Posted on 10/04/2007 7:07:18 AM PDT by SJackson
Ownership does not connote control... ...CEO pay levels became so huge that they cut into corporate earnings.
Ownership without control only happens with indirect ownership, like where the people own the state and the state owns the wealth. That's what Marx set out in Das Kaptital, and the rulers got rich at the expense of the masses. The American free-market legal system makes with ownership and control the same thing. I own parts of a number of corporations and in every single case I got no problem with the CEO getting paid all the money he wants --as long as it means that I get paid more money too.
...Global labor inputs...along the entire skill spectrum... against the American public....
American labor can't be beat in the world market because it's the most productive. What we've been seeing over the decades is US tariffs going lower and lower, while real American incomes are steadily hitting new highs. The idea has been to allow people the freedom to create wealth, and that's what's been making America great.
I will leave the radicalism to you! ;-) [Hewitt, is that you?!]
like, re-post the article in question as a link and excerpt..
You mean like Rude and his rotund pals fail to? Okay. Its your playhouse.
The Real Cost of Offshoring, and also as here at Free Republic, and, oh here are some links to the NON-COPYRIGHTED Charts and graphics from separate articles like this:
http://images.businessweek.com/mz/07/25/0725_29covsto.gif
and this one:
http://images.businessweek.com/mz/07/25/0725_29covsto_a.gif
and here:
http://images.businessweek.com/mz/07/25/0725_32covsto.gif
I have no way of knowing if they have or haven't threatened you over such links, as apparently Gannet has, please inform us, rather than snipe at the bidding of the import lobbyists.
No, it doesn't.
I own parts of a number of corporations and in every single case I got no problem with the CEO getting paid all the money he wants --as long as it means that I get paid more money too.
So you're merely being a passive owner. Not all share owners agree with you. Hence the resolutions to constrain. Secondly, to the extent you don't get paid more money...what will you do? Exercise a similar resolution, fight a proxy battle or maybe run for the Board of Directors yourself? Or just sell out?
Third, the focus on the financial return exclusively is fundamentally at variance with good citizenship, and is frankly amoral. Dennis Prager has opined at length on this, and I agree with him.
American labor can't be beat in the world market because it's the most productive.
On an hourly unit of production efficiency...no question. But on a cost basis? On a purely dollar-comparison cost basis? It can be underpriced. That's what outsourcing is all about.
Yes, you do. Check out the link posted in #627, and in there, plain as day, is (drum roll, please)...
businessweek.com
So maybe, just maybe, when some of your posts get removed, it is because they violate FR posting guidelines. No import lobby cabal required.
******************
Wow. What's that saying about not digging if you're in a hole?
Good advice!
Love your Clan chant, btw.
FYI: Your preferred candidate did well last night.
Thank you. :) Yes, he did fairly well.
No, it doesn't.
Hey Paul, there's got to be more to this discussion than "yesitisnoitisntyesitisnoitisntyesitisnoitisntyesitisnoitisnt". Let me know when you want to talk law; this might be a good place to start..
hourly unit of production efficiency...no question. But on a cost basis?
There are hard numbers for this. (The Boston Globe U.S. Workers World's Most Productive, U.S. workers are world’s most productive). Not everyone agrees. If you're going into surgery and instead of an American doctor you'd rather hire one from say, Uganda, then that's your choice.
Are you borrowing money from the Grocery store to buy its products instead of growing your own?
If he does borrow money to purchase his groceries, then the problem is that he’s spending more than he has and not the origin of his tomatoes.
Globalist!
The Third Way is definitely not Reaganism. It really chaps my hide when Third Way types try to associate themselves with Reagan. What a joke!
Here is a paradox. If most countries in the world are not free (at least free, as defined by small government, minimal government intervention, human rights, and respect for the rule of (English Common) law), then how can we have truly free trade? If we attempt to trade freely in this environment, and pretend its a level playing field, then those who are not free will rip us off. While it is noble to try and lead by example, the real world is quite brutal and there are many bad actors.
Here is a solution. Trade freely with other more or less free nations. And with all others? Either don’t trade at all, or, trade under very demanding terms that are totally to our advantage. This is exactly what Reagan’s time frame had in place. That is exactly what we did back then.
Still waiting on his answer...
“Explain the basics of how the deficit is bad for America.”
Spending more than we earned for decades has turned out great!
“Perhaps Duncan Hunter’s views would be of interest to 6 in 10 Republicans. “
They certainly would be if anyone KNEW about Duncan Hunter. Thanks to the media (AND THE GOP), they ignored him and handed us what we’ve got.
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.