Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="dj11, post: 1144501, member: 13851"] [COLOR=DarkOrange][COLOR=Black]I wrote the following before getting properly caffeinated, early in my day; [/COLOR] Nothing I wrote should lead you to believe I am anti business, and anti-capitalism. I understand the necessity for some speculation. Properly done, speculation can do marvelous things. Problem is, history has now shown us, repeatedly, that for those who just jump on the bandwagon, cuz it is going their way, the outcomes are dangerous to society as a whole. These people didn't understand what they were doing. Folks like Madoff, used gullibility to entice those lazy rich folks. The lazy rich were only out to get richer, investing in shit that provided no useful stuff. For those who put in 60 hours, to the average guys 40 hours, I say, good for you. Its the ones who put in 5 hours to the average guys 40 and then take 95% of the 40 hour guys production that I have a problem with. My problems with greed are only with excessive greed. A little greed has shown to be not so bad. It spurs the economic horse. It spurs innovation. It spurs the mind. But in excess it melts down all of those things. So regulation might be something like regulating how much of the production from any worker can go to a non-producing entity. Corps would only get 30% of the production, instead of that 95%. Example; A craftsman builds a piece of furniture, he has to make 20 of them a week. He would get to sell 1 (approximate wage equivalence) while the company would get to sell 19 of those pieces. enter [U][I][B]ROBOTS[/B][/I][/U]. Robots require a bigger up front investment, but so much less down the line. Robots making that same piece of furniture will make thousands and thousands at a much cheaper per piece price. The craftsman no longer has a job to buy one of those pieces, the company can't sell the pieces anymore, mostly because they never adjusted their prices down to reflect the cheaper production cost. This was greed at work. Once a price point is established, greed sets in. Cost per unit becomes paramount in the companies business plan. Where as that company could have continued healthily along by dropping the prices, spreading the wealth (so to speak), it instead decided to take losses on tax forms and via credit instruments (that few understand). CEO's took bonuses for the increased production, and that fabulous price per piece decrease and then blame outside conditions (general economy) on the companies woes. Counter example; If you could buy, and then learn to maintain the machine that makes paper clips, and get a contract to sell all your paper clips to Office Depot (for example), and it provided you and a small staff with decent living wages, and the prospects looked good for 50 years, wouldn't that be an ungreedy capitalism? One of the regulations I would support would be decentralization. Big conglomerates provide too many places to hide actual numbers, too many places to hide actual fault. Pontiac, as a brand, might or might not be proffitable. Suppose the folks responsible for Pontiac were to determine what they wanted to do. Instead, GM, decides what to do with Pontiac. I choose Pontiac here, because GM in the past has changed only the grill, and turned a Chevy into a Cadillac. Pontiac has shown some independance over the decades. [COLOR=Black]OK, still not caffeinated properly, and I'll revisit this later.[/COLOR] [/COLOR] [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us