Warren and the Divine Right of Capital: Accountable Capitalism Act

[TroglocratsRdumb]

How do you square this circle: The structure and legal basis of the modern MAGA corporation bears a great deal of resemblance to feudal estates, and this reality is at odds in an era that claims to value democracy over the Divine Right of Kings?

Warren has a plan:

Accountable Capitalism Act - Wikipedia

"The Accountable Capitalism Act, 115th Congress (2017-2018) S. 3348 is a proposed federal bill introduced by Senator Elizabeth Warren in August 2018.

"It would require that employees elect 40% of a board of directors of any corporation with over $1 billion in tax receipts, and that 75% of shareholders and directors must approve any political spending.

"Corporations with revenue over $1 billion would be required to obtain a federal corporate charter.

"The Act contains a 'constituency statute' that would give directors a duty of 'creating a general public benefit' with regard to a corporation's stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, and the environment, and the interests of the enterprise in the long-term.[1]"

The US is among a minority of OECD countries that gives no representation to the workforce (majority) in corporate governance.

For years Warren has claimed "corporations are not people."

Now her Accountable Capitalism Act demands that corporations that claim the legal rights of personhood should be legally required to accept the moral obligations of personhood.

yep, warren is a dangerous far left wing extremist like Obammy was
Save all of us some time and trouble and just move to Cuba where they are already doing everything that you want

 

[georgephillip]

Is this a definition of "speculation" you can subscribe to: an expectation future dividends will be higher than the market currently expects?

If so, what's the value of a company that continuously pays no dividends and does not appear as if it ever will?

WeWork’s Unraveling Is Another Indictment of Wall Street’s Universal Bank Model

Dividends alone is not a determining factor.

Again... you own a share of the company itself. That has value, even without dividends. Warren Buffet's company, Berkshire Hathaway, pays no dividends. But the company itself has grown. That growth has value. You as owner, have part ownership in that company, which has value.


Let's spin this around into something easier.

I own a house. Do I get dividends? No. But that house is an investment. Why? Because it has value that increases. Even without dividends showing me direct value, I know that over time property values do increase. Again... why? Because we all know that people need places to live. We can look at the history of property values, and see the increase.

Just like we know that people will need a car, so owning shares in a car company will have value.

Just like we know that people will need food, so owning shares in a food company will have value.

Now I am NOT saying... 'there is no speculation'. Again, everything has some amount of speculation. Democrats could take over my city, and put in place section 8 housing in my area, and the value of my house will drop like a rock. It could happen.

Government could put in place terrible protectionism, that could kill the auto market, and the car company I own shares in, could close.

But again, there is a huge difference between speculating on a real assets, and a ponzi scheme that has no assets.

Just like we know that people will need a car, so owning shares in a car company will have value.

Just like we know that people will need food, so owning shares in a food company will have value.

Even if the car and food company are not paying dividends?

Tan Liu: Why Many Of Today's Most-Owned Stocks Are Ponzi Schemes | Seeking Alpha

"So when one person buys low and sells high, another is also buying high and needs to sell for even higher. And a system where current investors' profits are dependent on cash from new investors is by definition how a Ponzi scheme works.

"What's wrong with that is a lot of stocks don't pay dividends and why are you an owner of a company if the company never pays the so-called owners?

"that's exactly how it works because when a stock doesn't pay dividends, there is no monetary connection between the revenues and profits of the company and the actual shares."

Of course there is. You directly own a share in a company. That ownership has value. Are you suggesting that I can own something, that produces value, but that ownership of that thing has no value?

Ridiculous. And I can prove it, by simply owning that stock, and seeing it's value increase in proportion to the profits of the company. Which it does. I own shares of Berkshire Hathaway.

There is always a monetary connection between revenues and profits of the company, and the actual shares.

Again... as long as there is an underlying asset, it simply can't be a ponzi scheme. The defining aspect of a ponzi scheme, is the fact there are no assets.

Of course there is. You directly own a share in a company. That ownership has value. Are you suggesting that I can own something, that produces value, but that ownership of that thing has no value?

Market value or par value?
Google currently trades for over $1200, but the corporation states in writing it doesn't pay dividends, there are no voting rights, and the par value of GOOG is only $0.001 per share. "The value of a stock is just an idea. It is something completely cerebral and imaginary. Real money on the other hand, is finite, traceable, and ...what investors ultimately care about."

How true is the statement that the stock market is essentially a Ponzi scheme? - Quora

Market value, is the only value.

See the problem shows up in your own post.

"Real money on the other hand, is finite, traceable, and ...what investors ultimately care about"

But real money has no value itself, except what you can trade it for.... such as stock.

Money itself only has a market value. We know this because money itself can go up and down in value. Point being, there is nothing in this world that has 'inherent' value. All value is a market value. It's all worth, only what other people are willing to exchange it for.

