Overpaid CEOs and Greedy Capitalists.. oh my!

[Boss]

LOL... No, I am not going to define what a CEO does for you, that defeats the purpose of me asking you to explain it to us. My intention is not to show you that I know more than you, it is to show that you don't know what CEOs do. So far, we have a bunch of hot air.... they "work hard" and they "make phone calls" and they "maximize profitability" and they "have meetings" but it all depends on what kind of corporation.

So why don't we drop the kabuki dance here, and just admit, you don't really believe a CEO does much, they are just a figurehead who gobbles up profits which could go to the worker bees, from your perspective, and that is why you loathe CEOs so much. The only real problem with your perspective is, it's totally wrong and contradicts capitalist principles. The capitalist has no need to pay a CEO a bunch of money they don't deserve, because this eats up profits the capitalist is in business to realize.

 

[AmazonTania]

Ok....first off...Google is your fucking friend....

Google

Yes, Google is your friend, but not a good economics teacher. Especially if it is going to refer me to outdated data from 2011.

The rest? Forget it....I'm tired beating my head against the wall trying to get "true believers" who get their info from the right wing.propaganda machine to see anything beyond what they've been told.

All the information I have told you came from the Census Bureau and the World Bank. I forgot those are basitians of Right Wing Hate.

I'll tell you what...if you want to know where I get most of my ideology from....buy Dylan Ratigan's book..."Greedy Bastards". For $10-15, you can get an insight on my thought process and you might learn.something yourself.

I don't care, but if your economic understanding originates from that book as well I suggest you get a refund. Immediately...

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The capitalist has no need to pay a CEO a bunch of money they don't deserve, because this eats up profits the capitalist is in business to realize.

not only does it eat up profits but it gives the competition an opportunity to price lower and drive the higher priced company into bankruptcy.

A liberal is a liberal because he lacks the IQ to understand capitalism.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

But that he deserves to make what he makes is hardly proven by the fact that he works hard.

Any price or wage is optimal if it is a capitalist price or wage, i.e., the price agreed to voluntarily by the people who know most about the value of the product or service being produced and purchased.

A price or wage is non optimal and slows an economy when the price or wage is guessed at by bureaucrats who know far less about the actual value of the product.

 

[MikeK]

LOL... No, I am not going to define what a CEO does for you, that defeats the purpose of me asking you to explain it to us. My intention is not to show you that I know more than you, it is to show that you don't know what CEOs do. So far, we have a bunch of hot air.... they "work hard" and they "make phone calls" and they "maximize profitability" and they "have meetings" but it all depends on what kind of corporation.

So why don't we drop the kabuki dance here, and just admit, you don't really believe a CEO does much, they are just a figurehead who gobbles up profits which could go to the worker bees, from your perspective, and that is why you loathe CEOs so much. The only real problem with your perspective is, it's totally wrong and contradicts capitalist principles. The capitalist has no need to pay a CEO a bunch of money they don't deserve, because this eats up profits the capitalist is in business to realize.

You presume too much.

I frankly don't care how much an individual, CEO, rock star, baseball player, pimp, or otherwise, makes -- provided any personal assets in excess of $20 million (after taxes) are subject to confiscation by IRS. I don't "loathe" CEOs. What I loathe is greed. And by simply lowering the bar the impetus that fosters and nourishes the destructive pathology of financial gluttony is eliminated.

As I've suggested in an earlier message, if the Framers of our Constitution were able to foresee the kind of wealth the industrialized nation of America would be capable of generating, and the kind of political and social damage excessive accumulations of that wealth would be capable of, there is no doubt they would have included limitations to such accumulation in the Document.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

kind of political and social damage excessive accumulations of that wealth would be capable of,

to stupid!! Gates Jobs Ford, for example, accululated the the greatest wealth in human history by making space age products available to the average person all over the globe.

Thats social damage only if you are a 100% perfect idiot!!

 

[Steelplate]

kind of political and social damage excessive accumulations of that wealth would be capable of,

to stupid!! Gates Jobs Ford, for example, accululated the the greatest wealth in human history by making space age products available to the average person all over the globe.

Thats social damage only if you are a 100% perfect idiot!!

Funny you should mention Ford...his philosophy was to pay enough that every one of his employees could afford his car without struggling.

You make them sound like philanthropists....

You are a fool.

 

[AmazonTania]

Funny you should mention Ford...his philosophy was to pay enough that every one of his employees could afford his car without struggling.

You make them sound like philanthropists....

You are a fool.

No, that was not his philosophy. At all. He wanted to reduce his turnover, as his employees were quitting and either starting their own businesses or working for Ford's competitors.

Probably less than 1% of Fords consumers consisted of his workforce.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

kind of political and social damage excessive accumulations of that wealth would be capable of,

to stupid!! Gates Jobs Ford, for example, accululated the the greatest wealth in human history by making space age products available to the average person all over the globe.

