Do you now,or have you ever worked,in any capacity on Wall Street?
I am now and have been for 38 years,conversant about that milieu.They do NOT call their gatherings " salons"!
I was giving you a very brief overview of the history of the word "salon" and from whence it came. The definition of that word has NOT changed in 100s of years.
Gee,where do YOU live? If I played music at the top/loudest level possible,inside my house,there isn't a neighbor who would hear it.But,of course I don't and would not play music,nor anything else,at such a decibel level.:-)
Businesses have absolutely NO governing rule nor law,or even a moral standard,which makes it have to do anything whatsoever,"for" the little people.Noblesse oblige ( yep,yet another European term ) is an obligation on PEOPLE;not business.
History lesson...what "history lesson"? You threw out a bunch of diverse statements,which you did not show proof of,And expect me to expound on them?
The Loral thing was a Clinton shell game,to pay off some of his backers,both here and in China.
I suggest that you go get quite a number of books ( you want a book list?) and read up on American history, vis-a-vis business practices,lowering salaries,firing Americans and replacing them with immigrants(which,BTW,at one point was CHINESE immigrants and I'm NOT talking about railroad's workers!),as well as the philanthropy of the Robber Barons through today.
You're lucky I used Stein( sheeeeeeeeeesh,I though EVERYONE knew about her "salons"),instead of several other names,whom I was certain you'd never heard of. :-)
Okay. You're still carrying on an argument about who uses the term salon and who does not? When did you become the arbiter of language? Let it go.
Secondly, though a corporation is not a person, but a legal fiction, it is run by people. Those people do have a responsibility to the society that they live in. It kind of comes with the nifty police and Army protection. So when those real people make decisions for the fictional people (corporations) they should have some regard for whether their decision will help or harm their society.
As to the fact that Loral occurred under Clinton, I don't dispute it. It's one of the many reasons I voted for Bush over Gore. Yet you're still not answering the basic question of whether it was a good thing for an American corporation to profit by arming a nation we could conceivably be at war with if Taiwan gets heated up.
Also, I said that "I think folks who cut corners like [hiring illegal aliens] are cut from the same mold as the Enron executive." I stand by that statement. Both crooked accounting and hiring illegals allow the malefactor to gain an illegal advantage in the marketplace and price out honest competitors.
I never diminished the "Robber Barons." Though it is quite sad to see their charitable foundations taken over by leftists. However, they gave back to society. Never said they didn't. What I have been saying is that just because something benefits a business or, more precisely, its owners, does not mean that it benefits society as a whole.
Finally, you never did tell me how to boldface or when to do it.