Money itself, has no more value to it, than what someone is willing to exchange for it..... just like stock has no value except for what people are willing to trade it for.

ALL THAT SAID...

When you said that Google has no voting rights... I found that rather unlikely.

Google Stock: A Tale of Two Share Classes (GOOG, GOOGL)

So a little background: There are different classes of shares. Class B, are the insider shares. These have 10 votes each, and are not sold publicly.

Class C shares, are the lowest class, and have no voting rights.

Class A shares, have voting rights. If you want voting rights, you can buy shares with them.

As for dividend payments...

You never know if the policy might change. Apple never paid a dividend from 1976 to 2011. Now they pay dividends.

More importantly, not paying dividends didn't stop people from owning stock in Apple, and making really good returns on it, from 1976 to 2011.

So I don't see a problem.

What is interesting just in thinking about it... it's fascinating how many hundreds of times left-wing people on here have complained about corporations giving money to the shareholders. Now you are pointing to companies that don't pay out to shareholders, and complaining about those companies.

Is there anything any company can do, that you won't find fault with? Just curious.

So a little background: There are different classes of shares. Class B, are the insider shares. These have 10 votes each, and are not sold publicly.

Class C shares, are the lowest class, and have no voting rights.

Class A shares, have voting rights. If you want voting rights, you can buy shares with them.

So...would we agree that many of today's perpetually dividend-less companies traded on public markets are operating as Ponzi schemes by definition?

Ponzi scheme - A Simple Explanation of the Concept

 

[daveman]

Can't believe I waded through 14 pages on this thread. George, are you feeling underpaid for the value you provide to your employer and this is the way you hope to extract more money from the company you work for?

After you and Warren successfully ruin the USA, are you going after China or Russia with this scheme, because you can be damn sure neither of those countries operates like Europe (which you seem extremely fond of).

How expensive are one-way tickets to Spain? Brush up on your Spanish.

Is capitalism working well for you, OMG?
If so, I suspect you are among the investor class.

For most productive Americans, the answer is no.
Warren's ACA corrects some of common law benefits corporations have acquired over the past two hundred years:

Accountable Capitalism Act - Wikipedia

"The Accountable Capitalism Act, 115th Congress (2017-2018) S. 3348 is a proposed federal bill introduced by Senator Elizabeth Warren in August 2018.

"It would require that employees elect 40% of a board of directors of any corporation with over $1 billion in tax receipts, and that 75% of shareholders and directors must approve any political spending. Corporations with revenue over $1 billion would be required to obtain a federal corporate charter.

"The Act contains a 'constituency statute that would give directors a duty of 'creating a general public benefit' with regard to a corporation's stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, and the environment, and the interests of the enterprise in the long-term.[1]"

You say you want the government to interfere even more deeply in business...then post a meme that says "government sucks"?

Damn, Commies are stupid.

 

[georgephillip]

Assuming there's always a Greater Fool

"The Greater Fool Theory is the notion that even when an asset is fully valued or overvalued, there is room for that asset's value to increase even further because there are 'greater fools' out there to push prices up purely due to hype or speculation."

The Greater Fool Theory — Steemit

If their $50 earnings are projected to hit $60 next year and $72 the year after, does that mean new buyers are "greater fools"?

If their $50 earnings are projected to hit $60 next year and $72 the year after, does that mean new buyers are "greater fools"?

Ask Liz

Elizabeth Warren puts a giant tech breakup billboard in San Francisco’s face

What happens to the Biggest Fools when capitalism's inherent bubbles inevitably POP?

Liz is one of the greatest fools we have.

Liz is one of the greatest fools we have.

Trump borrowing from China to pay Chinese company hit by his trade war with China up to $560 million

And he beat one of the smartest women in America.

What happens to the Biggest Fools when capitalism's inherent bubbles inevitably POP?

Our economy will still be miles ahead of your favorite commie economies.

What happens to the Biggest Fools when capitalism's inherent bubbles inevitably POP?

Our economy will still be miles ahead of your favorite commie economies.

Can you say that in Mandarin?

"The Chinese economy advanced 6.0 percent year-on-year in the September quarter of 2019, slowing from a 6.2 percent expansion in the previous quarter and compared with market expectations of 6.1 percent.

"It was the weakest growth rate since the first quarter of 1992, amid persistent trade tensions with the US, weakening global demand and alarming off-balance-sheet borrowings by local governments. GDP Annual Growth Rate in China averaged 9.39 percent from 1989 until 2019, reaching an all time high of 15.40 percent in the first quarter of 1993 and a record low of 3.80 percent in the fourth quarter of 1990."

