AIG

[classicman]

Sorry Bri - I said successful nor professor

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by classicman

What drives innovation? What gives people the desire to achieve, to overcome to bust their asses for 80- 100 hours a week and take all the risks needed to be successful?
Greed seems like the simplest answer to me. Can we somehow control that while not stifling it? THAT, I believe, is the challenge faced. Especially with so much global competition.

Not really. Most executives could learn a lot from Steve Jobs. He is like the anti-business businessman. According to him, he usually does the opposite of what they teach in business schools these days. And Apple is #1 on the list of most respected/innovative corporations, both in the states and worldwide, according to Forbes.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by Brianna

If by "successful" you mean having lots of stuff, then it's advertising.

Oh, and a small-ish penis.

[classicman]

Whew

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

*When someone who owns a sports team can get a new stadium built with money supplied by taxpayers, and then gets to keep all the profits, that is unfair to everyone but the owner of the team, and perhaps the athletes, who get giant salaries. Why should anyone have to pay for that, other than the people who profit from it? The owners are rich. They should pay for it themselves.

I think it is pretty crummy too, although it is misleading to say the teamowner takes all the profit while taxpayers paid for it. Teams either lease the use of the stadium or have put significant sums into the purchase and share the profits according to contracts agreed to by the cities in which the stadiums were built. I have the same 'not with my tax money' reaction to, though.

*When a large corporation like WalMart can get away with not paying for health insurance for their workers, and they end up on medicaid subsidized with taxpayers money, that isn't fair. WalMart is one of the richest, most successful corporations ever. The owners/executives of WalMart are extremely rich. Why should taxpayers be burdened with that?

Walmart provides insurance benefits for fulltime employees. I know they use the old 35 hour per week, part time employee escape, but the employees do choose to work there. The reason the owners are rich and the company makes huge profits is because they manage their p/l statements that tightly. Taxpayers are unfortunately stuck paying for some benefits for these low pay employers just like we do for the low pay grocery store clerk and the unemployed guy on his couch. That's the nature of the beast.
*

When pharmaceutical companies can charge as much as they do in THIS country (but not in any other country), but their R&D is subsidized with taxpayer money, that isn't fair.

R&D is subsidized through grants and the like but the companies spend far more in drug trials and development. They are private corporations who pay their employees to do a job. Instead of despising their profit, you should applaud it.
*

When rich people who have millions or billions of dollars can get away paying less than someone who makes 30k/year, that isn't fair.

Do you mean in dollars or percentages? I guarantee there is NO millionaire paying less in either category than someone making $30K/ year. That is a nice fallacy though.
*

When taxpayers end up having to bail out corporations because they have been mismanaged, but the people who mismanaged them get big bonuses and bloated salaries, that isn't fair.

There we agree. Those companies shouldn't be bailed out. If they aren't strong enough to compete and succeed they shouldn't exist.
*

When hundreds of people get laid off from work while the people at the top get bonuses and giant salaries, that isn't fair.

Too true. That is the very hallmark of a poorly managed company that should fail.

What would I do? Well, I'm not sure exactly how to change it, but I would try to enact policies that didn't allow any of that stuff to happen. We need to do something to curtail the greed and corruption. It's obscene, the way this crap happens, and people just put up with it. We are like blind sheep in this country going over a cliff. It's maddening.

You've thrown out the usual statements but without an idea of how to make it better they don't mean much.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by lookout123

I think it is pretty crummy too, although it is misleading to say the teamowner takes all the profit while taxpayers paid for it. Teams either lease the use of the stadium or have put significant sums into the purchase and share the profits according to contracts agreed to by the cities in which the stadiums were built. I have the same 'not with my tax money' reaction to, though.

Taxpayers who don't live in the area where the stadium is being built should not have to pay for it.

Walmart provides insurance benefits for fulltime employees. I know they use the old 35 hour per week, part time employee escape, but the employees do choose to work there. The reason the owners are rich and the company makes huge profits is because they manage their p/l statements that tightly. Taxpayers are unfortunately stuck paying for some benefits for these low pay employers just like we do for the low pay grocery store clerk and the unemployed guy on his couch. That's the nature of the beast.

