"jps" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

Well, no. He pockets his $50 million and saunters off stage
left, whistling a happy tune. And his platinum parachute is
paid for by the employees & common stockholders. It's the
new corporate kleptocracy...

I love it.

We're not experiencing fascism, we're the subjects of a kleptocracy.

I can't decide whether to laugh or cry.

jps


You know what? None of this matters. For every proven crook running a
company, I'll find you an honest, hard working example. It all depends on
one's personnel perspective of the world and business. If you tend to be of
the cynical bent, you are going to find conspiracy and deceit behind every
door. If you're a glass half full type your going to gravitate towards the
belief that the system can work, despite Herculean problems.
I've always been more of the latter. Obviously others here are not. Makes
the world go 'round. In my life there have been more people telling me I
couldn't do something than those who encouraged me to try. I rarely
listened to the first group.

RCE

On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 02:30:27 -0500, RCE wrote:


You know what? None of this matters. For every proven crook running a
company, I'll find you an honest, hard working example.

Personally, I'd expect you could find hundreds of honest businessmen for
each crook, but there lies the problem. As you know, it's quite
competitive out there. Competing with crooks isn't a level playing field.
If we don't punish the crooks far more heavily than we do, even an honest
businessman is tempted to shade the edges. What did Ebbers get? 25
years for an $11 billion fraud and there was talk that it was a "stiff"
sentence. If I'd lost my retirement and was forced to eat cat food
during my Golden Years because of some fat cat's greed, I'd be thinking
he'd better be spending heavily on security.

It all depends on
one's personnel perspective of the world and business. If you tend to be
of the cynical bent, you are going to find conspiracy and deceit behind
every door. If you're a glass half full type your going to gravitate
towards the belief that the system can work, despite Herculean problems.
I've always been more of the latter. Obviously others here are not.
Makes the world go 'round. In my life there have been more people telling
me I couldn't do something than those who encouraged me to try. I rarely
listened to the first group.

RCE

RCE wrote:
You know what? None of this matters. For every proven crook running a
company, I'll find you an honest, hard working example.


That's very true. It's also necessary for the functioning of
our whole hi-techindustrialized economy. But that doesn't
help if it's *your* IRA that's been plundered.


thunder wrote:
Personally, I'd expect you could find hundreds of honest businessmen for
each crook,

Cynic that I am, I agree wholeheartedly.

... but there lies the problem. As you know, it's quite
competitive out there. Competing with crooks isn't a level playing field.

Agreed.

If we don't punish the crooks far more heavily than we do, even an honest
businessman is tempted to shade the edges. What did Ebbers get? 25
years for an $11 billion fraud and there was talk that it was a "stiff"
sentence.

Look at the next part of the equation... who hands out lots
& lots of money to politicians? Mom-n-Pop stores? No.
Businessmen who can profitably make goods & services without
gov't intervention or plum cost-plus contracts? No again.

Therefor it is in the politicians interest to foster a
climate where huge comglomerates operate in murky fiscal
webs, large sums can change hands in the fog, and crooked
CEOs (or other corporate officers) go unpunished.

That's not cynicism, that's the hard cold reality of what is
happening today.


...If I'd lost my retirement and was forced to eat cat food
during my Golden Years because of some fat cat's greed, I'd be thinking
he'd better be spending heavily on security.

Oh, don't worry, they do. You might also want to check out
the recent growth in spending on security for gov't offices
& officials; and the bloom of laws about threats or assaults
on various gov't drones.


.....Obviously others here are not.
Makes the world go 'round. In my life there have been more people telling
me I couldn't do something than those who encouraged me to try. I rarely
listened to the first group.


Should have been taking bets... that's what I do (sometimes).

DSK

On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:34:47 -0500, DSK wrote:


Look at the next part of the equation... who hands out lots & lots of
money to politicians? Mom-n-Pop stores? No. Businessmen who can profitably
make goods & services without gov't intervention or plum cost-plus
contracts? No again.

I've said it before, but I think the incestuous relationship between
corporate welfare, in it's various guises, and campaign finance is the
biggest threat we have to this democracy. This Abramoff mess is just one
example. You have to wonder who the politicos are working for.

Look at the next part of the equation... who hands out lots & lots of
money to politicians? Mom-n-Pop stores? No. Businessmen who can profitably
make goods & services without gov't intervention or plum cost-plus
contracts? No again.


thunder wrote:
I've said it before, but I think the incestuous relationship between
corporate welfare, in it's various guises, and campaign finance is the
biggest threat we have to this democracy. This Abramoff mess is just one
example. You have to wonder who the politicos are working for.

No, you don't wonder at all, if you pay attention.

Eisenhower warned us about this. Maybe we should be grateful
that the 'dictatorship of the corporate interests' has held
off as long as it did. Meanwhile, voters are about the least
important concerns in Washington- 3 election cycles now have
proved that voters are stupid, have no memory at all, and
can be easily shilled into impoverishing & imprisoning
themselves.

DSK