China GDP Annual Growth Rate | 2019 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast

 

[daveman]

nothing in america is free. if you are getting something without paying for it, see a taxpayer and thank him! everyday!

Would that taxpayer be among the richest ten percent of Americans?

Free Lunch - David Cay Johnston - Book Review

"'Free Lunch' consists of 26 chapters, each a case study of a corporation enriching itself through lax or solicitous government: beggar-thy-neighbor state and local tax breaks to lure businesses, government subsidies for sports stadium construction, electricity deregulation and so on."

Imho, rich people have been getting things without paying for them for as long as the USA has existed.

Over much of that time corporations have expanded their power largely through the courts.

Warren is calling for a democratic (congressional) reassessment of the political leverage corporations, and the investor class they fund, have acquired over the majority of Americans across the past two hundred years.

Poor people have been getting things without paying for them for a long time, too.

Thing is, the policies Warren insists we need, and you blindly parrot, will only put people out of work and dependent on government.

Despite what you've been led to believe, that is not a good thing.

 

[georgephillip]

How do you square this circle: The structure and legal basis of the modern MAGA corporation bears a great deal of resemblance to feudal estates, and this reality is at odds in an era that claims to value democracy over the Divine Right of Kings?

Warren has a plan:

Accountable Capitalism Act - Wikipedia

"The Accountable Capitalism Act, 115th Congress (2017-2018) S. 3348 is a proposed federal bill introduced by Senator Elizabeth Warren in August 2018.

"It would require that employees elect 40% of a board of directors of any corporation with over $1 billion in tax receipts, and that 75% of shareholders and directors must approve any political spending.

"Corporations with revenue over $1 billion would be required to obtain a federal corporate charter.

"The Act contains a 'constituency statute' that would give directors a duty of 'creating a general public benefit' with regard to a corporation's stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, and the environment, and the interests of the enterprise in the long-term.[1]"

The US is among a minority of OECD countries that gives no representation to the workforce (majority) in corporate governance.

For years Warren has claimed "corporations are not people."

Now her Accountable Capitalism Act demands that corporations that claim the legal rights of personhood should be legally required to accept the moral obligations of personhood.

yep, warren is a dangerous far left wing extremist like Obammy was
Save all of us some time and trouble and just move to Cuba where they are already doing everything that you want

yep, warren is a dangerous far left wing extremist like Obammy was
Save all of us some time and trouble and just move to Cuba where they are already doing everything that you want

You think like a (corporate) slave.

Accountable Capitalism Act - Wikipedia

"Section 3 of the Act would establish an 'Office of United States Corporations', with a director appointed by the President on consent of the Senate, at the Department of Commerce to grant charters to large federal corporations, and monitor compliance with the Act's requirements.

"Section 4 requires corporations with over $1 billion in tax receipts to obtain a federal charter.

"Section 5(b)(2) requires US corporations to have the purpose of 'creating a general public benefit', while section 5(c) requires that directors have a duty to consider the interests of shareholders, employees (including of subsidiaries and suppliers), customers, the community, environment, and the long-term."

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Dividends alone is not a determining factor.

Again... you own a share of the company itself. That has value, even without dividends. Warren Buffet's company, Berkshire Hathaway, pays no dividends. But the company itself has grown. That growth has value. You as owner, have part ownership in that company, which has value.


Let's spin this around into something easier.

I own a house. Do I get dividends? No. But that house is an investment. Why? Because it has value that increases. Even without dividends showing me direct value, I know that over time property values do increase. Again... why? Because we all know that people need places to live. We can look at the history of property values, and see the increase.

Just like we know that people will need a car, so owning shares in a car company will have value.

Just like we know that people will need food, so owning shares in a food company will have value.

Now I am NOT saying... 'there is no speculation'. Again, everything has some amount of speculation. Democrats could take over my city, and put in place section 8 housing in my area, and the value of my house will drop like a rock. It could happen.

Government could put in place terrible protectionism, that could kill the auto market, and the car company I own shares in, could close.

But again, there is a huge difference between speculating on a real assets, and a ponzi scheme that has no assets.

Just like we know that people will need a car, so owning shares in a car company will have value.

Just like we know that people will need food, so owning shares in a food company will have value.

Even if the car and food company are not paying dividends?

Tan Liu: Why Many Of Today's Most-Owned Stocks Are Ponzi Schemes | Seeking Alpha

"So when one person buys low and sells high, another is also buying high and needs to sell for even higher. And a system where current investors' profits are dependent on cash from new investors is by definition how a Ponzi scheme works.

"What's wrong with that is a lot of stocks don't pay dividends and why are you an owner of a company if the company never pays the so-called owners?

"that's exactly how it works because when a stock doesn't pay dividends, there is no monetary connection between the revenues and profits of the company and the actual shares."

