r masses who entrusted thier future to the person. Rajat was on the Board of the best academic institutions,toms shoes, charities, and corporates; had friends were in the best positions and he got access to information and resources that would not be possible for any other human. So he used his position to advance his interest and collect vast amounts of financial and monetary resources that would ensure the survival of his offspring this is a common evolutionary goal for all humans. Why do you think at age 60 (or say 58 when he may have commited insider-trading) did he have to go through all the trouble to make more money. He had enough to sustain his life style for the rest of his life and I assume he has enough to fund his children s college and could leave them some savings. However, knowing how much is enough is impossible to know for humans and that is the fallacy we all encounter. The recent financial crisis cannot be blamed on these prime humans alone we are all to blame for it. See we always want a bigger house, better car, more exotic vacation,toms shoes sale, more possessions so that we can signal our survival strength to the oppsite sex. Humans want to offer the best education and living conditions for the future survival of thier offsprings. These are legitimate evolutionary goals but it is impossible to know the limit of how much is too much. In the past, human beings would have several offspings since the child survival rates were low later things improved and 1-2 kids is more common now. However, it is still hard to know who much to earn, save so that the kids may have the best survival chance. And that leads to people making choices that are less than ethical.A long time back i saw a movie where a mother was willing to sacrife her life to save her child now Rajat Gupta may be taking a risk (not on his life but atleast his independence and quality of life (read: jail time)) when he made decisions that could lead him into trouble. But he took the risk and got caught. Why do u think he needed all that money? I dont think he was broke or unable to provide to his family s basic needs. He just did not know how much was too much!Anyway,cheaptomsshoessalei.com, would love to hear your comments on this post. 4:04 am April 11, 2011 enlightened wrote: I see the association between Rajat Gupta and Raj Rajaratnam as an example of the wider nexus between corporates, advisors (banks, consultants, lawyers) and academics that is driven by excessive greed and has led us to the current financial mess.Business school professors consult for hedge funds, banks and corporates so how can we trust thier opinion on the business practices of these institutions. It is common place for corporate CFOs to get sweet deals and kickbacks when they award an M A deal to a particular bank things such as trips to exotic islands, lifelong asset management services, tickets to sports events are common place.Rajat was a co-investor in several of Rajaratnam s funds for several years and nobody brought that up when Rajat was appointed BoD at P G and Goldman. Perhaps other members were also i Related articles:

• cheaptomsshoessalei.com on priority basis
• cheap toms shoes 标题]
• toms shoes 48 pm April 18