Tax burden

[bheld]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

The cool thing about the market is that those big bonuses taken from the employees and given to the CEOs or boards or whatever create situations where the employees become demotivated and the corporation hurts because of it. Just in the past few years that very thing has happened to a number of multi-billion dollar corporations who ended up hurting MAJORLY in the end. One that comes to mind quickly is Tyco International.

But you can't judge corporations on the bad apples, we just need to make it so the bad apples can't take advantage of the situation. Most corporations are good, it's very few that are evil.

Everybody is getting big bonuses, not just the bad CEOs. They get it all as stock options too and only pay 15%.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Exxon Mobil is really hurting

The free market doesn't have a sense of justice, that's why we have regulations, and almost everyone agrees we need SOME regulation

if the free market were perfect, we'd have most americans saying we need no regulation whatsoever

Exxon Mobil isn't a good example because they are "supported" by the government... just as we've been talking about. They do NOT work on a free market system.

We have to have regulations when we create situations in which powerful corporations can affect legislation to favor them. It's really a vicious circle:

1. Government moves in on something it thinks is a problem that probably isn't as bad as they think,
2. Powerful people and corporations see a way to capitalize on the government's newly annexed "responsibility,"
3. Government sees new problem caused by people taking advantage of what they recently changed and make new changes and/or take new responsibilities,
4. Go to 2.

The justice in the free market is the almighty dollar. If people WANT a company to "Go Green," then that company better do it or they're digging their own grave. If it's found out that there is lead in toys coming from China, toy importers better start picking up their testing systems or they're doomed. There IS justice in that respect... and sometimes there's even reason to send people to jail But we'd have to worry about that far less if we didn't create the exploitable situations.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by bheld

Everybody is getting big bonuses, not just the bad CEOs. They get it all as stock options too and only pay 15%.

CEOs getting big payouts isn't a bad thing unless they're doing it at the expense of their employees, which if you do 5 seconds of research at all you'll see what effect that has on the offending company MOST of the time (excluding industries/companies that are propped up by the government... like those bastards over at Delta who I wish would die).

[Thorgrim]

People are busy and don't have time to educate themselves about every issue on every company they buy...nor can they believe it in the days of these big companies have propaganda outlets...cigarette companies spending more on commercials about how they help then actually donating to the cause they were highlighting

People would go "hey, you're not going green, i dont think ill" "wait a minute, we are going green, its a process, look at this beautiful ad we have that highlights the progress we are doing" (company is in no way going green, but lies are easy)

remember, regulations started because companies were abusing their free market priviledges...child labor in the coal mines being paid pennies? Teens being exposed to toxic chemicals and dying without any compensation

Now, if you're going to go all John Stossel on me and say "the robber baron days never happened and its all hyped up" then we'll have to agree to disagree and there's all there is left to say

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

CEOs getting big payouts isn't a bad thing unless they're doing it at the expense of their employees, which if you do 5 seconds of research at all you'll see what effect that has on the offending company MOST of the time (excluding industries/companies that are propped up by the government... like those bastards over at Delta who I wish would die).

If all the major airlines would have gone under like they were headed to right after 9/11, it would have caused an even worse recession, it's a virtual fact

It is what it is

[Ardentfrost]

The SEC, who I am not opposed to fully, guarantees truth to the investors.

And using the cigarette companies as an example of a company trying to trick investors isn't very effective since even when going through all that litigation and even TODAY, in our anti-smoking society, Phillip Morris stock (now known as Altria Group) is a fantastic buy with great dividends and an ever-increasing price.

I'll add this although I'm sure ppl on here are going to make a huge deal about it and call me a bastard... Just yesterday I saw some pictures of a Chinese "sweat shop" (which is a bullshit heart-string term anyway) and saw kids putting together toys and whatnot. The only thing that came to my head was "Man, good for them, trying to earn extra money for their family who is probably destitute." It might have been because usually you see the sweat shops in more southern areas that are hot, but the pictures I saw were well lit and the kids were just working the line putting heads on dolls or whatever else. We were just like that a little over 100 years ago, where poor families would get their children to hold jobs for more income, and look where we are now.

That's kinda off topic, but you talking about child labor and shit reminded me of that.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

If all the major airlines would have gone under like they were headed to right after 9/11, it would have caused an even worse recession, it's a virtual fact

It is what it is

Only 3 airlines needed to be bailed out by the government, and there were plenty more behind them that were ready for that added load. The ones that did go out of business can in some cases be blamed on the government bailing out airlines that were charging too much.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

The SEC, who I am not opposed to fully, guarantees truth to the investors.