Of course there is. You directly own a share in a company. That ownership has value. Are you suggesting that I can own something, that produces value, but that ownership of that thing has no value?

Ridiculous. And I can prove it, by simply owning that stock, and seeing it's value increase in proportion to the profits of the company. Which it does. I own shares of Berkshire Hathaway.

There is always a monetary connection between revenues and profits of the company, and the actual shares.

Again... as long as there is an underlying asset, it simply can't be a ponzi scheme. The defining aspect of a ponzi scheme, is the fact there are no assets.

Of course there is. You directly own a share in a company. That ownership has value. Are you suggesting that I can own something, that produces value, but that ownership of that thing has no value?

Market value or par value?
Google currently trades for over $1200, but the corporation states in writing it doesn't pay dividends, there are no voting rights, and the par value of GOOG is only $0.001 per share. "The value of a stock is just an idea. It is something completely cerebral and imaginary. Real money on the other hand, is finite, traceable, and ...what investors ultimately care about."

How true is the statement that the stock market is essentially a Ponzi scheme? - Quora

Market value, is the only value.

See the problem shows up in your own post.

"Real money on the other hand, is finite, traceable, and ...what investors ultimately care about"

But real money has no value itself, except what you can trade it for.... such as stock.

Money itself only has a market value. We know this because money itself can go up and down in value. Point being, there is nothing in this world that has 'inherent' value. All value is a market value. It's all worth, only what other people are willing to exchange it for.

Money itself, has no more value to it, than what someone is willing to exchange for it..... just like stock has no value except for what people are willing to trade it for.

ALL THAT SAID...

When you said that Google has no voting rights... I found that rather unlikely.

Google Stock: A Tale of Two Share Classes (GOOG, GOOGL)

So a little background: There are different classes of shares. Class B, are the insider shares. These have 10 votes each, and are not sold publicly.

Class C shares, are the lowest class, and have no voting rights.

Class A shares, have voting rights. If you want voting rights, you can buy shares with them.

As for dividend payments...

You never know if the policy might change. Apple never paid a dividend from 1976 to 2011. Now they pay dividends.

More importantly, not paying dividends didn't stop people from owning stock in Apple, and making really good returns on it, from 1976 to 2011.

So I don't see a problem.

What is interesting just in thinking about it... it's fascinating how many hundreds of times left-wing people on here have complained about corporations giving money to the shareholders. Now you are pointing to companies that don't pay out to shareholders, and complaining about those companies.

Is there anything any company can do, that you won't find fault with? Just curious.

So a little background: There are different classes of shares. Class B, are the insider shares. These have 10 votes each, and are not sold publicly.

Class C shares, are the lowest class, and have no voting rights.

Class A shares, have voting rights. If you want voting rights, you can buy shares with them.

So...would we agree that many of today's perpetually dividend-less companies traded on public markets are operating as Ponzi schemes by definition?

Ponzi scheme - A Simple Explanation of the Concept

So...would we agree that many of today's perpetually dividend-less companies traded on public markets are operating as Ponzi schemes by definition?

Not even close, by definition.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If their $50 earnings are projected to hit $60 next year and $72 the year after, does that mean new buyers are "greater fools"?

If their $50 earnings are projected to hit $60 next year and $72 the year after, does that mean new buyers are "greater fools"?

Ask Liz

Elizabeth Warren puts a giant tech breakup billboard in San Francisco’s face

What happens to the Biggest Fools when capitalism's inherent bubbles inevitably POP?

Liz is one of the greatest fools we have.

Liz is one of the greatest fools we have.

Trump borrowing from China to pay Chinese company hit by his trade war with China up to $560 million

And he beat one of the smartest women in America.

What happens to the Biggest Fools when capitalism's inherent bubbles inevitably POP?

Our economy will still be miles ahead of your favorite commie economies.

What happens to the Biggest Fools when capitalism's inherent bubbles inevitably POP?

Our economy will still be miles ahead of your favorite commie economies.

Can you say that in Mandarin?

"The Chinese economy advanced 6.0 percent year-on-year in the September quarter of 2019, slowing from a 6.2 percent expansion in the previous quarter and compared with market expectations of 6.1 percent.

"It was the weakest growth rate since the first quarter of 1992, amid persistent trade tensions with the US, weakening global demand and alarming off-balance-sheet borrowings by local governments. GDP Annual Growth Rate in China averaged 9.39 percent from 1989 until 2019, reaching an all time high of 15.40 percent in the first quarter of 1993 and a record low of 3.80 percent in the fourth quarter of 1990."

China GDP Annual Growth Rate | 2019 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast

Can you say that in Mandarin?

Commie economies suck, in Mandarin.

The Chinese economy advanced 6.0 percent year-on-year in the September quarter of 2019​

If you believe those numbers, you're even dumber than I first suspected.

