Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Make love, not war!

  1. #1

    Make love, not war!

    Guys, I'm totally blown away (no pun intended!) by the attemps both from the US and Iran to start a new war, don't we have enough wars right now???

    I'm calling a revolution! Let's make love to as many girls as we can to counter this threat and show our commitment to peace!

    CJ

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by oliver kloseoff
    the world is a big toilet that needs a big flush!
    ecnomicaly
    the world is driven by money
    which
    about 5% of the population controls 95% of the wealth!
    war is a money machine for the rich and greedy.
    human life has no concern or value to them.
    if you see the big flash one day
    stick your head between your legs
    and kiss your ass goodbye
    oliver
    LOL! I always said you're hopelessly cynical but I think I agree with everything you wrote.

    GG

  3. #3
    Working rage-aholic
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    a rocky planet with one moon
    Posts
    863
    Here's what I don't understand about wars. They're all fought over money, ultimately. But they're always fought by the poor.
    Why are homely people discriminated against...we're the majority

  4. #4

    Corporate Keynesianism

    Quote Originally Posted by Big Daddy Cool
    In our version of the Free Enterprise system the largest corporations (the few) controle business laws by supporting one government or another that makes it very difficult for upstarts to get involved and claim a peice of the economic pie. In a true free enterprise system any number of us on the board could pool our resources together and start up a business (computer chips for example). But you will see all the unnessary laws that will make things very difficult and unnessarly expensive to get things started. Who do you think are responsible for having these laws put in place? There you go, Corporate Communisim.
    Big Daddy,

    John Maynard Keynes was the famous economist whose policies helped America and Europe get out of the Great Depression. He advocated that governments spend in order to stimulate aggregate demand, which back then was non-existent.

    Noam Chomsky, the left-wing intellectual, and John Kenneth Galbraith, the Harvard economist, are credited with the sayings "corporate welfarism" and "military Keynesianism", which is that governments tax us to support large corporations and the military industrial complex. That is the beauty of capitalism.

    Do we really have a free enterprise system? Who can effectively compete with the Wal Marts of this world? Do we really need all those lobbies in Washington?

    GG

  5. #5
    Village Idiot
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NYC's armpit
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by General Gonad
    Do we really have a free enterprise system? Who can effectively compete with the Wal Marts of this world? Do we really need all those lobbies in Washington?
    1) No. But no true system is completely laissez-faire. Certain government regulations must exist to protect the consumer from the dangers of unbridled capitalism. It's a delicate balance. What if crack was freely marketed and sold? Imagine an entire nation of complete addicts.
    2) Plenty of things can compete with Wal Mart, so long as we understand that their are other motivations for consumer activity not related to the bottom line. For example, oil and oil filters are cheaper at my local Wal-Mart. It's also a giant pain in the ass every time I go there because of the mobs of people, the traffic in the parking lot, the screaming kids running at 200 mph like little guided missles, ramming full speed into the most inappropriate thing (me, things near me, etc).
    3) Depends. There's the argument about freedom of speech. Demonstrations and protests are a form of "lobbying". What if the interests you represent impact millions? Would you ban an individual or organization from representing the desires of others? Should the AARP be prohibited from representing the interests of retired persons? What about the NAACP? Don't they have an equally legitimate right to speak as the NRA?

  6. #6
    Nugie,

    I do not believe in laissez-faire, right wing crap because most of the time it's based on economic policies that favor the rich at the expense of the poor working class. Of course, they are careful to sell it as benefitting the working class with all their trickle down theories.

    As far as lobbying is concerned, I do think it's gotten out of hand with some special interest groups that I feel serve no real social purpose. The AARP is not the same as the NRA.

    As far as Wal Mart, I refuse to shop there but it is the cheapest place by far. Most consumers only look at price, not the corporations that exploit their workers to deliver them cheap goods.

    >>Big Daddy,

    While I am not a right-wing nut on my economic policies, I hate useless bureaucricy. We've got plenty of that here in Canada, which is why we will never be as productive as the US, only more humane.

