Yes Jason, you are correct. However, today almost 'the majority' own
stock. Of course, 'it' (stocks) clearly are no profit deal at all. A
gamble perhaps, like going to Vegas. Profit deal, no.

Some numbers on this:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/columnist/krantz/2008-11-11-main-street-wall-street_N.htm



On Dec 11, 8:57 pm, "Jason (Memphis)" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> The majority of Americans do not own stocks.  So the majority of
> American are left out of this profit deal.
>
> On Dec 11, 9:00 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > “…If Govt. becomes involved in a business it necessarily sets up a
> > huge bureaucracy in its own image to
> > run it. I've seen these grow from nothing - layer upon layer. It
> > drains the economy slowly and exhaustively. I've never seen one
> > function efficiently in the long term…” – clog
>
> > Yeh, sorta like Wall Street and millions of stock holders. Talk about
> > a huge bureaucracy! And, the government claims to regulate all of this
> > too!!! Capitalism bureaucracy built in it’s own image for sure.
> > Clearly, the ‘economy’, whatever anyone wants to mean by the term, is
> > drained fully by CEO’s with BILLIONS of dollars in stock and having to
> > give additional profits to the stock holders. Anyone who wants to buy
> > stuff has to pay so much more because of this grossly inefficient, top
> > heavy and greedy system.
>
> > On Dec 11, 7:12 am, Clogtowner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Hi y'all - "First, ‘the Govt.’ (We the people.) can be in any business
> > > ‘we’ want
> > > to be in. ‘We’ set it up that way. There is no ‘should’ about it.
> > > And, ‘we’ in fact have little to no control over spending. At least
> > > not directly. Also, there are no real ‘strings’ when it comes to such
> > > things. If studied long enough, this will become obvious. And, as
> > > contradictory as it looks, you now seem to think it is OK for ‘us’ to
> > > turn a profit! Strange! "
>
> > > Indeed I have only been in this country for 21 years but I have
> > > studied the effect of Govt. ovwnership of business in the Eastern
> > > Bloc, and I've seen the results. If Govt. becomes involved in a
> > > business it necessarily sets up a huge bureaucracy in its own image to
> > > run it. I've seen these grow from nothing - layer upon layer. It
> > > drains the economy slowly and exhaustively. I've never seen one
> > > function efficiently in the long term.
> > > We can't say what strings are attached to the Auto deal yet as it has
> > > not been completed, but so far it looks more promising, from a
> > > taxpayer point of view, than the Bank debacle.
> > > During the recent collapse of many banks the FDIC (and I don't
> > > normally praise the Govt.) has done a fine job of ensuring stability
> > > and guaranteeing accounts. Note the difference in the UK where no FDIC
> > > existed and we were treated to videos of Building Society customers
> > > lined up and screaming for their money. Eventually the UK Govt. were
> > > forced to step in and offer their version of the FDIC.
>
> > > On Dec 10, 11:30 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > “Hi y'all - I can't agree with you on this. Neither the Govt. nor the
> > > > whole citizenry of this country should be in the car business. As the
> > > > Govt. controls the spending I have no objections to loans in the
> > > > interest of the country with strings to ensure repayment, and
> > > > hopefully, a profit. The Govt. does a good job of backing up our bank
> > > > accounts FDIC (so far.)
> > > > I do agree about the banks. They should have been offered the same
> > > > deal.” – clog
>
> > > > Clog, I know you weren’t born here nor are you old enough to know what
> > > > all has transpired when it comes to such issues here in the US. So, I
> > > > don’t blame you much for being what appears to be quite naïve.
>
> > > > First, ‘the Govt.’ (We the people.) can be in any business ‘we’ want
> > > > to be in. ‘We’ set it up that way. There is no ‘should’ about it.
> > > > And, ‘we’ in fact have little to no control over spending. At least
> > > > not directly. Also, there are no real ‘strings’ when it comes to such
> > > > things. If studied long enough, this will become obvious. And, as
> > > > contradictory as it looks, you now seem to think it is OK for ‘us’ to
> > > > turn a profit! Strange!
> > > > Anyway, no, the Govt. (We the people.) do not do a good job of backing
> > > > up our bank accounts. Think “Savings and Loan Crisis’. The thing that
> > > > McCain was deeply involved in among others.
> > > > And, what is ‘common knowledge’ (about the banks) is in fact not the
> > > > reality. IF one reads the 108 pages or so of the first bank bailout,
> > > > what it said was that the banks should just take the money and buy
> > > > other banks! It said nothing about helping people and businesses who
> > > > couldn’t get loans. Look it up. Most of what is presented on corporate
> > > > TV is half truths at best. At worst, much of it makes the old USSR’s
> > > > Pravda look like a comic book!
>
> > > > On Dec 10, 7:25 am, Clogtowner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Hi y'all - I can't agree with you on this. Neither the Govt. nor the
> > > > > whole citizenry of this country should be in the car business. As the
> > > > > Govt. controls the spending I have no objections to loans in the
> > > > > interest of the country with strings to ensure repayment, and
> > > > > hopefully, a profit. The Govt. does a good job of backing up our bank
> > > > > accounts FDIC (so far.)
> > > > > I do agree about the banks. They should have been offered the same
> > > > > deal.