 

[georgephillip]

Can't believe I waded through 14 pages on this thread. George, are you feeling underpaid for the value you provide to your employer and this is the way you hope to extract more money from the company you work for?

After you and Warren successfully ruin the USA, are you going after China or Russia with this scheme, because you can be damn sure neither of those countries operates like Europe (which you seem extremely fond of).

How expensive are one-way tickets to Spain? Brush up on your Spanish.

Is capitalism working well for you, OMG?
If so, I suspect you are among the investor class.

Well yeah. That's how you stop being poor.

If you never join the investor class, then you will be poor until you die.

That's not a problem of the investor class... that's a problem of you being stupid.

All smart people are investors. ALL.... ALL smart people are investors.

Not investing, by definition, makes you an idiot..... unless you are a monk somewhere with a vow of poverty, or something.

Instead of crying, and whining about investors.... stop being an idiot, and become an investor yourself.

A janitor secretly amassed an $8 million fortune and left most of it to his library and hospital

And stop spamming the thread. If you don't cut it out, I'll have you reported, and your posts removed.

This is a forum for discussion... not you doing cut and paste every post.

Well yeah. That's how you stop being poor.

If you never join the investor class, then you will be poor until you die.

That's not a problem of the investor class... that's a problem of you being stupid.

All smart people are investors. ALL.... ALL smart people are investors.

Yet only the richest ten percent of Americans "earn" enough money to join the US investor class. Are you arguing the US economy should work only for the richest ten percent of Americans while consigning the remaining 90% of workers to endure one round of austerity measures after another?

 

[georgephillip]

Can't believe I waded through 14 pages on this thread. George, are you feeling underpaid for the value you provide to your employer and this is the way you hope to extract more money from the company you work for?

After you and Warren successfully ruin the USA, are you going after China or Russia with this scheme, because you can be damn sure neither of those countries operates like Europe (which you seem extremely fond of).

How expensive are one-way tickets to Spain? Brush up on your Spanish.

Is capitalism working well for you, OMG?
If so, I suspect you are among the investor class.

Well yeah. That's how you stop being poor.

If you never join the investor class, then you will be poor until you die.

That's not a problem of the investor class... that's a problem of you being stupid.

All smart people are investors. ALL.... ALL smart people are investors.

Not investing, by definition, makes you an idiot..... unless you are a monk somewhere with a vow of poverty, or something.

Instead of crying, and whining about investors.... stop being an idiot, and become an investor yourself.

A janitor secretly amassed an $8 million fortune and left most of it to his library and hospital

And stop spamming the thread. If you don't cut it out, I'll have you reported, and your posts removed.

This is a forum for discussion... not you doing cut and paste every post.

And stop spamming the thread. If you don't cut it out, I'll have you reported, and your posts removed.

This is a forum for discussion... not you doing cut and paste every post.

What are you afraid of, finding supporting evidence for your beliefs and providing that evidence for others on the board to judge?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Can't believe I waded through 14 pages on this thread. George, are you feeling underpaid for the value you provide to your employer and this is the way you hope to extract more money from the company you work for?

After you and Warren successfully ruin the USA, are you going after China or Russia with this scheme, because you can be damn sure neither of those countries operates like Europe (which you seem extremely fond of).

How expensive are one-way tickets to Spain? Brush up on your Spanish.

Is capitalism working well for you, OMG?
If so, I suspect you are among the investor class.

Well yeah. That's how you stop being poor.

If you never join the investor class, then you will be poor until you die.

That's not a problem of the investor class... that's a problem of you being stupid.

All smart people are investors. ALL.... ALL smart people are investors.

Not investing, by definition, makes you an idiot..... unless you are a monk somewhere with a vow of poverty, or something.

Instead of crying, and whining about investors.... stop being an idiot, and become an investor yourself.

A janitor secretly amassed an $8 million fortune and left most of it to his library and hospital

And stop spamming the thread. If you don't cut it out, I'll have you reported, and your posts removed.

This is a forum for discussion... not you doing cut and paste every post.

Well yeah. That's how you stop being poor.

If you never join the investor class, then you will be poor until you die.

That's not a problem of the investor class... that's a problem of you being stupid.

All smart people are investors. ALL.... ALL smart people are investors.

Yet only the richest ten percent of Americans "earn" enough money to join the US investor class. Are you arguing the US economy should work only for the richest ten percent of Americans while consigning the remaining 90% of workers to endure one round of austerity measures after another?

Yet only the richest ten percent of Americans "earn" enough money to join the US investor class.

Baloney.