And using the cigarette companies as an example of a company trying to trick investors isn't very effective since even when going through all that litigation and even TODAY, in our anti-smoking society, Phillip Morris stock (now known as Altria Group) is a fantastic buy with great dividends and an ever-increasing price.

I'll add this although I'm sure ppl on here are going to make a huge deal about it and call me a bastard... Just yesterday I saw some pictures of a Chinese "sweat shop" (which is a bullshit heart-string term anyway) and saw kids putting together toys and whatnot. The only thing that came to my head was "Man, good for them, trying to earn extra money for their family who is probably destitute." It might have been because usually you see the sweat shops in more southern areas that are hot, but the pictures I saw were well lit and the kids were just working the line putting heads on dolls or whatever else. We were just like that a little over 100 years ago, where poor families would get their children to hold jobs for more income, and look where we are now.

That's kinda off topic, but you talking about child labor and shit reminded me of that.

Those photos were tightly controlled by the communist government, despite what the "MSM" may say

and i can't imagine you'd want any of your younger 8 year old relatives skipping school and any playtime so they can spend 10 hours, even in that clean place...working...children need to be children...chores are okay, 10 hour work days in a factory away from your family is not

that they have to work for half-pennies so they don't starve is not a statement to anything except the ugly side of industry

I'm english-german but especially my german side has a long long line of being heavily exploited in the PA mines, and its no laughing matter to our family, nor is it something to be "proud about" as Republican and conservative as some of them may be, they all have a distinct hatred for the robber barons of the coal mining days and the incredibly disgusting system they set up and ran for decades

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

Only 3 airlines needed to be bailed out by the government, and there were plenty more behind them that were ready for that added load. The ones that did go out of business can in some cases be blamed on the government bailing out airlines that were charging too much.

Speculation, and your proposition is a gamble...where the loss is a huge recession, possibly a depression

[Ardentfrost]

All the same, the most horrible shit in our country was fixed or on a path to being fixed long before government ever stepped in. For instance, Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle" which was about horrible child labor situations caused major changes because people were demanding it happen. The companies had to either make the changes or lose business, so it was a no-brainer.

And those pics may have been special, however we STILL had child labor in America for MANY years so that the families could make ends meat. Our nation's wealth has increased greatly since those days and we don't NEED children to work anymore, but who are we to decide that another country's children needn't work? That doesn't really support sovereignty.

As far as robber barrons are concerned, that was still a result of poor government practices that supported their industries... why do you think the Rockefellers are STILL so powerful, even to this day?

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Speculation, and your proposition is a gamble...where the loss is a huge recession, possibly a depression

The speculative part was only in that some had to shut down because the government propped up specific airlines.... however, those companies were still stealing away business from the other ACTUALLY successful businesses, OF WHICH THERE WERE MANY! You can't say our economy would have collapsed over 3 airlines shutting their doors when there were 20 more to supply the ensuing demand.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

All the same, the most horrible shit in our country was fixed or on a path to being fixed long before government ever stepped in. For instance, Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle" which was about horrible child labor situations caused major changes because people were demanding it happen. The companies had to either make the changes or lose business, so it was a no-brainer.

And those pics may have been special, however we STILL had child labor in America for MANY years so that the families could make ends meat. Our nation's wealth has increased greatly since those days and we don't NEED children to work anymore, but who are we to decide that another country's children needn't work? That doesn't really support sovereignty.

As far as robber barrons are concerned, that was still a result of poor government practices that supported their industries... why do you think the Rockefellers are STILL so powerful, even to this day?

The Coal barons were not "supported" by the government, and your sinclair example is bad because it required a liberal activist to publish his findings...today he'd be mocked as too liberal and he lied, the WSJ would say he had sex with animals, etc

More to the point, the Coal Barons were self-sufficient and as far as they were concerned, the government was just some small little thing they paid some taxes to...

