Posted on 03/21/2006 11:37:40 PM PST by Nasty McPhilthy
Go Hedgetrimmer, Go!
Spot on! Government needs to get involved to protect us from unfair competition.
These international corporations are basically powerful enough that B no longer really applies. They can have laws re-written for their benefit. The laws of our nation are basically gotten around and their original intent offset by the fact that they can move certain operations to places where those laws do not apply, but still profit by doing business here.
These multi-national corporations are no longer just machines, nor do they any longer truly obey the laws of supply and demand. They are harmful to our nation, and belligerent to our form of governance.
*Bump*
An excellent read by Steve Forbes.
OK... Quit pulling my leg (you are being facetious, I assume.) :)
It's not the shareholders. It's the laws of incorporation that grant them protections not given other forms of business ownership. It's damaging to our country. Those laws were passed as a planned economy to benefit corporate shareholders who wished to engage in their own little game of protectionism. They're having the unintended consequence of damaging our society.
I meant to address you directly, then accidentally posted without including your name. Apologies.
However, I don't think you can blame a corporate/machine for doing the very thing it was designed to do. If there is fault, then it's the fault of the politicians.
Jim Owens, chairman and chief executive of Caterpillar might be a great guy. He might love his kids, remember his anniversary and wife's birthday, and buy the losing team at little league Dairy Queen after a 16 to zip shut out...
But, if he acts or says anything that is counter to the best interests of his company and its shareholders in his capacity as CEO, then he should be canned. And right now, as it happens, his interests apparently are with the Chinese.
But again, blame the politicians. If a law was passed tomorrow stating that Americans couldn't sell earth movers to China, Owens' company would take a hit, but like a good CEO he'd have to roll up his sleeves and sell his earth movers someplace else.
Bah!
</i>
I don't have a problem with us selling earth movers to China, nor them selling products here.
Trade is fine and good. My guess is that the Chinese will not buy earth-movers from Caterpillar for long. They will reverse engineer the product, and likely introduce a competitive product utilizing all the R&D that Caterpillar has invested in over the years, and then use that to slit Jim's throat by eating into his market-share.
Why would Jim do this? Because the corporate animal has become his master, rather than vice-versa. The collective is more important than the individual.
"If there is fault, then it's the fault of the politicians."
Politicians are inherently corrupt (as we all are to some extent). Some are better than others, but they all smell funny. Doubtless the pockets of the lawmakers who wrote our laws for incorporation were stuffed in one form or another. I'm only more amazed as time goes by how well the framers of our constitution understood the true nature of government.
Not to worry, KC. Plagiarism never happens among magazine editors, only reporters for the Washington Post and the New York Times.
LOL! I'm all for the Peter-Paul game. I'm an unabashed capitalist PIG (and a modestly successful one, at that). The current situation only worries me in that I am a nationalist, and as such, would prefer to see American Peters and Pauls stay firmly ahead of those in other nations (mutual survival and prosperity qualifies as a worthy goal in my book). I'm also rather fond of our form of governance that allows us to play the Peter-Paul game in a delightful and entertaining fashion. I'd rather like future generations of Americans to have the same opportunity to engage in our national past-time. ;)
Yep. The Chinese will reverse engineer the earth movers and gain a price advantage. Jim will have to whip his R&D guys into a frenzy to design a new earth mover to gain a technical advantage, which the Chinese will then reverse engineer,which will then send Jim back to the R&D guys etc.etc. etc. Progress.
Of course the "corporate animal" is Jim's master. That's where the money comes from and that's where his professional loyalties are.
I'm not quite sure what you expect from these companies. Patriotism? Altruism? If so, then you're looking in the wrong place. It's like looking for a flounder in a tree and then acting disappointed because you didn't find one nestled up there in the branches.
The damned things have taken on a life of their own... I'm sure that wasn't the intent when they were invented, but that's pretty much how it's turned-out. Rather like 'The Terminator' or 'The Matrix' in that regard. :) They've gotten so powerful that it's nearly impossible put them down once they've gone mad. Law of unintended consequences...
And...
A company is loyal to its customers. Right now the Chinese happen to be good customers of select industries. And again, it's not a business problem. It's a political problem.
It would seem from this thread that the shared interest you identify is believed to always be nefarious in nature and that people will always choose the unethical alternative if given the freedom to do so.
I thought that collectivism as an ideal was dead. What did I know. Here's the old definition: The principles or system of ownership and control of the means of production and distribution by the people collectively, usually under the supervision of a government. Duty to the state?
Anything related to an organization that issues stock to raise capital" is mine, but I can't really put my finger on it
I'd add: In most cases its liability is limited to the assets it possesses and creditors may not seize property of persons associated with the corporation as stockholders or otherwise. Legal personality gives the corporation many of the capacities of a natural person; e.g., it can hold property and can even commit crimes (for which it may be fined and its directors imprisoned).
I think this has something to with ensuring we don't become averse to risk. But what do I know? I'm still trying to figure out how it is I'm a global socialist and a collectivist. Very confusing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.