McDonald's 401(k) Plan Is Supersized Compared To Many

https://www.benefits.ml.com/CDN/ATG...ository/BOL0024826/609450_EnrollmentGuide.pdf

 

[daveman]

Ask Liz

Elizabeth Warren puts a giant tech breakup billboard in San Francisco’s face

What happens to the Biggest Fools when capitalism's inherent bubbles inevitably POP?

Liz is one of the greatest fools we have.

Liz is one of the greatest fools we have.

Trump borrowing from China to pay Chinese company hit by his trade war with China up to $560 million

And he beat one of the smartest women in America.

What happens to the Biggest Fools when capitalism's inherent bubbles inevitably POP?

Our economy will still be miles ahead of your favorite commie economies.

What happens to the Biggest Fools when capitalism's inherent bubbles inevitably POP?

Our economy will still be miles ahead of your favorite commie economies.

Can you say that in Mandarin?

"The Chinese economy advanced 6.0 percent year-on-year in the September quarter of 2019, slowing from a 6.2 percent expansion in the previous quarter and compared with market expectations of 6.1 percent.

"It was the weakest growth rate since the first quarter of 1992, amid persistent trade tensions with the US, weakening global demand and alarming off-balance-sheet borrowings by local governments. GDP Annual Growth Rate in China averaged 9.39 percent from 1989 until 2019, reaching an all time high of 15.40 percent in the first quarter of 1993 and a record low of 3.80 percent in the fourth quarter of 1990."

China GDP Annual Growth Rate | 2019 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast

Can you say that in Mandarin?

Commie economies suck, in Mandarin.

The Chinese economy advanced 6.0 percent year-on-year in the September quarter of 2019​

If you believe those numbers, you're even dumber than I first suspected.

I expect their economy did advance at least some...by selling human organs harvested from prisoners.

Hey, George -- Commies are huge pieces of shit.

 

[georgephillip]

GeorgePhillip, I am not an investor - sorry. I'm just a blue collar guy who spent his life working in law enforcement and corrections, I never made enough to be an investor.

If Europeans want to allow, or mandate, such practices in their countries, that's up to them.

My working years were also spent in blue collar employment.
Those years began in the mid-sixties when a single minimum wage job would provide enough income to pay the entire rent on an apartment with enough left over the maintain a 7 year-old car. Today a single minimum wage job pays for homelessness, and I blame tax and trade policies over the past half-century that have privileged capital over labor.

 

[Third Party]

If so, what's the value of a company that continuously pays no dividends and does not appear as if it ever will?

Whatever a willing buyer and a willing seller can agree on...…...

Whatever a willing buyer and a willing seller can agree on...…...

Would that require them to..


spec·u·late
/ˈspekyəˌlāt/
Learn to pronounce

verb

1. 1.
   form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence.
   "my colleagues speculate about my private life"
   
   Similar:
   conjecture
   
   
   theorize
   theorized that the atolls marked the sites of vanished volcanoes" data-hw="theorize" data-lb="" data-tae="false" data-te="false" data-tl="en-US" data-url="/search?rlz=1C1PRFI_enUS784US784&sxsrf=ACYBGNQszNq2Sy8fH4i7oKmHktshgSaofg:1571873851052&q=define+theorize&forcedict=theorize&dictcorpus=en-US">
   
   form theories
   
   hypothesize
   
   
   make suppositions
   
   postulate
   
   
   guess
   
   
   make guesses
   
   surmise
   
   
   think
   
   
   wonder
   
   
   muse
   
   
   
2. 2.
   invest in stocks, property, or other ventures in the hope of gain but with the risk of loss.
   "he didn't look as though he had the money to speculate in stocks"

speculate - Google Search

Obviously, a guy like you, with no money, doesn't need to worry about buying any stocks.

Leave the speculating to others.

Obviously, a guy like you, with no money, doesn't need to worry about buying any stocks.

Leave the speculating to others.

"'The U.S. financial markets had always been either corrupt or about to be corrupted.' – Michael Lewis, Flash Boys"

Wall Street has Always Been Corrupt…

So is the WWF-but it survives and thrives.

So is the WWF-but it survives and thrives

But unlike the WWF, Wall Street fraud has the capacity to crash the global economy (again)

How Wall Street cost you $70,000

I don't agree with you, but you do have the best pictures.

 

[georgephillip]

nothing in america is free. if you are getting something without paying for it, see a taxpayer and thank him! everyday!

Would that taxpayer be among the richest ten percent of Americans?

Free Lunch - David Cay Johnston - Book Review

"'Free Lunch' consists of 26 chapters, each a case study of a corporation enriching itself through lax or solicitous government: beggar-thy-neighbor state and local tax breaks to lure businesses, government subsidies for sports stadium construction, electricity deregulation and so on."

Imho, rich people have been getting things without paying for them for as long as the USA has existed.

Over much of that time corporations have expanded their power largely through the courts.