Thats social damage only if you are a 100% perfect idiot!!

Funny you should mention Ford...his philosophy was to pay enough that every one of his employees could afford his car without struggling.

You make them sound like philanthropists....

You are a fool.

of course they are far far better than philanthropists. Walmart alone makes it possible for people to buy $500 billion of merchandise each year and employes millions and millions directly and indirectly all over
the world. Do you know a philanthropist who can do .1% of that!!

Capitalism got us from the stone age to here, not philanthropists you perfect liberal fool!!

China just switched to capitalism and eliminated half the worlds poverty!! Could a philanthropist do that?? Isn't thinking fun???

 

[Steelplate]

to stupid!! Gates Jobs Ford, for example, accululated the the greatest wealth in human history by making space age products available to the average person all over the globe.

Thats social damage only if you are a 100% perfect idiot!!

Funny you should mention Ford...his philosophy was to pay enough that every one of his employees could afford his car without struggling.

You make them sound like philanthropists....

You are a fool.

of course they are far far better than philanthropists. Walmart alone makes it possible for people to buy $500 billion of merchandise each year and employes millions and millions directly and indirectly all over
the world. Do you know a philanthropist who can do .1% of that!!

Capitalism got us from the stone age to here, not philanthropists you perfect liberal fool!!

China just switched to capitalism and eliminated half the worlds poverty!! Could a philanthropist do that?? Isn't thinking fun???

Employs millions of people simply because the government subsidizes their wages...just like McDonald's and every low wage employer.

They didn't "switch" to Capitalism at all...they are in the sweatshop business...making shit for American companies. Don't confuse that with Capitalism. If they were to have "switched" to Capitalism, they'd have their own privately controlled companies and they'd compete directly with us without OUR capital, OUR designs and OUR innovations.

Our companies sold the country out for massive profits....period.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Walmart employs millions of people simply because the government subsidizes their wages...just like McDonald's and every low wage employer.

Are you saying that without liberal welfare no one would work for Walmart and they'd go out of business?

They didn't "switch" to Capitalism at all...they are in the sweatshop business...

too stupid!! so we have capitalism socialism and the sweatshop business as the 3 most commonn economic systems??

What not read "Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics" and How China became Capitalist"

FYI China switched to capitalism in 1980 and eliminated 40% of world poverty!! Under liberalism 10 million would slowly starve to death in a bad year!!

See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow??

 

[Rshermr]

Funny you should mention Ford...his philosophy was to pay enough that every one of his employees could afford his car without struggling.

You make them sound like philanthropists....

You are a fool.

No, that was not his philosophy. At all. He wanted to reduce his turnover, as his employees were quitting and either starting their own businesses or working for Ford's competitors.

Probably less than 1% of Fords consumers consisted of his workforce.

Poor amazon. Outed as a tool with no game. Now trying another stupid statement. Funny she never has a link, eh.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Funny you should mention Ford...his philosophy was to pay enough that every one of his employees could afford his car without struggling.

obviously you must pay the lowest wages possible to have the lowest prices for your customers if you want to stay in business!! Ford didn't get to have a philosophy in a capitalist economy! He had to raise his customers standard of living faster than anyone else in the world or go bankrupt!! Get it now??

A liberal simply lacks the IQ to understand capitalism

 

[Rshermr]

LOL... No, I am not going to define what a CEO does for you, that defeats the purpose of me asking you to explain it to us. My intention is not to show you that I know more than you, it is to show that you don't know what CEOs do. So far, we have a bunch of hot air.... they "work hard" and they "make phone calls" and they "maximize profitability" and they "have meetings" but it all depends on what kind of corporation.

So why don't we drop the kabuki dance here, and just admit, you don't really believe a CEO does much, they are just a figurehead who gobbles up profits which could go to the worker bees, from your perspective, and that is why you loathe CEOs so much. The only real problem with your perspective is, it's totally wrong and contradicts capitalist principles. The capitalist has no need to pay a CEO a bunch of money they don't deserve, because this eats up profits the capitalist is in business to realize.

You presume too much.

I frankly don't care how much an individual, CEO, rock star, baseball player, pimp, or otherwise, makes -- provided any personal assets in excess of $20 million (after taxes) are subject to confiscation by IRS. I don't "loathe" CEOs. What I loathe is greed. And by simply lowering the bar the impetus that fosters and nourishes the destructive pathology of financial gluttony is eliminated.

As I've suggested in an earlier message, if the Framers of our Constitution were able to foresee the kind of wealth the industrialized nation of America would be capable of generating, and the kind of political and social damage excessive accumulations of that wealth would be capable of, there is no doubt they would have included limitations to such accumulation in the Document.

