Reply
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
633
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

633 Views
Message 61 of 137

@rk9152 wrote:

 


Not excusing, no ravages, just a question. When people suggest the government "stepping in" I just wonder what they mean - but no one seems to want to address that. Considering the topic, when it comes up here it would appear they mean step in to either create a company or take over a company.


Oh!!! Rk  is me remember?
I don't know the intentions or what they mean by goverment stepping in and what you have stated is that Government should create a company or take over a company?  Really,?  where and how did you get that idea ? I haven't seen anyone in this  thread or anywhere in which anyone has actually stated that Government should create or take over anything. please!!!!! do get real.
I just posted an example on when Government has stepped in the Well Fargo situation. and that is probably as far as where government should  step in. Or the Enron situation. remember? 
And by the way what other many ways that you posted are? please enlighten me?
CEO's  are an aspect of the type of corporations that we have in the US. and they have been not so good, I don't even think that they are good for the stockholders. I wonder how much their stock would be is the profits were higher and they didn't include those ridiculous salaries.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
633
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
623
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

623 Views
Message 62 of 137

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:


When industries refuse to police themselves, then the government is forced to step in and do it for them.  A perfect example is the recent Untied Airlines fiasco.  Either United will take steps to never do that again (it is as simple as increasing their incentive to be "bumped") or the government will do something to force them to do it.  The choice is theirs, so either control it yourself, or wait for the government to tell you what you have to do.

 

"Step in" in what way. We do have OSHA but that is not the topic. The topic is the advisability or lack there of of workers' owned and operated businesses and how to bring it about (if you are in favor of that). I do not see UAL in that subject.

 

So, your thinking on the topic?


 


There are many ways for workers to own pieces of a company.  Your example is simply a school project that is not worth responding to.


And yet, here you are - responding but still no mention of what those "many ways" might be.


I was responding to you about the difference between CEO and worker pay.  Since you no longer care to talk about that I am guessing our conversation is over.

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
623
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
623
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

623 Views
Message 63 of 137

@pc6063 wrote:

Mlseker- I guess when a poster can't support something said, it's easier to divert to something else!

maybe it's a trick picked up from the Trump  administration.

having said that, since this thread is about co-ops--wonder if the original poster is ever heard of something called Agway!! 


The poster certainly has heard of Amway - your point?

 

And about "diverting" what is the reference to Trump?

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
623
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
622
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

622 Views
Message 64 of 137

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:


When industries refuse to police themselves, then the government is forced to step in and do it for them.  A perfect example is the recent Untied Airlines fiasco.  Either United will take steps to never do that again (it is as simple as increasing their incentive to be "bumped") or the government will do something to force them to do it.  The choice is theirs, so either control it yourself, or wait for the government to tell you what you have to do.

 

"Step in" in what way. We do have OSHA but that is not the topic. The topic is the advisability or lack there of of workers' owned and operated businesses and how to bring it about (if you are in favor of that). I do not see UAL in that subject.

 

So, your thinking on the topic?


 


There are many ways for workers to own pieces of a company.  Your example is simply a school project that is not worth responding to.


And yet, here you are - responding but still no mention of what those "many ways" might be.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
622
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
622
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

622 Views
Message 65 of 137

@rker321 wrote:

"when government stepsw in" that is the premise that you use in order to excuse the ravages that todays corporations do to our society.
There is not need for the government to step in, when a corporation utiize a fair policy fot its workers there is not need for governemt to step in.

Look at Well Fargo. and what has happened in that company. We all know that it behaved badly, actually very badly. so there are insitutitions that actually were forced to come in and deal with the bad behaviour of Wells Fargo.
It was not a given that governement was going to inervene, there was a reason in which they did.
There needs to be a balance in all corporation between workers and executivesit doesn't necessary include co-ops but it does  have to do with the behaviour of corporations and what unfettered capitalism has created.
We have a problem in this country because of this. not to recognize that there is a problem and simply go out there and say that those people are Socialists or Marxists and try to deny the faults of what is happening is quite childish.
Again, try to become more objective in your opinons. and less subjective and partisan.

 


Not excusing, no ravages, just a question. When people suggest the government "stepping in" I just wonder what they mean - but no one seems to want to address that. Considering the topic, when it comes up here it would appear they mean step in to either create a company or take over a company.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
622
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
620
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

620 Views
Message 66 of 137

@rk9152 wrote:

 

Your second point, again you and I are in agreement. But there may be other points of view on these boards desiring government intervention to bring about such co-ops or to create them out of existing entities via salary controls.


Accepting others point of view is pivotal in this message board, we all have different opinions practically about everything.  No one is absolutely right or wrong. 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
620
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
616
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

616 Views
Message 67 of 137

@Olderscout66 wrote:

There is not a single realistic element in the basic premis concerning how companies get started and continue - it's nothing but a collection of smoke and mirrors designed to make people think that somehow having lots of money makes you very special and not having enough to live on makes you dirt.

