Jim Webb

[uscitizen]

methings you have things a bit jumbled Damo.
Business executives selling out their company, and renting votes in congress are not the same thing at all.
And the majority of shareholders now a days are like me, they don't care as long as they make money. Do you think the stock market game is actually about investing in a company ?
Well with the IPO or additional releases it is, but after that is is just about getting money from the other stock players.

 

[OrnotBitwise]

If you believe that the vast majority of the middle class are upset over the division of wages then say this you are directly in contradiction with yourself.

No, I'm not. Not if you take that "major shareholders" caveat into account.

Remember that well over half of the personal wealth, including shareholder equity, of the United States is owned by less than 5% of the population.

As to litigation, you've got to be joking. It's far too expensive and daunting a remedy to be practical as a general solution to the problem.

 

[uscitizen]

Yes, are we not still trying ENRON crooks ?

 

[Damocles]

methings you have things a bit jumbled Damo.
Business executives selling out their company, and renting votes in congress are not the same thing at all.
And the majority of shareholders now a days are like me, they don't care as long as they make money. Do you think the stock market game is actually about investing in a company ?
Well with the IPO or additional releases it is, but after that is is just about getting money from the other stock players.

They are connected. Both things have to be corrected for a real change to take effect. However Businessmen buying votes so that they can continue what they do is most definitely connected to what they do.

Pretending that somehow it is separate is simply pretense for political sake, rather than admit that promoting division and government intervention where change can be effected with current law and a good understanding if shareholder rights and people willing to exercise them is just another way to advocate another responsibility to the government.

"I don't want to bother to learn and when I do I don't want to do anything but trade my shares and make money." is a political stance, one which I prefer not to take, but many seem to want it. It is exactly the same idea as what those guys are doing on a larger scale.

We can effect change, but only if we are willing to take the responsibilities we have.

 

[Damocles]

No, I'm not. Not if you take that "major shareholders" caveat into account.

Remember that well over half of the personal wealth, including shareholder equity, of the United States is owned by less than 5% of the population.

As to litigation, you've got to be joking. It's far too expensive and daunting a remedy to be practical as a general solution to the problem.

Any good lawyer who knows you have a good case with a solid practice will take you on and a percentage of the end result, cost is not usually a factor when suing large corporations.... You can make change even as a minority shareholder if you can show that their actions are not for the good of the company....

So, pretend that it's all good, we can just let things go with shareholders never taking their own responsibility to effect change in the corporations that they have a stake in. Let the government do it.... That will never be my position. If there already is recourse at hand it is unnecessary to make more law just so I don't have to take responsibility.

 

[Damocles]

Yes, are we not still trying ENRON crooks ?

We are. Amazingly the corporation-friendly R President prosecuted those who broke laws...

Had the shareholders been paying attention and voting their actual stake it is likely this would have been sidetracked long before it got there... Crooks go where the money is, if shareholders held them to reasonable salaries they would go elsewhere to work their "magic".

 

[OrnotBitwise]

Any good lawyer who knows you have a good case with a solid practice will take you on and a percentage of the end result, cost is not usually a factor when suing large corporations.... You can make change even as a minority shareholder if you can show that their actions are not for the good of the company....

So, pretend that it's all good, we can just let things go with shareholders never taking their own responsibility to effect change in the corporations that they have a stake in. Let the government do it.... That will never be my position. If there already is recourse at hand it is unnecessary to make more law just so I don't have to take responsibility.

But the point is that the law's not working. You claim that people "should" be more "responsible" -- as you see it -- but that's just wishful thinking, at best, and social engineering, at worst.

Fact is that people aren't. To hell with anyone's ideas about whether they should be or not. "Should" is the most overused and least practical word in the English language.

 

[uscitizen]

We are. Amazingly the corporation-friendly R President prosecuted those who broke laws...

Had the shareholders been paying attention and voting their actual stake it is likely this would have been sidetracked long before it got there... Crooks go where the money is, if shareholders held them to reasonable salaries they would go elsewhere to work their "magic".

Yes after they sere sued by a state or two .

 

[Cancel5]

I thought it was amazingly populist, also working to create an enmity between classes.

And by populist, I mean the exploitation of the misinformed emotional folk. "Those people make more money than you, you should hate them and take it."

One should be wary of misleading economic statistics often tossed around by populist politicians. A flood of low-skilled immigrants, many illegal, has had a downward influence on average wages. Increases in non-wage compensation like employer-provided health insurance or deferred compensation in the form of generous defined-benefit pension plans for government employees are frequently ignored in the wage data. Then there's the discrepancy between reported incomes and consumption, with consumption data a much better measure of living standards showing far less inequality.

Anyway, I suspected that class divisiveness would be a plan, it shows the Ds are campaigning already... using emotive populist ideas to keep power.

So, am I to understand that you do not see the need for change in this area?

I have read several books that state America is losing her footing and her middle class.

You apparently are not in agreement.

I am a populist, so I find your comments very interesting.

 

[uscitizen]

Any good lawyer who knows you have a good case with a solid practice will take you on and a percentage of the end result, cost is not usually a factor when suing large corporations.... You can make change even as a minority shareholder if you can show that their actions are not for the good of the company....

So, pretend that it's all good, we can just let things go with shareholders never taking their own responsibility to effect change in the corporations that they have a stake in. Let the government do it.... That will never be my position. If there already is recourse at hand it is unnecessary to make more law just so I don't have to take responsibility.

Perahps you or I cannot handle the responsibility ? It is then the providence of the government to step in and take necessary action. We have many historical precidents on this.