Warren is calling for a democratic (congressional) reassessment of the political leverage corporations, and the investor class they fund, have acquired over the majority of Americans across the past two hundred years.

Poor people have been getting things without paying for them for a long time, too.

Thing is, the policies Warren insists we need, and you blindly parrot, will only put people out of work and dependent on government.

Despite what you've been led to believe, that is not a good thing.

Poor people have been getting things without paying for them for a long time, too.

Thing is, the policies Warren insists we need, and you blindly parrot, will only put people out of work and dependent on government.

Despite what you've been led to believe, that is not a good thing.

How did FDR respond when the owners of capital could not or would not provide jobs during the Great Depression?

Green New Deal - Wikipedia

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

nothing in america is free. if you are getting something without paying for it, see a taxpayer and thank him! everyday!

Would that taxpayer be among the richest ten percent of Americans?

Free Lunch - David Cay Johnston - Book Review

"'Free Lunch' consists of 26 chapters, each a case study of a corporation enriching itself through lax or solicitous government: beggar-thy-neighbor state and local tax breaks to lure businesses, government subsidies for sports stadium construction, electricity deregulation and so on."

Imho, rich people have been getting things without paying for them for as long as the USA has existed.

Over much of that time corporations have expanded their power largely through the courts.

Warren is calling for a democratic (congressional) reassessment of the political leverage corporations, and the investor class they fund, have acquired over the majority of Americans across the past two hundred years.

Poor people have been getting things without paying for them for a long time, too.

Thing is, the policies Warren insists we need, and you blindly parrot, will only put people out of work and dependent on government.

Despite what you've been led to believe, that is not a good thing.

Poor people have been getting things without paying for them for a long time, too.

Thing is, the policies Warren insists we need, and you blindly parrot, will only put people out of work and dependent on government.

Despite what you've been led to believe, that is not a good thing.

How did FDR respond when the owners of capital could not or would not provide jobs during the Great Depression?

Green New Deal - Wikipedia

Less reliable, more expensive energy…...just what we need to grow our economy...…..DURR

 

[Andylusion]

Can't believe I waded through 14 pages on this thread. George, are you feeling underpaid for the value you provide to your employer and this is the way you hope to extract more money from the company you work for?

After you and Warren successfully ruin the USA, are you going after China or Russia with this scheme, because you can be damn sure neither of those countries operates like Europe (which you seem extremely fond of).

How expensive are one-way tickets to Spain? Brush up on your Spanish.

Is capitalism working well for you, OMG?
If so, I suspect you are among the investor class.

Well yeah. That's how you stop being poor.

If you never join the investor class, then you will be poor until you die.

That's not a problem of the investor class... that's a problem of you being stupid.

All smart people are investors. ALL.... ALL smart people are investors.

Not investing, by definition, makes you an idiot..... unless you are a monk somewhere with a vow of poverty, or something.

Instead of crying, and whining about investors.... stop being an idiot, and become an investor yourself.

A janitor secretly amassed an $8 million fortune and left most of it to his library and hospital

And stop spamming the thread. If you don't cut it out, I'll have you reported, and your posts removed.

This is a forum for discussion... not you doing cut and paste every post.

Well yeah. That's how you stop being poor.

If you never join the investor class, then you will be poor until you die.

That's not a problem of the investor class... that's a problem of you being stupid.

All smart people are investors. ALL.... ALL smart people are investors.

Yet only the richest ten percent of Americans "earn" enough money to join the US investor class. Are you arguing the US economy should work only for the richest ten percent of Americans while consigning the remaining 90% of workers to endure one round of austerity measures after another?

Being an investor isn't dependent on how much you earn. Again, a janitor ended up with $8 Million. So you don't have to earn big bucks to end up in the 'investor class'. In fact, I'm in the investor class, and yet I haven't earned more than $30k a year.

The poorest people can be part of the investor class. It's a matter of.... choosing to invest.

How to Become a Millionaire on Minimum Wage | The Motley Fool

If you put in just $50 a month, from age 18.... consistently, year over year... into good growth mutual funds, you'll end up a millionaire, even if you are making just minimum wage.

Anyone can be in the investor class... you just need to make the choice to invest. If you choose to not be an investor, that's not a problem of society, or the economy. That's a problem on you.

 

[Andylusion]

nothing in america is free. if you are getting something without paying for it, see a taxpayer and thank him! everyday!

Would that taxpayer be among the richest ten percent of Americans?

Free Lunch - David Cay Johnston - Book Review

"'Free Lunch' consists of 26 chapters, each a case study of a corporation enriching itself through lax or solicitous government: beggar-thy-neighbor state and local tax breaks to lure businesses, government subsidies for sports stadium construction, electricity deregulation and so on."

