Posted on 02/08/2011 2:36:30 AM PST by Scanian
Nothing wrong with profit sharing - as long as it's a private transaction either between an employee and the company or the union and the industry.
But Obama's not concerned about that kind of setup. In fact, he makes it sound as if government would have a role in enforcing such profit sharing (video at RealClearPolitics link)
"'If we're fighting to reform the tax code and increase exports, the benefits cannot just translate into greater profits and bonuses for those at the top. They have to be shared by American workers, who need to know that opening markets will lift their standard of living as well as your bottom line,' President Obama told the Chamber of Commerce on Monday morning."
Someone might suggest a way this would work. I suppose government could mandate a certain percentage of profits - "excess profits" - be put in a kitty for all workers. Or government could just seize what it thinks is too much profit and redistribute the wealth.
Any way you look at it, it's more coercion, more redistributive nonsense from someone who has no respect for business or the people who create wealth.
Shareholders-—there you go.
I have a liberal friend who loves to bitch about oil companies, insurance companies-—you name it.
Knowing he likes to invest his money for max return I always tell him, “Let’s run a S&P and if you think they’re doing so well you can buy in and get in on the fun yourself.”
When he finds out the real profit margins, he shuts up.
Nobody will take the risk of investing in a business if they do not think they have a chance of making a profit. In effect Obama is saying to business owners: "If you invest and lose you lose. And if you invest and win you will still lose because we in Washington will have the final say in how much, if any, you get to keep." This is like something out of Atlas Shrugged.
This kind of stupid talk can only do more damage. And if Obama tries to force this through, by executive order or some such nonsense, then a lot of businesses will simply close shop. Who knows? Maybe that's what he wants. Nobody can be this stupid.
Andnow , I suppose, the government will propose mandating that people start businesses.
We just have to keep Brack talking gibberish like this and he’ll insure his own early retirement. And I would love to see his transcripts. Barry Sotero couldn’t have been all that smart.
Lenin would be truly proud of our punk president.
0bama and his followers seem to think American Corporations are the same as the old “Robber Baron” companies of the 19th Century – one man at the top owns everything and keeps all the profits. 0bama and his minions seem never to have heard of stockholders, unless thinking they’re all of the coupon clipper class. Heck, I’m a stockholder – through shares in my credit union. I know several other stockholders – through their retirement accounts.
US Corporations share their profits all the time, Billions & Billions each year for those with some "Skin in the Game".
The call it stock dividends Mr. Obamah!
If an employee wants more than his salary and benefits from the company he or she works for, then they need to put some skin in the game and share not only the profits but also the risk.
It's the American Way Mr. Obamah!
If Obamacare prevails and sets a precedent for such mandates, don’t be surprised.
Which is the bigger risk,? the production risks or the investment risk.
Come on down and I'll put you on one of our longliners...or perhaps get you a job with my BIL in the coals mines in Kentucky. Then we will discuss risk.
And companies sending US jobs to China is “putting skin in the game”?
What game?
Certainly not a game good for America.
So that means Soetoro will redistribute his millions of earnings with the people, too, right?
Is it worth noting that Obama is being misquoted on this?
Excellent response!
He should suggest minimum wage for rap artists, professional athletes, TV anchors, MSM reporters and movie stars and see if that ‘redistribution’ thingee will work!!!
always the good commie isn’t he?
If you want to change the subject to overseas labor, that fine, but don't confuse the two topics.
“If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose – because it contains all the others – the fact that they were the people who created the phrase ‘to make money’. No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity – to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted, or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words ‘to make money’ hold the essence of human morality.
“Yet these were the words for which Americans were denounced by the rotted cultures of the looters’ continents. Now the looters’ credo has brought you to regard your proudest achievements as a hallmark of shame, your prosperity as guilt, your greatest men, the industrialists, as blackguards, and your magnificent factories as the product and property of muscular labor, the labor of whip-driven slaves, like the pyramids of Egypt. The rotter who simpers that he sees no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the whip, ought to learn the difference on his own hide – as, I think, he will.
“Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns – or dollars. Take your choice – there is no other – and your time is running out.”
original source: Atlas Shrugged, Rand, Part II, Section 2, pages 387-391 of the paperback
Excuse me?
Your premise seems to be, free speech as long as it’s agreed with?
;)
As I wrote last March: those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholder's equity (myself especially) are in a state of shocked disbelief. Such counterparty surveillance is a central pillar of our financial markets’ state of balance. If it fails, as occurred this year, market stability is undermined.”
Alan Greenspan...acolyte of Rand
Ok.. How about sharing the employers cost of say, social security and other employer tax liabilities with the employee. Since SS is broken, that should be easy, why pay into it. The truth is, it costs money to hire employees due to the expansive government. I estimate about 10 percent. So how about giving everybody a TEN percent raise by getting rid of that.
Are the workers stockholders?
No! Then they have no right to share in any profits, because they having nothing at risk.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.