 

[Damocles]

But the point is that the law's not working. You claim that people "should" be more "responsible" -- as you see it -- but that's just wishful thinking, at best, and social engineering, at worst.

Fact is that people aren't. To hell with anyone's ideas about whether they should be or not. "Should" is the most overused and least practical word in the English language.

No, I claim that a strong education program can change things. I provided solutions, not just rhetoric. Like I said, I offered reality, the answer I got was, "I don't want to be bothered..."

And education is not social engineering.

Let the coin-operated bought and paid for Politicians run the show, they'll provide solutions.... Right. I guess I'm far more cynical about the government than you are. I watched while the Ds held the government for decades, yet the problems still existed...

I do not believe that their "solutions" will actually resolve anything.

 

[Cancel5]

No, I'm not. Not if you take that "major shareholders" caveat into account.

Remember that well over half of the personal wealth, including shareholder equity, of the United States is owned by less than 5% of the population.

As to litigation, you've got to be joking. It's far too expensive and daunting a remedy to be practical as a general solution to the problem.

Litigation, sounds like a lawyer to me...

Isn't litigation part of the problem in the US.

 

[Damocles]

Perahps you or I cannot handle the responsibility ? It is then the providence of the government to step in and take necessary action. We have many historical precidents on this.

And here is where we diverge on a fundamental level. I have watched that same government fail at the most simple things on social engineering such as this. I'd rather get with the program and show people where solutions were there. People can certainly handle the responsibility if we show them how to use the tools. Instead we almost totally ignore such economics education and just let the government handle it... That same government who are bought by the same people they promise to reign in.

 

[Damocles]

Litigation, sounds like a lawyer to me...

Isn't litigation part of the problem in the US.

Litigation has a very real place in society. While many believe the US to be overly litigious, in this area litigation is almost non-existent as people do not realize the actual rights they have as shareowners. Shoot, most of them don't even realize which companies they own shares in... Prospectus are exceedingly boring....

 

[uscitizen]

Guys there is no one simple answer to the issues raised here. A bite at a time will have to do, and will be more stable in the long run.
You see beauracacy (sp?) has a couple of advantages, it has inertia and complexity so is slow to change. And while one aspect of the soloution might be destroyed by future leglislation, having the soloution consist of many parts makes it's effective demise less likely.
Diversification in leglislation ?

I hardly think we can dismantle our beaucracy without extreme turmoil in any short timeframe....

 

[uscitizen]

And here is where we diverge on a fundamental level. I have watched that same government fail at the most simple things on social engineering such as this. I'd rather get with the program and show people where solutions were there. People can certainly handle the responsibility if we show them how to use the tools. Instead we almost totally ignore such economics education and just let the government handle it... That same government who are bought by the same people they promise to reign in.

It is a hell of a cycle isn't it. A real love hate relationship with our government.....Are we into a full symbiotic relationship with our government yet ?

 

[klaatu]

Strong Education is a factor, no doubt. Like introducing economics to children at a very young age .. teaching them how to balance a check book, micro and macro ..perhaps in the 5th or 6th grade ... instead of feel good bullshit like why Mary has two dads... Or arguing about Nativity scenes.
Take the psyco babble out of grammar and middle school and replace it with strong roots. This would be a good start ...

I believe Webbs rebuttal was right on .. and I see him as a shining star for the Dems.. for me personally he is pointing the Democratic Party in the right direction...taking it back to the days when it represented the majority of the people...not just a fringe few. lets not forget his words about Iraq ...and his family history....powerful stuff ...it hit me smack in the head.

If I continue to see more Jim Webbs arise in the Democratic party ...I may be returning home.

 

[Damocles]

Strong Education is a factor, no doubt. Like introducing economics to children at a very young age .. teaching them how to balance a check book, micro and macro ..perhaps in the 5th or 6th grade ... instead of feel good bullshit like why Mary has two dads... Or arguing about Nativity scenes.
Take the psyco babble out of grammar and middle school and replace it with strong roots. This would be a good start ...

I believe Webbs rebuttal was right on .. and I see him as a shining star for the Dems.. for me personally he is pointing the Democratic Party in the right direction...taking it back to the days when it represented the majority of the people...not just a fringe few. lets not forget his words about Iraq ...and his family history....powerful stuff ...it hit me smack in the head.

If I continue to see more Jim Webbs arise in the Democratic party ...I may be returning home.

He is a former R, and I like the guy actually. Once again, it's not that I don't agree that there is a problem. It's that I don't believe we need to pretend that "they" are the enemy to resolve it. The idea that society is supposed to progress is denied by the supposed necessity to simplify everything to a set of "two Americas" the one with "them" (the bad guys) the other with "us" (the good guys). There is a certain hypocrisy from a group who decried it from one side to cheer it from "their" side.

 

[maineman]

I have been a huge fan of Webb's for years.

Trivia: Jim Webb lost in the 1968 USNA Brigade Boxing championship match to whom?

 

[uscitizen]

He is a former R, and I like the guy actually. Once again, it's not that I don't agree that there is a problem. It's that I don't believe we need to pretend that "they" are the enemy to resolve it. The idea that society is supposed to progress is denied by the supposed necessity to simplify everything to a set of "two Americas" the one with "them" (the bad guys) the other with "us" (the good guys). There is a certain hypocrisy from a group who decried it from one side to cheer it from "their" side.

I have to pretty much agree with that. Has the USA outgrown the 2 party system ? And are our elected officials serving those who they are supposed to represent or are they serving their party which is pretty much controlled by corporate and special interests ?