Visit the Archives for U.S. Politics Online -- U.S. Politics Online . net
Secretary of Defense
It's easy to post what you did, if you can conveniently forget the corporate spying, bribing of employees and other illegal tactics used by corporations.Originally Posted by soot
Yes, it's alive an well. Then we consider the bribing of elected officials, to enact laws creating large amounts of time to be spent in filling out paperwork, easily done by several of the banks of lawyers on retainer from large corporations, but extremely expensive for the small business.
One good book on tactics big business uses to stifle smaller companies is, "The Big Ripoff", by Timothy Carney.
fiscal conservative, Constitutional Neo-liberal democrat
"I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat," Noted humorist Will Rogers
http://politicalcorner.org/index.php
http://www.realchange.org/bushjr.htm
Secretary of Defense
Yes, but in those decades that it took them to do so, the "Big 3" of American car makers made many millions in profit. It was only because the foreign cars of that time were superior, did they finally make enough inroads to make it worthwhile to really push.
fiscal conservative, Constitutional Neo-liberal democrat
"I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat," Noted humorist Will Rogers
http://politicalcorner.org/index.php
http://www.realchange.org/bushjr.htm
The point is that the competition from the Japanese makers was a good thing...
Secretary of Defense
The real point actually is that American car makers put as many blockades up to foreign car makers as possible, with help from the governement.
Your contention was that competition was desired by corporations, that just is not so. Corporations do not want competition, and will do whatever they can to stifle it.
fiscal conservative, Constitutional Neo-liberal democrat
"I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat," Noted humorist Will Rogers
http://politicalcorner.org/index.php
http://www.realchange.org/bushjr.htm
Vice President
The point is: competition from the Japanese was a good thing, but the Big Three fought it every step of the way with every hurdle they could find.
Corporation managements do not welcome competition except in a very small and unusual segment.
"There is no gain in arguing with a poo flinging monkey. While his
gibbering and raucous cries of victory may seem obnoxious in your ears
as you walk away, he will soon be quietly sitting behind his bars again
and licking his own feces off his fingers as you carry on with your day."
Do you think that GM, Chrysler, or Ford ever wanted to see the other two makers go out of business?
Vice President
You effectively implied its ok with you if a bad CEO makes high pay, and insinuated that only a liberal would care how much the CEO makes. Therefore, you must not believe in genuine competition for CEO jobs, which means in turn that you must be against true competition for CEO positions and salaries.Originally Posted by CharlesDavenport
What's it to you if a bad CEO makes good money? I don't understand the obsession that liberals have with what somebody makes.
Are you suddenly suggesting that how much a CEO makes and how competent they are matters to you?
Secretary of State
Not likely, Reggie.
Wrong, again.
Yes, let us never mind what a CEO makes, because the last that I checked, there weren't millions of Asians both willing and capable of doing what CEOs do for 1/160th of the pay.
Try really hard to understand the economics of the situation, if you can do that over the emotional turmoil swirling in your brain, which is caused by the fact that some people make a lot of money, while others do not.
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add "within the limits of the law" because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Isaac H Tiffany (1819)
U.S. House Representative
I believe there are many who could do the jobs of the CEO for a fraction of the pay, and do it better. We can argue about why they get paid, but their performance has been so obnoxious as to demand a change. The system of renumeration of these people is neither logical or capitalistic. The shareholders don't even know it's their duty to study the options given them, the security traders don't care. The board of directors is just a rubber stamp of the CEO and they scratch each others back regardless of the company's performance. It gets even worse in the financial sector where the system is so corrupt they bilk their own customers to pay the shareholders. All the right can say is "no regulation" while they themselves are getting bilked every day and are too brainwashed to know it.
"Againsed stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain" Friedrich von Schiller[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Secretary of State
That's great, clarkatticus. Feel free to start your own company, make yourself CEO, and pay yourself next to nothing. I'm sure that you will have no problem finding millions of people who will buy your company's products based solely on the premise that you are making far less than other CEOs.
Let us know how that turns out, will you?
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add "within the limits of the law" because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Isaac H Tiffany (1819)
U.S. House Representative
you didn't read the post, I'm saying the current system is not capitalistic, the best for the job should be the criteria, not the person who buys the job. we are getting creamed by foreign companies that are better led than ours. Maybe you think these guys are smarter than you (apparently they are), I think they are just more greedy and ethically lacking than I, not smarter.
"Againsed stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain" Friedrich von Schiller[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
U.S. House Representative
oh, and smurf, feel free to live your life in the shadow of those guys
"Againsed stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain" Friedrich von Schiller[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Secretary of State
And yet competition not only came in, but surpassed them.
Such is the nature of the business world.
A is A
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
No I didn't. Not at all. Your incorrect inference is on you. I simply wondered why someone would get so upset about how much money a CEO made when that person thought they were doing a bad job. Not surprisingly, the rest of your logic train missed the station as well.
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." - Margaret Thatcher
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
Yes. Watch the documentary "Who Killed the Electric Car". It shows that auto makers and oil companies worked very hard to keep electric cars from becoming mainstream. One of the biggest things they did was buy a manufacturer of batteries that had a newer (at the time) battery technology to make the batteries lighter and longer lasting (NiMh). After they bought a majority share, they put a gag order on the former owner barring him from speaking about the product so that the public would think that we still had to use lead acid batteries which were a problem due to their weight and much shorter run times.
They killed the introduction of the electric car because they had their money in oil and they did not want to spend the necessary money to compete so they crushed the competition. While we are seeing electric cars start to emerge now, we lost a lost a lot of time and money saving alternatives to oil during that time.
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks