Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Right Wing Extremist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (9145)	6/1/2001 11:50:53 AM
From: PROLIFE	Respond to of 59480

Why should I be worried about how he made his money? It's his money, (much of which he donates anyway, unlike Gores 300 dollars,sheeesh.) I did not hear Halliburton griping about paying it, but I do remember back when Halliburton had equipment stacked everywhere, not making any money. You Demolibs were not out helping them then, but you sure want their piece of pie now...

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (9145)	6/1/2001 11:53:16 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 59480

That's the shareholder's beef, if there is one, not ours (unless you own Halliburton). JLA

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (9145)	6/1/2001 12:10:05 PM
From: Bill	Respond to of 59480

Well... as long as you asked, Cheney turned Haliburton around. He ditched stagnant old dirty business units and focused on new environmentally friendly technologies to grow the business. His compensation was agreed upon when he signed his last contract there in 1998. In 1998, Haliburton lost 4 cents/share, in 2000 they had 42 cents/share profit. A remarkable turnaround by a remarkable (underpaid) CEO.

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (9145)	6/1/2001 12:24:58 PM
From: SofaSpud	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 59480

Flap, I don't know where you live, but from what I've read this morning you'd make a super supporter of the Canadian government. You want to talk about wealth redistribution, Canada has made it a fine art. An example. An acquaintance of mine prepares cross-border tax returns. They recently had a U.S. citizen with four children, who was a homeowner, with an income of US$65,000. His federal income tax payable was about $2,500. Now I'm a Canadian, and that's about what I make (in Canadian dollars, which are about 0.65 of a US$). Homeowner, three kids. Last year I paid about $15,000 in federal income tax. You see in Canada, I'm considered a high-income earner, until recently subject to high income surtaxes. Oh, and I live in the province with the lowest income taxes, so only paid about another $4,000 in provincial income tax. The icon single mother probably gets better services here than in the U.S. Certainly the poor are the focus of public discussion, and most of our media bleed about them on a daily basis. But they've leveled the playing field so much that they're jeopardizing their revenue sources. A lot of our best educated (usually at considerable public expense) are leaving for a more sane system where they actually get to keep enough of their earnings to pursue a dream of self-sufficiency. There has to be a happy medium, and the Canadian system is NOT it. Bottom line - be careful what you wish for. I'd rather we got a few more earners like Dick Cheney up here, and fewer people living off the "safety net". I think you'll find that the safety net can turn into a hammock pretty easily.

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (9145)	6/1/2001 12:36:51 PM
From: haqihana	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 59480

flap, "Enquiring minds want to know" I imagine you look for boogey men under your bed too. Personally, I think the salaries of some CEOs are too high, but since it is money that belongs to the corporations, it is none of your, or my business. Raising taxes on the corporations will not change that. No penalty is justified because some one, or some business, applies itself, and makes a lot of money. There will always be the rich, the middle class, and the poor. It has been so since time began, and the demo/libs can't change it. The only alternative is Communism. Then everyone will be poor. Wouldn't that be just dandy??

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (9145)	6/1/2001 10:00:15 PM
From: KLP	Respond to of 59480

flap, please provide links for your "stories"...and BTW, don't you think Democrats are shareholders too.....and "obscene".... What are the current salaries for the 5 top leaders in your Union....National Union....??? And who pays those salaries? You said: Story in the local paper last week pointed out that shareholders (read Republicans, for the most part) are also becoming much more vocal over the obscene salaries that some CEOs command, especially in light of what a bad job some of them are doing to "grow the company