saying is that while it is true that a psychopath who is good at what he does will rise quickly and ruthlessly top the top in business or politics, the psychopath who possesses the self control and intelligence to do so is a very, very rare specimen. So the mid-level manager of the semi-local company that the average joe works for that treats them like dirt probably isn't a sociopath, but rather a person who takes their job seriously and doesn't put up with incompetence.

If it seems as though I am defending this type of behavior, I am not... I'm simply pointing out that there is a huge difference in treating someone with no respect because they never seem to have any original thoughts to contribute and causing a person harm to further your own success without caring that you destroyed an honest mans life. Calling someone a psychopath because they do not treat you with respect that you don't deserve is is just a sad excuse of the incompetent person who refuses to take responsibility for their own shortcomings.