Even with some of the people who work full time, unless they are managers or higher ups, many of them can't afford the insurance and so they still end up on medicaid. WalMart should pay them enough to afford to buy insurance, or they should provide it to them.

*R&D is subsidized through grants and the like but the companies spend far more in drug trials and development. They are private corporations who pay their employees to do a job. Instead of despising their profit, you should applaud it.

Why? We are paying for a lot of the research and development, then charged extremely high prices for the very drugs we helped pay to develop. What we are paying for is advertising. Why should drug companies even be advertising? That should be between a doctor and their patient. If people really want to know about new drugs, there are plenty of ways to get information about them. Drug companies are extremely corrupt, and they are very profitable. Health care should not be about profit, it should be about helping people.

Do you mean in dollars or percentages? I guarantee there is NO millionaire paying less in either category than someone making $30K/ year. That is a nice fallacy though.

Warren Buffet has even said he pays less than his secretary. Not in actual dollars of course, but the % he pays is less than hers. That is very common.

There we agree. Those companies shouldn't be bailed out. If they aren't strong enough to compete and succeed they shouldn't exist.
Too true. That is the very hallmark of a poorly managed company that should fail.

Yeparoo.

You've thrown out the usual statements but without an idea of how to make it better they don't mean much.

Well, we could start by putting some regulations back into place to stop corruption, have serious oversight and transparency, and we could investigate and try people who break the law or are unethical with regard to how they conduct business. We could reform the tax code. We could stop subsidizing private corporations, or companies that make more than $500,000/year. We could provide health care for everyone so the burden doesn't fall on corporations, and then charge them a higher tax rate to help pay for it. We could stop bailing out companies that fail. We could start enforcing antitrust laws, and break up companies that are too big to fail. And, we could have some kind of regulations about how executives are paid, and have a living wage for workers, so people make enough money to live and afford things. And lastly, we could reform the advertising industry. how is that for a start?

[classicman]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

Well, we could start by putting some regulations back into place to stop corruption, have serious oversight and transparency, and we could investigate and try people who break the law or are unethical with regard to how they conduct business.

I love this idea - Lets start here

Barney Frank is the Chairman of the Financial Services Committee.
Committee Members
The #1 guy responsible for oversight. And paid rather handsomely for it as well. Do you think he owes us a refund too?

Here is just a tidbit from the site:

The Financial Services Committee is responsible for the oversight of the U.S. banking industry.

The extraordinary increase in subprime mortgage lending over the past decade has made credit and home ownership opportunities available to millions of consumers who could not qualify for conventional mortgages. The Democratic Caucus of the Committee has long advocated expanding access to credit for such consumers and this is a goal the Caucus continues to pursue.

Originally Posted by sugarpop

And lastly, we could reform the advertising industry. how is that for a start?

Wha Wha What?????

[TGRR]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

According to him, he usually does the opposite of what they teach in business schools these days.

That's fortunate, considering what is taught in business schools is crap of the first order.

The corporation I work for won't hire an MBA. Everyone in management is some form of chemical engineer. But it's not an American company, and is thus not quite as stupid.

[TGRR]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

And lastly, we could reform the advertising industry. how is that for a start?

Why? It's the only one that works.

[TGRR]

Originally Posted by classicman

Greed seems like the simplest answer to me. Can we somehow control that while not stifling it?

Yes, it's called regulation. And it worked just fine from the 30s until Carter and all the dumbfucks after him.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by classicman

I love this idea - Lets start here

Barney Frank is the Chairman of the Financial Services Committee.
Committee Members
The #1 guy responsible for oversight. And paid rather handsomely for it as well. Do you think he owes us a refund too?

Here is just a tidbit from the site:

Yes, I do think people in government, who should've been doing their job bu weren't, should also be held accountable.

Wha Wha What?????

Advertising is the bane of existance.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by TGRR

Why? It's the only one that works.

It doesn't work in a very good way though. Advertising is part of the problem. It should be reformed as well.

[classicman]

Whatare you talking about?

[TGRR]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

It doesn't work in a very good way though. Advertising is part of the problem. It should be reformed as well.

Good way? There is no "good way" in advertising under capitalism. There is "successful" and "unsuccessful". If that is unacceptable, you'll have to find a new system.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by classicman

Whatare you talking about?

It's about something I posted earlier. You have to go back and read the post.