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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (191043)	10/11/2001 3:23:49 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

What does the new Nobel Lauriate in economics say about this? money.cnn.com An unregulated market does not work efficiently when the different participants have asymetric information or asymetric power. Sometimes these markets completely fall apart without regulation. TP

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (191043)	10/11/2001 3:47:44 PM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

"while fat-cat CEOs saw their income jump more than five-fold. That's obscene" What about sports figures and entertainers? They make more than obscene money, don't they? And they prey on the sports nuts with $50 plus seats to watch a GAME. "only increase the burden on the already overtaxed American worker" Which ones are overtaxed iyo? Arguments I have had with you in the past indicated that you felt that people paying the top rate don't pay enough. How do you justify one group being over taxed, even though they pay less than another group that you claim is under taxed? My hope is that America is smart enough to see that the democratic party has a position that CANNOT be supported with logic or facts. I think they are, but the jury is still out.

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (191043)	10/11/2001 3:56:20 PM
From: DMaA	Respond to of 769667

IN PRINCIPLE, unless the man works for you, what he earns is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. Because if it becomes your business, then IN PRINCIPLE we have eliminated the Constitutional Right of Private Property. Private means PRIVATE!!!! Private property means FREEDOM!!!

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (191043)	10/11/2001 5:23:24 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

One of the biggest Myths is that all union leaders are honest hard working people who care about the average worker. If they really believed in their rhetoric, why don't they take a massive pay-cut and give the proceeds to their union workers? nlpc.org Some other interesting web sites related to union issues. Union corruption by state. nlpc.org Fighting corruption in the AFL-CIO nlpc.org Fighting corruption in the Teamsters Union nlpc.org The truth is that most unions are no better or worse than big business. Some unions are a great help to both workers and top-management. Others, terribly corrupt and a serious impediment to improvement and progress for the worker and the organization. On the other hand, some corporations are ugly and corrupt places, and some wonderful places that people enjoy like an extended family. More and more, corporate American leaders are realizing that to be competitive in a world environment means you need to create a business environment in which people are trusted, cared about, empowered and treated with dignity and respect. The wave of leader as servants to all their shareholders is steadily gaining momentum. You may be able to buy someone's hand and back, but you cannot buy their heart, mind and spirit. For the best corporate leaders, this is no longer a questionable statement, but one of implementation and effort. Differences in wage rates between top-management and line workers will always be an issue poorly led unions will attempt to use in order to create a climate of hatred, jealousy, mistrust and fear. Unfortunately, far too many of them believe their power and perks rest on continuously inciting this kind of divisive culture. Michael

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (191043)	10/11/2001 6:41:52 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

I respectfully disagree. In an "ideal" economic model, such might be true. However, we don't live in an "ideal" world. The extent of corporate welfare today has polluted the competitive spirit. We don't now, and no one ever has lived in an economy that is exactly like the classical capitalist model. There are always complicating factors and imperfections. Perhaps there are more now then in the past, but that does not mean the classic model is useless. There still is a lot of competition and lowered costs will result in lower prices. Also as I said in my post before to the extent that things are uncompetitive it is not because of tax rate reductions or high pay for CEOs. Where things are not competitive then the worry should be at the lack of competition. Anyone who thinks things are not competitive should try compare prices in computers or even at the deals you can get on cars now. Yes there are pockets of the economy where competition is slim. The worst examples of this are probably the result of government action for example there is no competition in delivering first class mail, and monopolies in cable TV and phone service where created by at least partially by government restrictions. Lowering tax rates will not decrease competition here. Reducing CEO salaries will not increase it. Anyone who thinks things are not competitive should try compare prices in computers or even at the deals you can get on cars now. Yes there are pockets of the economy where competition is slim. The worst examples of this are probably the result of government action for example there is no competition in delivering first class mail, and monoplies in cable TV and phone service where created by at least partially by government restrictions. Lowering tax rates will not decrease competition here. Reduceing CEO salaries will not increase it. Tim