They treated their workers like slaves in their "company towns" that looked more like prison or slave camps and operated as such, and worked them to death as they watched their families die of diseases caused by malnurishment

Sickening disgusting people who saw all this and took in obscene amounts of money to live like...Barons

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

The speculative part was only in that some had to shut down because the government propped up specific airlines.... however, those companies were still stealing away business from the other ACTUALLY successful businesses, OF WHICH THERE WERE MANY! You can't say our economy would have collapsed over 3 airlines shutting their doors when there were 20 more to supply the ensuing demand.

sure I can when those airlines controlled major amounts of traiffic and couldn't just "hand it off" like it was nothing...you make it sound so simple

these companies at risk had set up huge networks, you couldn't have others just come in and take it all like nothing...and what would happen with all those bankrupted companies jets? the newly adapting companies still had a traveler shortage, they didn't need them...but when it would pick up, they'd almost go bankrupt trying to build a fleet of new ones after the old ones had decayed beyond normal repairs

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

sure I can when those airlines controlled major amounts of traiffic and couldn't just "hand it off" like it was nothing...you make it sound so simple

these companies at risk had set up huge networks, you couldn't have others just come in and take it all like nothing...and what would happen with all those bankrupted companies jets? the newly adapting companies still had a traveler shortage, they didn't need them...but when it would pick up, they'd almost go bankrupt trying to build a fleet of new ones after the old ones had decayed beyond normal repairs

I know for a fact AirTran was ready to buy up a lot of jets. And Delta didn't need to be propped up until just recently, so they were fine at that time. Delta, though, already had major government contracts that it could use to float it's profit margin. AND the gov't STILL only let's Delta fly into certain out-of-country locations.

It's far too speculative to claim that we'd have been fucked without Continental and US Airways, which were the only two airlines at that time propped up.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

I know for a fact AirTran was ready to buy up a lot of jets. And Delta didn't need to be propped up until just recently, so they were fine at that time. Delta, though, already had major government contracts that it could use to float it's profit margin. AND the gov't STILL only let's Delta fly into certain out-of-country locations.

It's far too speculative to claim that we'd have been fucked without Continental and US Airways, which were the only two airlines at that time propped up.

the bottom line was that we had to support the airlines and not risk a domino effect or a total industry collapse, if you know "for a fact" that AirTran could have handled the entire nations 1999 demand for air travel, then you simply know the issue better than me and it's pointless to discuss because I'm ignorant on the exact details

I just know the basics and I believe the principle was VALID though not neccesary correct...

[Ardentfrost]

it wasn't just airtran. Like I said, there were 20 other airlines spread throughout the nation doing all the routes those 2 airlines were doing, with delta and American doing most of the international (which they still do). They would have been more than happy to take all those customers, which they were doing ANYWAY which is why Delta ran into trouble later... they're required by their government contracts to make certain trips regardless of how full the flight is which began eating into their profits bigtime when the smaller airlines started taking all their business.

[bheld]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

All the same, the most horrible shit in our country was fixed or on a path to being fixed long before government ever stepped in. For instance, Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle" which was about horrible child labor situations caused major changes because people were demanding it happen. The companies had to either make the changes or lose business, so it was a no-brainer.

And those pics may have been special, however we STILL had child labor in America for MANY years so that the families could make ends meat. Our nation's wealth has increased greatly since those days and we don't NEED children to work anymore, but who are we to decide that another country's children needn't work? That doesn't really support sovereignty.

As far as robber barrons are concerned, that was still a result of poor government practices that supported their industries... why do you think the Rockefellers are STILL so powerful, even to this day?

That illustrates perfectly the reactionary nature of the market rather than the preventative nature that would be necessary to solve most of the major issues facing our country today. The free market is great to be sure, but let's not pretend there aren't any problems with it.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by bheld

That illustrates perfectly the reactionary nature of the market rather than the preventative nature that would be necessary to solve most of the major issues facing our country today. The free market is great to be sure, but let's not pretend there aren't any problems with it.

But our government is reactionary too, it just takes longer to react than the market. There's no way around reactionary fixes, we cannot know the problems before they happen. But if the market has been shown to not only start fixing things faster, but also do a better job of fixing things, then why continue using the government in those situations?

[bheld]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

But our government is reactionary too, it just takes longer to react than the market. There's no way around reactionary fixes, we cannot know the problems before they happen. But if the market has been shown to not only start fixing things faster, but also do a better job of fixing things, then why continue using the government in those situations?

No, government gives us a chance to prevent problems instead of reacting to problems. The market absolutely has NOT shown that it fixes problems or does anything near a satisfactory job when they feel like they have to. If you look at all the pathetic attempts to fix problems the private sector has done in the recent past it's all been because they were scared of government intervention in the first place.