As to the basic premise - it seems like you are saying that worker's owned and operated businesses are not possible. But the "lots of money" is just smoke and mirrors since that is no where in the Acme founding story. Nor was there any class warfare in the original post. Where do you get this stuff??

 

If you have a great idea for a new improved product, you can get financing from venture capitalists who will take a share of the company (stock) in exchange for the money you need to build the factory hire the workers and market your product for the first several years after which the profits from the business will pay all the bills including the one owed to you as a stockholder.

Agreed. And then the stockholders have a stake in the company so someone other than the workers is gaining from their efforts. I find no problem with that but I wonder if some do. 

 

Funny thing - those venture capitalists today concentrate on buying controlling interests in existing, profitable, companies, then gutting the company by selling off assets and demanding wage reductions from the workers and finally declaring bankruptcy after they pay themselves huge compensation packages for "saving the company". Hostess Foods is a great example.

Well, that's the stock market. Shall we get rid of it?

 

None of this has a thing to do with income taxes.

Exactly, so why bring them up?

 

When McDonald's was founded in 1955, the TMR was 91% and they and Mr Kroc did just fine.

I thought you said this had nothing to do with income taxes/

 

When Microsoft was founded in 1975, the TMR was 70%, and still Bill Gates went on to considerable success.

I thought you said this had nothing to do with income taxes.

 

Besides, the issue is really what the company does with the money (profits) it earns. For 40 years, 1936 to 1976, virtually all (96%) of the profits from productivity gains went back to the workers who became more productive.

Is that in some way related to workers owned and operated businesses?

 

Then the tax rates dropped and the ones providing "organization" (management) for the enterprise began giving themselves all the profits, and workers wages stagnated.

Taxes again - and how is that related to workers owned and operated businesses?

 

The reason for the shift is totally obvious - the high TMR for those 40 years would've taken almost every dime ofevery additional dollar the organizers gave themselves as higher pay, so since they hated workers, but hated Government more, they gave the money to the workers.

Again with  the taxes.

 

Then Reagans taxscam allowed the organizers to keep all the profit they gave themselves, so that's what they did. There is NO other rational explanation for why a Corporation that paid it's CEO 10 times what it paid its workers in 1965 now needs to pay the CEO 500 times what it pays its workers, with commensorate increases for ALL of management.

Again with the taxes.

 

The reason the recovery form the jrbush Depression all went to Wall Street is that all the additional profits the companies made went to the top management who bought stock, NOT to the workers who WOULD have bought goods and services and driven the entire economy forward, not just the financial sector.

And this relates to workers owned and operated businesses in what way?

 

If you want a society that produces every increasing profits in the financial sector while closing actual factories and retail outlets, then you're definatily a GOPer bgecause that is what Republican financial policy has done for the last 30 years.

And what.......well, you know.

 

 


 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
616
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
610
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

610 Views
Message 68 of 137

Mlseker- I guess when a poster can't support something said, it's easier to divert to something else!

maybe it's a trick picked up from the Trump  administration.

having said that, since this thread is about co-ops--wonder if the original poster is ever heard of something called Agway!! 

Gee, I miss having a real President!!
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
610
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
611
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

611 Views
Message 69 of 137

@rk9152 wrote:

@MIseker wrote:


Those posters a certainly not on this board. I have not seen one person speak for what you portray, and if someone does drop me a note in the mail. Not one person here is for a total collectivism, or marxism. Someone is painting air castles to shoot at.

 

 "Total" - are there posters here for "partial" collectivism, "partial" Marxism??

 

But then, let's not talk about "posters". Let's keep it between us Guys (generic). I know what I think. I assume you know what you think. Let's not concern ourselves with what others may think.


 im not the one making claims about other posters, other than to say the dont exist. please, prove me wrong.

 


 

So it begins.
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
611
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
611
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

611 Views
Message 70 of 137

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:


When industries refuse to police themselves, then the government is forced to step in and do it for them.  A perfect example is the recent Untied Airlines fiasco.  Either United will take steps to never do that again (it is as simple as increasing their incentive to be "bumped") or the government will do something to force them to do it.  The choice is theirs, so either control it yourself, or wait for the government to tell you what you have to do.

 

"Step in" in what way. We do have OSHA but that is not the topic. The topic is the advisability or lack there of of workers' owned and operated businesses and how to bring it about (if you are in favor of that). I do not see UAL in that subject.

 

So, your thinking on the topic?


 


There are many ways for workers to own pieces of a company.  Your example is simply a school project that is not worth responding to.

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
611
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Roundtable Discussion:
Ask questions and get advice from fellow entrepreneurs
Now through Nov. 22

Top Authors