novus wrote:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')orporations are only ALLOWED to exist to serve the public good not the other way around.
PeakOil is You
Job losses in US getting awful close to a million a month
Re: Job losses in US getting awful close to a million a month
by Sixstrings » Thu 02 Apr 2009, 00:48:43
Silly rabbit..
Corporations exist for one reason only -- to maximize an investor's profit while at the same time relieving him of any liability or personal responsibility for the business at hand.
So the investor gets the best of all worlds. He gets to say "hey man, don't talk to me about what that company does, I just own a part of it -- and in five minutes I'll go and sell it, and five minutes later I'll short it and bet on its downfall."
See how that works? It's all about separating and protecting the stockholders from any personal responsibility to/for the enterprise they in fact own.
-
Sixstrings - Fusion
- Posts: 15160
- Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Re: Job losses in US getting awful close to a million a month
by Sixstrings » Thu 02 Apr 2009, 01:02:20
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eastbay', 'T')he one's doing the laying off just don't care. Why should they? They have nothing in common with the workers. CEO behavior was bad enough 40 years ago but today it's just downright obscene.
When the income disparity between average workers and CEO's reaches a certain point expect revolution. I would have thought that breaking point would be quite a bit less than the 262:1 difference we now suffer.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/ ... 525.column
Just 40 years ago, as the Vietnam Era was getting underway, it was only 24:1, and whiffs of revolution was in the air across The West. What happened? Why are people now timidly accepting this fairly recent immoral inequitability shift?
Back then people protested against war and today people vote for war.
Today we accept a horrifying spread between average workers pay and CEO pay, back then we knew a 24:1 spread was just plain wrong. Today few complain about a 262:1 difference.
Why have people become so supportive of such an oppressive status quo lately? I tell ya, it's starting to get annoying.
When the income disparity between average workers and CEO's reaches a certain point expect revolution. I would have thought that breaking point would be quite a bit less than the 262:1 difference we now suffer.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/ ... 525.column
Just 40 years ago, as the Vietnam Era was getting underway, it was only 24:1, and whiffs of revolution was in the air across The West. What happened? Why are people now timidly accepting this fairly recent immoral inequitability shift?
Back then people protested against war and today people vote for war.
Today we accept a horrifying spread between average workers pay and CEO pay, back then we knew a 24:1 spread was just plain wrong. Today few complain about a 262:1 difference.
Why have people become so supportive of such an oppressive status quo lately? I tell ya, it's starting to get annoying.
Amen, eastbay.
I think it's probably the fault of that great opiate of the masses, television. I swear, that glowing box is nothing but a mind-control tool, used to program consumers from cradle to grave.
Ya, sure, you may think you get a different spin on things by watching Fox. But the ads are the same, aren't they? And that relentless advertising has a cumulative effect over the years -- it shapes our values, desires, view of ourselves, everything.
-
Sixstrings - Fusion
- Posts: 15160
- Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Re: Job losses in US getting awful close to a million a month
by EnergyUnlimited » Thu 02 Apr 2009, 02:08:44
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', '
')I think it's probably the fault of that great opiate of the masses, television. I swear, that glowing box is nothing but a mind-control tool, used to program consumers from cradle to grave.
')I think it's probably the fault of that great opiate of the masses, television. I swear, that glowing box is nothing but a mind-control tool, used to program consumers from cradle to grave.
You are not getting it right.
Until now system was seen as working well by masses.
Everyone could get his/her Mc Mansion, SUV, boat etc so they didn't give a slightest damn about CEOs and their private jets or share options.
Peoples were simply content with their achievements, albeit they overlooked that these are usually funded by debt, however that is entirely different story.
Television was only of secondary importance in creation of cheerful feelings between masses.
There is also a long trend (10 000+ years?) showing that masses are keen to accept oppression from small powerful elites as long as their basic existential needs are met. That obedience is in human genes.
Perhaps peoples feel that someone cares about them, even if he seems to be a strict father.
So you are unlikely to get rebellion until peoples literally go hungry and even then it will take considerable time before rebellion unfolds.
Other driving forces for rebellion are based on religious or nationalistic issues, but these are rather absent in Western world.
So don't expect revolution only because your CEO is getting 200 or 500 times as high salary as you do.
That is plain silly.
-
EnergyUnlimited - Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 7537
- Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00
Re: Job losses in US getting awful close to a million a month
by Mesuge » Thu 02 Apr 2009, 06:36:20
Exactly, there will be no rebellion in the U.S.
The energy and awarness/education at individual level is not there, the organizational foundations are not there either (multi party political system and unions as in Europe or Asia).
This looks more like a descent into more totalitarian perhaps feudal state, where people just obey a little bit more each year in exchange for little food and security (good behaviour = only 2 out of your 3 kids drafted into resource wars).
Some regional pockets of resistance might pop up, but it will be insignificant (think freaks around Ron Paul) and dealt with promptly under anti-terror laws and propaganda.
What it takes is a general/national strike and/or dozens of million individuals in peoples's march on D.C. and that won't happen for above listed reasons and few others.
The energy and awarness/education at individual level is not there, the organizational foundations are not there either (multi party political system and unions as in Europe or Asia).
This looks more like a descent into more totalitarian perhaps feudal state, where people just obey a little bit more each year in exchange for little food and security (good behaviour = only 2 out of your 3 kids drafted into resource wars).
Some regional pockets of resistance might pop up, but it will be insignificant (think freaks around Ron Paul) and dealt with promptly under anti-terror laws and propaganda.
What it takes is a general/national strike and/or dozens of million individuals in peoples's march on D.C. and that won't happen for above listed reasons and few others.
DOOMerotron: at all-time high [8.3] out of 10..
-
Mesuge - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1500
- Joined: Tue 01 Nov 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: Euro high horse bastard on the run
Re: Job losses in US getting awful close to a million a month
by Pretorian » Thu 02 Apr 2009, 07:45:23
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eastbay', 'T')he one's doing the laying off just don't care. Why should they? They have nothing in common with the workers. CEO behavior was bad enough 40 years ago but today it's just downright obscene.
When the income disparity between average workers and CEO's reaches a certain point expect revolution. I would have thought that breaking point would be quite a bit less than the 262:1 difference we now suffer.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/ ... 525.column
Just 40 years ago, as the Vietnam Era was getting underway, it was only 24:1, and whiffs of revolution was in the air across The West. What happened? Why are people now timidly accepting this fairly recent immoral inequitability shift?
Back then people protested against war and today people vote for war.
Today we accept a horrifying spread between average workers pay and CEO pay, back then we knew a 24:1 spread was just plain wrong. Today few complain about a 262:1 difference.
Why have people become so supportive of such an oppressive status quo lately? I tell ya, it's starting to get annoying.
When the income disparity between average workers and CEO's reaches a certain point expect revolution. I would have thought that breaking point would be quite a bit less than the 262:1 difference we now suffer.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/ ... 525.column
Just 40 years ago, as the Vietnam Era was getting underway, it was only 24:1, and whiffs of revolution was in the air across The West. What happened? Why are people now timidly accepting this fairly recent immoral inequitability shift?
Back then people protested against war and today people vote for war.
Today we accept a horrifying spread between average workers pay and CEO pay, back then we knew a 24:1 spread was just plain wrong. Today few complain about a 262:1 difference.
Why have people become so supportive of such an oppressive status quo lately? I tell ya, it's starting to get annoying.
So who does decide how much that CEO will get for whatever he does in his office? If CEO, then just short his stock and be happy. Why complain, its not your money.
- Pretorian
- Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 4685
- Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
- Location: Somewhere there
