On Dec 12, 5:23*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 14:53:18 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog



wrote:
On Dec 12, 3:14 pm, wrote:
On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 13:02:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog

wrote:

In striking contrast, General Electric, the American industrial giant
and Siemens competitor, is looking out for its shareholders by granting
its second dividend of the year. They've gotta do something with that
$20 billion in cash they have laying around. GE will make about $7
billion in profits this year, but about $3 billion of that it is from
the bank it owns, GE Capital. That would be the same GE Capital bailed
out by the taxpayers. CEO Jeffery Immelt will collect a salary of about
$10 million, choosing for the second year to forego a huge bonus.
Meanwhile, GE is demanding Massachusetts pay them $25 million to keep a
factory open.

Speaking of General Electric and their motive for extorting funds
from Massachusetts while in a sucking for survival mode. Lets take a
look at who is at the helm. The article is a year and a half out of
date, however not much has changed with the corporation's leadership.

http://www.swans.com/library/art15/barker20.html

"This brief look at GE's boardroom clearly demonstrates that
representatives of the world's leading liberal philanthropies have no
qualms in maintaining intimate and profitable links to a leading
corporation in the US's military-industrial complex. Such a revelation
should give progressive activists much food for thought.

Rather than being a haven for warmongers, GE could be more accurately
described as a haven for well known liberal funders. Moreover, many of
the liberal foundations that GE board members have connections with
actually fund the most influential parts of the antiwar movement
within the United States. This is a problematic situation for
activists intent on bringing the military-industrial-media-foundation
complex to its knees. However, to date it is an issue that has rarely
been broached by the peace movement. This must change and liberal
foundation funding must be raised as an agenda item at future antiwar
meetings.?

So, in summation, big corporations do not have the best interest of
the United States in mind. They care one and only about profits.

That is your summation, D'Plume.

What about it do your find in error Mr. Dog?

Very little actually, however your summation gives quite a glimmer of
negativity. Profit is not a bad thing. All must work on a profit.
Hourly wage earners make a profit.

Now what is considered a 'fair' or an 'obscene' profit is yet to be or
never determined. What seems fair to one may be obscene to another.

I must say I am rather tickled when I hear or see retailers
advertisments stating that they are selling what ever good at "the
lowest possible price"

"Possible?"

However low, chances are there is still a profit.