Imho, rich people have been getting things without paying for them for as long as the USA has existed.

Over much of that time corporations have expanded their power largely through the courts.

Warren is calling for a democratic (congressional) reassessment of the political leverage corporations, and the investor class they fund, have acquired over the majority of Americans across the past two hundred years.

Poor people have been getting things without paying for them for a long time, too.

Thing is, the policies Warren insists we need, and you blindly parrot, will only put people out of work and dependent on government.

Despite what you've been led to believe, that is not a good thing.

Poor people have been getting things without paying for them for a long time, too.

Thing is, the policies Warren insists we need, and you blindly parrot, will only put people out of work and dependent on government.

Despite what you've been led to believe, that is not a good thing.

How did FDR respond when the owners of capital could not or would not provide jobs during the Great Depression?

Green New Deal - Wikipedia

Bad example. FDR's policies dragged out the great depression. In fact, FDRs policies caused a recession inside the great depression.

Similarly, the Green New Deal would only screw us over.

 

[Andylusion]

GeorgePhillip, I am not an investor - sorry. I'm just a blue collar guy who spent his life working in law enforcement and corrections, I never made enough to be an investor.

If Europeans want to allow, or mandate, such practices in their countries, that's up to them.

My working years were also spent in blue collar employment.
Those years began in the mid-sixties when a single minimum wage job would provide enough income to pay the entire rent on an apartment with enough left over the maintain a 7 year-old car. Today a single minimum wage job pays for homelessness, and I blame tax and trade policies over the past half-century that have privileged capital over labor.

Minimum wage in the 1960s doesn't pay for anything more than minimum wage today pays for.

You could not live any better in the 1960s on minimum wage, than you can today on minimum wage.

The problem is not that minimum wage doesn't cover as much as it used to.... it covers just as much, if not a little more.

The difference is that the standard of living has increased beyond the minimum wage.

You can still, even to this day, rent the same quality apartment you could in the 1960s on minimum wage. The problem is simply that people don't want a 1960s apartment.

You can still buy the same quality car on minimum wage, from the 1960s. The problem is, people don't want a 1960s quality car.

People want to go out to eat all the time. They want netflix and streaming services. They want smart phones, and unlimited data packages. Broadband internet, and 4K, 50 Inch flat screen TVs. They want central air conditioning.

The list goes on and on.

You say you could afford a house in 1960 on a low wage, but you are ignoring that the house in 1960 was 1/8th the size of a house today, and didn't have air conditioning, and didn't have a dozen power outlets on each wall, and often didn't have nearly as much insulation.

The Size of a Home the Year You Were Born

In 1960, the average house was barely 1,200 sq ft. Today the average is 2,600 sq ft. More than double. And you think international trade is the reason minimum wage no longer covers the cost of a house?

You can get a home in Columbus Ohio, for just $40,000. A person, even on minimum wage, can afford that payment. But the sq ft of the house is.....600 sq ft.

If you buy a house comparable to 1960s homes, you can pay for it with minimum wage income.

That's not a problem of taxes, or of trade. It's a problem that what the people want to live in, is no longer what was normal in the 1960s.

You are blaming the rich, and trade, for what is really a problem of the public making choices. If you want a nicer home than what was normal in the 1960s, then you need more income than what was normal in the 1960s. That's basic economic at work.

 

[daveman]

nothing in america is free. if you are getting something without paying for it, see a taxpayer and thank him! everyday!

Would that taxpayer be among the richest ten percent of Americans?

Free Lunch - David Cay Johnston - Book Review

"'Free Lunch' consists of 26 chapters, each a case study of a corporation enriching itself through lax or solicitous government: beggar-thy-neighbor state and local tax breaks to lure businesses, government subsidies for sports stadium construction, electricity deregulation and so on."

Imho, rich people have been getting things without paying for them for as long as the USA has existed.

Over much of that time corporations have expanded their power largely through the courts.

Warren is calling for a democratic (congressional) reassessment of the political leverage corporations, and the investor class they fund, have acquired over the majority of Americans across the past two hundred years.

Poor people have been getting things without paying for them for a long time, too.

Thing is, the policies Warren insists we need, and you blindly parrot, will only put people out of work and dependent on government.

Despite what you've been led to believe, that is not a good thing.

Poor people have been getting things without paying for them for a long time, too.

Thing is, the policies Warren insists we need, and you blindly parrot, will only put people out of work and dependent on government.

Despite what you've been led to believe, that is not a good thing.

How did FDR respond when the owners of capital could not or would not provide jobs during the Great Depression?

Green New Deal - Wikipedia

FDR extended the Great Depression longer than it would have lasted if he hadn't interfered.

And the Green New Deal is utter crap. But, hey, I don't expect any independent thought from a stupid Commie like you.