Richest 2% hold half of world's assets

[The once and future king]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, I'm still not see the connection. I don't see how where the money I spend on random stuff I own goes to is relavant to whether or not working class people in the U.S. have the opportunity to start their own business? What am I missing?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure he's saying that your purchasing of goods made overseas furthers unfair trade agreements which serve to drive down wages in the US. Obviously by driving down wages you are taking away possibilities--such as saving up to open their business--from the working class.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am saying that talking about class/exploitation delineated by geography is totaly false in the modern economy given the ease of trans national capital flows.

I am undecided on the issue. I think it is good that Caps invest in manufacturing in poorer countries but I would like to see more of their profits transfered back into the local market via higher wages so that workers were then able to take there wages/savings and invest into serving the local market. As is stands Caps are carefull to pay enough to "trap" the labour into having to work in sweat shops etc on a subsistence wage. In my view this is short termism.

By releasing a bit more of the wealth created by adding value in poor as feck land and then selling the product of that labour in rich as feck land back to the labour providers, caps could develop new consumers and markets much faster.

Remember that $10 invested in PAF land will probably have a much higher ROI than $10 invested in RAF land.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They voluntarily agree to the conditions. They are free to divest their investment.

[/ QUOTE ]

A bit late after a share plunge due to high pay increase for executives.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh really...name one.

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

OTOH, he's also driving up the wages of people who were making bare subsistence or worse in other countries; the truly poor.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that $0.15/hr is infinitely better than $0/hr, but the situation still isn't utopian.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They voluntarily agree to the conditions. They are free to divest their investment.

[/ QUOTE ]

A bit late after a share plunge due to high pay increase for executives.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh really...name one.

[/ QUOTE ]

He won't be able to, if he's presuming that more money for execs = less money for shareholders = share plunge. If anything, I'd say exec salaries are only relevent in so much as the message it sends to the market. IIRC, UNH was getting thrashed for mismanagement, and the exec pay seemed to be putting people off to the stock.

[peritonlogon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My question for you is why do you care?

[/ QUOTE ]
Because it matters

[/ QUOTE ]
It matters? If you're not a shareholder it's none of your business.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have a vested interest in America in general.

[/ QUOTE ]
Vested interest? What does that mean? Other than, "I want to tell other people what to do"?

[/ QUOTE ]
Would you just stop it, that's not what it means, you're just being dogmatic and obtuse.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Isn't it intervention to say how the votes count? Well, we say how their counted now, why not change that to a better way?

[/ QUOTE ]
Huh? Nobody is stopping you from forming a corporation and counting votes any way you want.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's just a non sequitur, so what? You're saying that I should be coerced just because no one is stopping me from forming my own corporation?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who is being coerced? Are people compelled to become shareholders?

[/ QUOTE ]
Woah wait a minute here, aren't shareholders being coerced to accept the pay of their CEO?

[/ QUOTE ]
No. Shareholders voluntarily buy shares. They know (through the due diligence they do before investing, of course) what they are entited to through the ownership of those shares (how they get to vote, etc).

[/ QUOTE ]
This argument still doesn't matter. All stocks in the US are counted the same way. It's an institutional problem not a problem of individual choice in stock purchasing.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What does it matter whether or not someone was coerced when they became a shareholder when they are being coerced as a share holder.

[/ QUOTE ]
They voluntarily agree to the conditions. They are free to divest their investment.

[/ QUOTE ]
So what? this is non sequitur to your whole coercion argument. Besides, any telco, company, corporation or person is free to divest their investment. That argument contradicts your entire perspective. If a telco doesn't like the regulation, they are free to sell their business.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you don't like the rules a corporation is set up with, you can choose to invest somewhere else.

[/ QUOTE ] Not if I want to invest in the USA.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's not someone else's obligation to provide you with investment opportunities you find agreeable. I want to invest in a company headquartered on main street, and I also want to invest in a company that makes cheese graters. Unfortunately, no company making cheese graters happens to be headquartered on main street. Therefore, I am being coerced.

[/ QUOTE ]
According this argument, you suffer absolouly no coercion in any trasaction you make in these United States and should stop bitching about the state and take your business elsewhere. The differences are only semantic.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, the *real* problem comes way before that, actually. The mechanics of the election process are really insignificant compared to the fact that the results of that process are imposed upon people who don't want anything to do with it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wait, you're worried about people who voluntarily invest in companies being "coerced" by the decisions of the shareholders, but you "disagree" that people who *do not* voluntarily agree to a system of government are forced to abide by the decisions of that government?

[/ QUOTE ]
More empty rhetoric...According to your standards they can divest their investment and move some place else. Like freedom ship .

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

OTOH, he's also driving up the wages of people who were making bare subsistence or worse in other countries; the truly poor.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that $0.15/hr is infinitely better than $0/hr, but the situation still isn't utopian.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh, I don't se much difference between the use of "ideal" vs. "utopian." Besides, nearly everything we discuss here, we discuss with some subjective, utopian goal in mind.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, I'm still not see the connection. I don't see how where the money I spend on random stuff I own goes to is relavant to whether or not working class people in the U.S. have the opportunity to start their own business? What am I missing?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure he's saying that your purchasing of goods made overseas furthers unfair trade agreements which serve to drive down wages in the US. Obviously by driving down wages you are taking away possibilities--such as saving up to open their business--from the working class.

[/ QUOTE ]
OTOH, he's also driving up the wages of people who were making bare subsistence or worse in other countries; the truly poor.

[/ QUOTE ]

And increasing his own standard of living at the same time!

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

OTOH, he's also driving up the wages of people who were making bare subsistence or worse in other countries; the truly poor.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that $0.15/hr is infinitely better than $0/hr, but the situation still isn't ideal.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's nobody stopping you from building a factory in the third world and paying workers $10/hour.

Well, OK, there probably are people who would stop you; local government tinpots. But I'm pretty sure you can bribe them. You know what I'm getting at.

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]

And increasing his own standard of living at the same time!

[/ QUOTE ]

Not necessarily. I get >$1 worth of utility by buying a product that is union made in the US or fair trade for every actual $1 I spend on those products. If those prodcuts are not available, I'm necessarily worse off, no matter how low the price is.

[neverforgetlol]

[ QUOTE ]
1. The workers always get screwed and the capitalists are evil bastards!

2. Prove it.

1. Here's an example where one group of people arbitrarily defined as workers got screwed by another group arbitrarily defined as capitalists.

[/ QUOTE ]

how can you arbitrarily define a group as capitalists? capitalists are those who own capital and buy labor power from those without capital.


anyway, capitatlism is part of the state, the state is part of capitalism. that's why i cant oppose the state but support capitalism.