You know, I think that based on the drivel Boss posts that he was probably a ceo at the same time I was an emperor. Funny. Any guy who calls you a marxist pretty much gives up any hope of convincing a rational person that he has a clue.
But that is the thing. A guy like Boss can pretend he was anything on a board like this. I suspect he is a very sad case, who simply wants to be thought of as someone with accomplishment.

 

[AmazonTania]

Poor amazon. Outed as a tool with no game. Now trying another stupid statement.

Only stupid to those who have never learned accounting terms and passing off Google as an economic text book.

Funny she never has a link, eh.

Now all of a sudden you have standards, although you don't follow these standards yourself. If you've ever been correct any anything (which you haven't) you don't need to links. Everything I say is easily verifiable using Google. You're suppose to be good at using that, correct? Only need sources if I really need to put up some sort of effort in refuting claims.

 

[Steelplate]

Funny you should mention Ford...his philosophy was to pay enough that every one of his employees could afford his car without struggling.

obviously you must pay the lowest wages possible to have the lowest prices for your customers if you want to stay in business!! Ford didn't get to have a philosophy in a capitalist economy! He had to raise his customers standard of living faster than anyone else in the world or go bankrupt!! Get it now??

A liberal simply lacks the IQ to understand capitalism

Once again...you are a fool...a useful idiot to the corporatists. Funny how we were doing great with higher wages, higher taxes and lower profits in the 50's, 60's and 70's. Up until the OPEC oil embargo that we were woefully unprepared for. Of course, Carter got the blame for the resulting inflation and that ushered in Reaganomics. After 30+ years fictional trickle down you see the results.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Once again...you are a fool...a useful idiot to the corporatists.

dear, conservatives are anti-corporatists. Conservatives are for separation of business and government, while liberals are for combining government and business like in Obamacare.

How stupid do you feel now?? Do you want to be a liberal all your life?? Ask yourself!!

 

[itfitzme]

I was talking with a gas
station owner about pricing. He owns an independently operated Cheveron. He said he does not compete against his local competion by lowering price. He called it "bad form".

 

[Boss]

LOL... No, I am not going to define what a CEO does for you, that defeats the purpose of me asking you to explain it to us. My intention is not to show you that I know more than you, it is to show that you don't know what CEOs do. So far, we have a bunch of hot air.... they "work hard" and they "make phone calls" and they "maximize profitability" and they "have meetings" but it all depends on what kind of corporation.

So why don't we drop the kabuki dance here, and just admit, you don't really believe a CEO does much, they are just a figurehead who gobbles up profits which could go to the worker bees, from your perspective, and that is why you loathe CEOs so much. The only real problem with your perspective is, it's totally wrong and contradicts capitalist principles. The capitalist has no need to pay a CEO a bunch of money they don't deserve, because this eats up profits the capitalist is in business to realize.

You presume too much.

I frankly don't care how much an individual, CEO, rock star, baseball player, pimp, or otherwise, makes -- provided any personal assets in excess of $20 million (after taxes) are subject to confiscation by IRS. I don't "loathe" CEOs. What I loathe is greed. And by simply lowering the bar the impetus that fosters and nourishes the destructive pathology of financial gluttony is eliminated.

As I've suggested in an earlier message, if the Framers of our Constitution were able to foresee the kind of wealth the industrialized nation of America would be capable of generating, and the kind of political and social damage excessive accumulations of that wealth would be capable of, there is no doubt they would have included limitations to such accumulation in the Document.

You know, I think that based on the drivel Boss posts that he was probably a ceo at the same time I was an emperor. Funny. Any guy who calls you a marxist pretty much gives up any hope of convincing a rational person that he has a clue.
But that is the thing. A guy like Boss can pretend he was anything on a board like this. I suspect he is a very sad case, who simply wants to be thought of as someone with accomplishment.

Aww.. sounds like someone got a little butt-hurt that I showed everyone how dumb they are. I do want to clarify, Mike is not a Marxist when he starts talking about confiscating wealth, he is a Maoist, which is far worse. And if he (or you) had been around at the time of our founding, the Founding Fathers would have used you as tree decorations.

 

[AmazonTania]

Once again...you are a fool...a useful idiot to the corporatists. Funny how we were doing great with higher wages, higher taxes and lower profits in the 50's, 60's and 70's. Up until the OPEC oil embargo that we were woefully unprepared for. Of course, Carter got the blame for the resulting inflation and that ushered in Reaganomics. After 30+ years fictional trickle down you see the results.

You do realise that all the prosperity that you believe was so great in that time period came off the backs off of the rich and poor, correct? Taxes were high, and no one paid them but a small few. And profits were anything but low, but I guess that is your idea of a boom economy. When businesses aren't making any money.