>
> > > > > On Dec 9, 10:49 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Again, the notion of nationalization isn't being mentioned. I would 
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > for that. At least that way, 'we the people' would get some sort of
> > > > > > return on our investment. By now, we should own almost every US 
> > > > > > bank.
>
> > > > > > On Dec 9, 2:30 pm, Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > <<$70/hr. with no reference to benefits. I >>
>
> > > > > > > That includes benefits to *retirees*.
>
> > > > > > > According to my limited accounting, the benefits that retirees 
> > > > > > > receive
> > > > > > > should be expensed as they occurred and not attached to future
> > > > > > > employees.  I'd like to see this topic explored in greater detail.
>
> > > > > > > On Dec 9, 2:39 pm, Clogtowner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Hi y'all - I've just done some further research on payscales 
> > > > > > > > and I've
> > > > > > > > come up with no solid answer. The UAW (I'd expect them to be 
> > > > > > > > biased)
> > > > > > > > mention $30/hr plus benefits (what do the benefits amount to?) 
> > > > > > > > Faux
> > > > > > > > news and the like mention (I'd expect them to be biased too) 
> > > > > > > > $70/hr.
> > > > > > > > with no reference to benefits. I suppose the truth is somewhere 
> > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > between In any event, these rates seem rather high to a poor 
> > > > > > > > old Mid
> > > > > > > > Southerner for manual labor. Why don't they locate their 
> > > > > > > > factories
> > > > > > > > (not overseas) where labor is cheaper? I don't know what the 
> > > > > > > > pay rates
> > > > > > > > are at the Tennessee Saturn Plant - they seem to be struggling 
> > > > > > > > too.
> > > > > > > > I'm sure a plant located in North Mississippi would be more
> > > > > > > > economical, but would the drug free, semi skilled, reliable 
> > > > > > > > labor
> > > > > > > > force be available?
>
> > > > > > > > On Dec 9, 11:26 am, CrossBow <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > The true average is represented below - it is not $70 per 
> > > > > > > > > hour, per
> > > > > > > > > se.  SPIN DOCTORS  are at it again.
>
> > > > > > > > > *"That $70 per hour figure is arrived at by dividing total 
> > > > > > > > > labour costs by
> > > > > > > > > the total number of workers, then by average hours worked. It 
> > > > > > > > > also happens
> > > > > > > > > to include pension obligations for GM, which is comprised of 
> > > > > > > > > current
> > > > > > > > > payments accrued by past workers. So, while the average 
> > > > > > > > > worker probably
> > > > > > > > > makes closer to **$30 per 
> > > > > > > > > hour*<http://www.uaw.org/contracts/07/gm/gm02.php>
> > > > > > > > > *, the total wages paid out include payments to retirees who 
> > > > > > > > > have chosen to
> > > > > > > > > defer payment of their wages."*
>
> > > > > > > > > I personally don't have as much pity as I maybe should for 
> > > > > > > > > the businesses
> > > > > > > > > that are drowning in overstock. It is hard to imagine Mom & 
> > > > > > > > > Pop businesses
> > > > > > > > > with dangerous overstock - because it is not easy for them to 
> > > > > > > > > get the
> > > > > > > > > capitol to get the inventory in the first place.  No, I think 
> > > > > > > > > it is the
> > > > > > > > > retail giant/corpses with excess inventory they cannot sell, 
> > > > > > > > > with bloated
> > > > > > > > > expectations, that have also been charging too damn much for 
> > > > > > > > > little (think
> > > > > > > > > inflation, right?).
>
> > > > > > > > > Good Mom & Pops, like I work for, plan ahead, and use stable 
> > > > > > > > > business
> > > > > > > > > practices to keep afloat.  Most businesses flop in the first 
> > > > > > > > > year due to
> > > > > > > > > crappy planning anyway..is it our responsability as a 
> > > > > > > > > consumer to rescue
> > > > > > > > > them or the Corpses? Homoconsumerensis to the rescue?  It's 
> > > > > > > > > their job to do
> > > > > > > > > thier homework just like each individual needs to guard their 
> > > > > > > > > credit
> > > > > > > > > score. I know about hard luck, it happens, but haven't we 
> > > > > > > > > grown far too
> > > > > > > > > careless in our Hummer driving, McDonald's grubbing, plastic 
> > > > > > > > > burning,
> > > > > > > > > reality tv watching, FUNK? As you can tell I am feeling 
> > > > > > > > > miserly this
> > > > > > > > > morning...
>
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Clogtowner 
> > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - welcome to capitalism. The good times are great, 
> > > > > > > > > > but
> > > > > > > > > > business is cyclical and must be prepared for. He who 
> > > > > > > > > > builds his
> > > > > > > > > > business out of unsupported credit will fail. The Govt. 
> > > > > > > > > > Bailout of the
> > > > > > > > > > car industry is supposed to be a loan with strings - 
> > > > > > > > > > nothing wrong
> > > > > > > > > > with that, as long as the taxpayer benefits?? In the 
> > > > > > > > > > interest of
> > > > > > > > > > preserving some manufacturing base in this country, it 
> > > > > > > > > > would seem to
> > > > > > > > > > be justified. Having said that, the strings must be tight - 
> > > > > > > > > > why do GM
> > > > > > > > > > etc. workers
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Memphis Freethought Alliance" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to