    GG

  7. #7

    Ex-Exxon CEO's Massive Pension Draws Fire

    Here is another example of the problems of today's capitalism:

    Ex-Exxon CEO's Massive Pension Draws Fire
    Sunday April 16, 9:20 am ET
    By Steve Quinn, AP Business Writer

    Critics Question Exxon Executive Pay, Including $98M Pension Payout, $69.7M Compensation

    DALLAS (AP) -- A $69.7 million compensation package and $98 million pension payout to Exxon Mobil Corp.'s former chief executive and chairman Lee R. Raymond has some shareholders and economists asking, "how much is enough?"

    "Some folks will ask the question, 'Is this more evidence of big oil taking an enormous windfall and retaining all the riches?'" said Mel Fugate, assistant professor for Southern Methodist University's Cox School of Business.

    The Irving company has drawn criticism from politicians and economists for becoming the most profitable company in history -- at consumers' expense, they say.

    Exxon benefited from high oil and natural gas prices and solid demand for refined products en route to earning $36 billion last year. The company has defended its profits, saying that other industries have larger profit margins but oil companies' bottom lines stand out because they operate on a much larger scale.

    Recent news of Raymond's payout and pension is stoking embers Fugate said had been starting to die out. But with gasoline prices again reaching $3 a gallon at the pump in some areas and big oil companies about to report first-quarter earnings in coming weeks, expect more fallout, economists say.

    On Wednesday, Exxon reported executive compensation in a regulatory filing that showed Raymond receiving $48.5 million in salary, bonuses, incentive payments and stock awards.

    His compensation package also included $21.2 million from exercising stock options, which the company stopped awarding in 2001.

    His $98 million pension payout reflects 43 years of service. But he would have received nearly $17 million less had he retired just last year, according to the company's 2005 proxy statement.

    In this year's proxy statement, Exxon defended the package by saying it rewards Raymond's "outstanding leadership of the business, continued strengthening of our worldwide competitive position, and continuing progress toward achieving long-range strategic goals." Raymond had been CEO since 1993 before stepping down at the end of last year.

    Exxon added that Raymond's compensation is "appropriately positioned relative to CEOs of U.S.-based, integrated oil companies and other major U.S.-based corporations, particluarly in view of the long-term performance of the company and the substantial experience and expertise that Mr. Raymond has brought to the job."

    Last year, Chevron Corp. Chairman and CEO David O'Reilly received a $1.55 million salary, $3.5 million bonus and $3.57 million in long-term compensation. He did not exercise any options, but owns options valued at just over $34 million, including exercisable options worth $28 million, according to Chevron's proxy.

    Fugate, who specializes in executive compensation and management, said Exxon is sending a "very, very bad signal" by allowing Raymond to select the lump-sum payout.

    "They are in very, very rich times, so on one hand they say, 'we can afford it,' but on the other hand they are taking an awful lot of heat because they've made too much at the expense of consumers. I'm surprised they are not being asked to justify that."

    They will be at the company's shareholders meeting in Dallas on May 31. Several shareholders have placed resolutions on the agenda that, if passed, would put the clamps on some executive pay.

    Shareholder Emil Rossi, author of one of the resolutions, says that although he's done well as a longtime owner of Exxon stock, he believes the executives are keeping too much for themselves.

    "(Raymond) took over a good company," said Rossi, of Boonville, Calif. "He didn't bring it out from being a bad company, so his pay is clean out of reason. It's not because of his smartness."

    Twice since November, big oil executives, including Raymond before his retirement, sat in Senate hearings defending their profits and deflecting accusations of gouging.

  8. #8
    Village Idiot
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NYC's armpit
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by General Gonad
    The AARP is not the same as the NRA.
    GG,

    Ah, but that wasn't the question. Clearly, the AARP is not the same as the NRA. The WWF is different from the VFW.

    The point is that their right to lobby on behalf of their members is the same. By restricting "some" lobbies which may or may not be mainstream, you have to restrict the right of all lobbies.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Nugie
    GG,

    Ah, but that wasn't the question. Clearly, the AARP is not the same as the NRA. The WWF is different from the VFW.

    The point is that their right to lobby on behalf of their members is the same. By restricting "some" lobbies which may or may not be mainstream, you have to restrict the right of all lobbies.
    Yes, that is the problem, give them all the same rights even though they don't really deserve it.

    GG

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •