Obsolescence of Ownership

[Larry Gude]

Hmmm...

How about any remuneration that can be attained via ethical methods.

Remuneration and profit are two different things. I'm not in business to get remunerated. I'm in business to make profit.

 

[FromTexas]

Remuneration and profit are two different things. I'm not in business to get remunerated. I'm in business to make profit.

Much less whose definition of ethical we are talking. Some people think it is unethical for oil and gas companies to make a 10% profit. Other people think it is unethical for chickens to be beheaded and fed to us after being deep fried. Ethical can be subjective.

 

[jrtime]

Remuneration and profit are two different things. I'm not in business to get remunerated. I'm in business to make profit.

Profit through any means? Including explotation of workers by reducing benefits and lowering wages? By buying congressional favors ?

 

[Larry Gude]

How old...

Profit through any means? Including explotation of workers by reducing benefits and lowering wages? By buying congressional favors ?

..are you?

 

[jrtime]

..are you?

Probably much older than you. Soon be a senior citizen.

 

[Larry Gude]

Well good...

Probably much older than you. Soon be a senior citizen.

...then you'll have no trouble explaining yourself;

Pick a product or service or even a specific company or even person, say Ken Lay for instance, and let's chat about the greed associated with it and the public interest. Politics is a service, so, if you like, we can use that.

 

[MMDad]

Profit through any means? Including explotation of workers by reducing benefits and lowering wages? By buying congressional favors ?

Whatever the market will bear. The only reason companies offer benefits better than the minmum required by law is that you have to offer a compensation package that makes people want to work for you. There is no need for government intervention. The process is self regulating.

So what do you think congress should do about the problem you perceive? Look at how well they run the country. Do you really think they could do any better by increasing regulation of business?

 

[jrtime]

...then you'll have no trouble explaining yourself;

Pick a product or service or even a specific company or even person, say Ken Lay for instance, and let's chat about the greed associated with it and the public interest. Politics is a service, so, if you like, we can use that.

Politics? Can't we pick something less subjective and controversial like Religion?

No, seriously if you're looking for something to clarify the meaning of the original post let's go with say technology. I think you mentioned something back a bit about a 386 and accounting software. Would that be okay?

 

[jrtime]

Whatever the market will bear. The only reason companies offer benefits better than the minmum required by law is that you have to offer a compensation package that makes people want to work for you. There is no need for government intervention. The process is self regulating.

So what do you think congress should do about the problem you perceive? Look at how well they run the country. Do you really think they could do any better by increasing regulation of business?

Absolutely not!!! I think they should stay out of business and any let it function as a true free enterprise system. What I'm saying is they should not be influenced by the lobbyiest with the campaign funding and pork issues that they use to benefit their own agendas. What's happening now is the old "Quid pro Quo" . The role of government should be to perpetuate opportunity not control or influence outcomes.

 

[MMDad]

Absolutely not!!! I think they should stay out of business and any let it function as a true free enterprise system. What I'm saying is they should not be influenced by the lobbyiest with the campaign funding and pork issues that they use to benefit their own agendas. What's happening now is the old "Quid pro Quo" . The role of government should be to perpetuate opportunity not control or influence outcomes.

That doesn't fit with your original post:

This is an issue that needs to be addressed. Let's see if the "new" congress passes any legislation in this regard.

What can congress do to stop "obsolescence of ownership" without interfering?

As for corrupt politicians, you may as well just get used to it. The only way it can change is if the corrupt politicians suddenly grew a set of ethics. It'll never happen. That's one thing that history can definitely teach us. Politicians are corrupt.

 

[jrtime]

That doesn't fit with your original post:



What can congress do to stop "obsolescence of ownership" without interfering?

As for corrupt politicians, you may as well just get used to it. The only way it can change is if the corrupt politicians suddenly grew a set of ethics. It'll never happen. That's one thing that history can definitely teach us. Politicians are corrupt.

But it does fit precisely ! They need to legislate themselves into abiding by the principals of the office into which they were elected. Represent all of us not just those with the most financial influence.

 

[MMDad]

But it does fit precisely ! They need to legislate themselves into abiding by the principals of the office into which they were elected. Represent all of us not just those with the most financial influence.

Never happen. I'm more likely to win the lottery 20 times in one week.

 

[ylexot]

But it does fit precisely ! They need to legislate themselves into abiding by the principals of the office into which they were elected. Represent all of us not just those with the most financial influence.

Yeah...that'll happen.

 

[jrtime]

Yeah...that'll happen.

Probably not and that was my original point. We will be driven to backruptcy as the wealth of the nation is squandered by those entrusted with safeguarding it. Profit margins will not be attained if consumers cannot afford the goods and services that are produced. It's time for us to speak up and not resort to business as usual with the defacto defeatist attitude. Let's hold'em accountable and voice our opinions. This issue hits home to me because I see the struggle of young folks tryling to make ends meet even with appropriate education and marketable skills.

 

[vraiblonde]

They need to legislate themselves into abiding by the principals of the office into which they were elected. Represent all of us not just those with the most financial influence.

What's in it for them? I mean, some crook is going to be elected anyway - we the voters make sure of that. So why should they start policing themselves when we're going to vote for them anyway?

What I'm saying is they should not be influenced by the lobbyiest with the campaign funding and pork issues that they use to benefit their own agendas.

How are you supposed to wage a political campaign without money? And how are you going to get people to give you money if they're not going to get anything back out of the deal?

I mean, I agree with the principle of your argument - it's just unrealistic. Money makes the world go round - that's just the way it is. The good news is that it's pretty easy to make money in this country. Especially when corporations are making so much money that they don't have to lay anyone off or cut their benefits.

 

[vraiblonde]

This issue hits home to me because I see the struggle of young folks tryling to make ends meet even with appropriate education and marketable skills.

Young people are supposed to struggle. I struggled when I was young. I'm sure you did too. They're not supposed to graduate from college and be where their parents are financially. Struggling is part of the learning process - builds character.

 

[ylexot]

I'm curious...are you only opposed to corporate lobbyists?

 

[bcp]

all my crappy cars are paid for.
my puter has been paid for a couple years now.
My home will be paid off in 13 years
my boat will be paid off in 4 years

I plan to keep the house after pay off
I plan to get at least another 10 years from my cars (unless I sell my truck and get a used one from someone I know that is selling one)

 

[jrtime]

I'm curious...are you only opposed to corporate lobbyists?

I'm opposed to any and all who are not solely a subject matter expert that explains the pros and cons of a particular issue or venture.

 

[ylexot]

I'm opposed to any and all who are not solely a subject matter expert that explains the pros and cons of a particular issue or venture.

Ok, so you are opposed to all humans. Got it.