If you still can't see through this guy

[TitanTiger 20,482]

Just now, I_M4_AU said:

Well Titan, the Chairman of the Board holds the CEO responsible for turning a profit so the stock holders are happy.  If the stock holder are not happy, the Chairman of the Board is not happy and heads will roll.  The CEO accepts the job knowing this, some are more ruthless than others, but the bottom line is profit.  If you cause my stock to go down, you're done is the attitude the public has, like it or not.  All the other stuff is just fluff to make the company's image look better and/or appease the employees.

Why are pharmaceuticals so expensive?  Do you thing it's because they have to pay for the research?  Why are utilities regulated by the government?  Do you think if the utilities were in a free market, the cost to the consumer would be the same?  Why do automobile manufactures use robots to build their cars?  Would it be cheaper to use manual labor for those jobs?

It's all about the profit.  How about health care and the problem we're having finding a solution?  If Obamacare is going to fail, one of the problems is the insurance companies will not provide coverage if they can't produce a profit.  Maybe they need to be deemed a ulitity, then we will be well on our way to a socialist government.

And that's the problem.  Somewhere along the line we bought hook, line and sinker into this notion and it's poisonous.  No capitalist system can last when the only obligation shareholders, CEOs, owners and so on believe is on them is to maximize profit.  

John Adams noted that "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."  I'd say the same goes for a capitalist economy.  If you remove morality, or dumb it down such that the only binding moral obligation for a business owner is the pursuit of profit, it will eventually be the downfall of that system.

[TexasTiger 12,862]

13 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Well Titan, the Chairman of the Board holds the CEO responsible for turning a profit so the stock holders are happy.  If the stock holder are not happy, the Chairman of the Board is not happy and heads will roll.  The CEO accepts the job knowing this, some are more ruthless than others, but the bottom line is profit.  If you cause my stock to go down, you're done is the attitude the public has, like it or not.  All the other stuff is just fluff to make the company's image look better and/or appease the employees.

Why are pharmaceuticals so expensive?  Do you thing it's because they have to pay for the research?  Why are utilities regulated by the government?  Do you think if the utilities were in a free market, the cost to the consumer would be the same?  Why do automobile manufactures use robots to build their cars?  Would it be cheaper to use manual labor for those jobs?

It's all about the profit.  How about health care and the problem we're having finding a solution?  If Obamacare is going to fail, one of the problems is the insurance companies will not provide coverage if they can't produce a profit.  Maybe they need to be deemed a ulitity, then we will be well on our way to a socialist government.

Did you vote for Trump?

[I_M4_AU 7,819]

9 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

And that's the problem.  Somewhere along the line we bought hook, line and sinker into this notion and it's poisonous.  No capitalist system can last when the only obligation shareholders, CEOs, owners and so on believe is on them is to maximize profit.  

John Adams noted that "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."  I'd say the same goes for a capitalist economy.  If you remove morality, or dumb it down such that the only binding moral obligation for a business owner is the pursuit of profit, it will eventually be the downfall of that system.

I can't disagree with this post.  I'm not defending any businessman here, I'm just pointing out what I believe they are motivated by as I have witnessed through out my career.  It's the business first, all else is just necessary to keep the business alive.  In bankruptcy court all of the stakeholders are equal, but until then, profit is king.

 

[I_M4_AU 7,819]

10 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Did you vote for Trump?

Tex, you have a tendency to ass.u.me too much.

[TexasTiger 12,862]

6 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Tex, you have a tendency to ass.u.me too much.

Asking a question is the opposite of assuming.

[I_M4_AU 7,819]

38 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Asking a question is the opposite of assuming.

And you would think a reasonable person would answer that question on a forum?

[TexasTiger 12,862]

9 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

And you would think a reasonable person would answer that question on a forum?

Yes. A hyper paranoid one might not.

[homersapien 11,373]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

Well Titan, the Chairman of the Board holds the CEO responsible for turning a profit so the stock holders are happy.  If the stock holder are not happy, the Chairman of the Board is not happy and heads will roll.  The CEO accepts the job knowing this, some are more ruthless than others, but the bottom line is profit.  If you cause my stock to go down, you're done is the attitude the public has, like it or not.  All the other stuff is just fluff to make the company's image look better and/or appease the employees.

Why are pharmaceuticals so expensive?  Do you thing it's because they have to pay for the research?  Why are utilities regulated by the government?  Do you think if the utilities were in a free market, the cost to the consumer would be the same?  Why do automobile manufactures use robots to build their cars?  Would it be cheaper to use manual labor for those jobs?

It's all about the profit.  How about health care and the problem we're having finding a solution?  If Obamacare is going to fail, one of the problems is the insurance companies will not provide coverage if they can't produce a profit.  Maybe they need to be deemed a ulitity, then we will be well on our way to a socialist government.

You seem to be arguing both sides of the issue.

 

[homersapien 11,373]

26 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

And you would think a reasonable person would answer that question on a forum?

Irony 

[I_M4_AU 7,819]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

You seem to be arguing both sides of the issue.

 

I can see both sides of the issue and have lived through both sides.

[SaltyTiger 7,798]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

 

John Adams noted that "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."  I'd say the same goes for a capitalist economy.  If you remove morality, or dumb it down such that the only binding moral obligation for a business owner is the pursuit of profit, it will eventually be the downfall of that system.

Bingo, IMO. 

[DKW 86 7,423]

19 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Yes. A hyper paranoid one might not.

You havent answered a question on this forum in 10-15 years. What does that make you?

[DKW 86 7,423]

19 hours ago, homersapien said:

You seem to be arguing both sides of the issue.

 

Homer, grownups can see both sides of issues. I can despise Trump, but I can see why people tired of the status quo voted for him. I can really appreciate HRC's qualifications and still react abhorrently to her use of a private server and her tone deafness in dealing with the voters. I can be a Liberal and still plainly see that the Democrat Party needs a ton of work. This is not hard.

[I_M4_AU 7,819]

20 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Yes. A hyper paranoid one might not.

Says the person who will not reveal his gender.  As Homey would say; hypocrisy

[homersapien 11,373]

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

Homer, grownups can see both sides of issues. I can despise Trump, but I can see why people tired of the status quo voted for him. I can really appreciate HRC's qualifications and still react abhorrently to her use of a private server and her tone deafness in dealing with the voters. I can be a Liberal and still plainly see that the Democrat Party needs a ton of work. This is not hard.

Well, that's reasonable, but it had nothing to do with the topic.

[homersapien 11,373]

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

You havent answered a question on this forum in 10-15 years. What does that make you?

[TexasTiger 12,862]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

Says the person who will not reveal his gender.  As Homey would say; hypocrisy

You asked me a question. Would a reasonable person dare to reveal who they voted for on a POLITICAL forum? Try to be more logical and relevant.

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

Says the person who will not reveal his gender.  As Homey would say; hypocrisy

Oh, you must not have gotten invited to Tex's gender reveal party. There was cake. The Cristal was so good I can't recall if the cake was pink or blue though. So sad! 

[TexasTiger 12,862]

Back to the topic, Trump doesn't really even try to hire American.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/politics/apply-by-fax-before-it-can-hire-foreign-workers-trumps-mar-a-lago-club-advertises-at-home--briefly/2017/08/07/7198576c-792f-11e7-9eac-d56bd5568db8_story.html