IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Share your pain, but pretty much inured by now..
It's as inevitable as.. Monica Lewinsky. Or the missing intern + Evil Pigeon syndrome. It's what our press IS. (And Brit tabloids beat us all hollow: Diana)

I feel similarly re the Ashcroft excesses, though these be taboo for the News Clowns [thanks again PK Dick - for explaining our world to us. RIP]

Every outrage - if large enough - constitutes a brief wake-up of the grazing masses. But yes, it'd be more than nice if.. Enron proved sufficient catalyst for a review of much of Corp Law, based on the realities of today: the power of international Corps to flaunt laws of all nations via strategic location of the er Main Office\ufffd.. and the sweatshops / enviro toxics, and other more subtle ploys.

I expect little of the above to make it through the nightly car-crashes with color pix. Surely you didn't (really) either?


Ashton
blessed are those who expect nothing, for -
New ::sigh:: No, I don't expect
any interruption longer than a few seconds from car crashes and "all news is local". What does bother me is seeing intelligent people (as here [well, there have to be a few :-)] ) wasting time on that glitzy BS rather than keeping their eye on the ball.

Marx was right about a lot of things. I compare him to the physicians he was contemporary to: diagnosis done pretty well, prognosis within tolerance, prescription -- leeches? arsenic cocktails? We have learned a bit, since.

And I'd be prepared to argue that the Corporation -- which is an abstraction, not something concrete -- is the next form of Government, and is in fact the means whereby Marx's prescription could be brought about. Consider: the corporation is not exclusive, and corporations can interpenetrate one another and governments. It's simply more flexible, and flexibility wins over rigidity in most cases. The Workers should own the Means of Production. Well, duh. What's common stock for? The people who invented it weren't thinking that way. They saw it from a different angle, but that doesn't mean what they saw was the entire elephant.

Today's implementations won't get us there, but in many ways the changes necessary to start moving in that direction would be to the advantage of the corporations and their officers, at least at first. If stocks were owned in dribs and drabs by individuals, instead of in huge blocks by speculators and "funds", the stock market would be a lot less volatile -- and the volatility of the stock market is a big contributor to the appallingly short-term attitude of planners. Hey, I've got a suggestion there: No corporation should own voting stock in another. Now there's a reform for ya.

But no, people are focusing on the scandals and getting the money. The original reason Governments allowed Corporations to exist was financial. At the time, no reliable mechanism existed for collecting taxes on large numbers of individuals; the bookkeeping didn't exist. Therefore the Corporation, which collected money from individuals and aggregated it; tax that, the job's easier. As a nice bonus, you could tax people you didn't govern -- if somebody in India bought tea, a bit of that came back to Whitehall when the East India Company filed its tax return. And still today, when it's time to "balance the budget", somebody will always suggest higher corporate taxes, forgetting that every penny the Corporation has came, in the medium and long term, from its customers.

I do not think the current crop of corporate mangers are angels. Quite the contrary; a few of them need to be treated like British admirals pour encourager les autres. But taking the easy target is allowing them to get away with it, and that needs to be talked about. As do many things.

Instead it's car crashes and Get Bush! When they Get Bush and somebody else gets elected, it'll be car crashes and Get Whoever! Ultimately it's f*ing boring.
Regards,
Ric
New Not a bad angle, that
Indeed Corps are less rigid. And it just might be possible to detoxify the inherent sociopathic greed at the upper levels, via truly wise new regulations. Have to ponder that one.. and the current noise level.

Still - that would require interest, will, participation - and finding 2 or 3 actually wise folk: all this against massive and massively funded opposition from the entrenched er leeches. These will kill to keep the hegemony of the few. (Or usually - arrange so that the kids die - for them)

IMhO Marx managed several insightful ideas about 'what folks always do' - expressed as well as anyone ever did. Allow for techno advances? He still got a lot right. From each according to ability; to each according to need, was a fine idea - but only for an actually mature species; a mere hopeful extrapolation towards --> the possible (?) (Roosians never got anywhere near 'communism'! just ~fascist 'socialism' - and the BS taught kids about that all: rivals the Taliban for accuracy).

And so it goes -


A.
still pondering that Good point..
     Missing - have you seen our executatives? - (Simon_Jester) - (22)
         It was after all, a Texas-sized scam - (Ashton) - (7)
             Well, DoJ will investigate Enron case. - (a6l6e6x) - (6)
                 Don't agree with regulation proposal - (bbronson) - (2)
                     No blackouts on 401K - (Arkadiy)
                     Re: Don't agree with regulation proposal - (a6l6e6x)
                 To harsh - (JayMehaffey)
                 More important is the company match - (bconnors) - (1)
                     Good point! -NT - (a6l6e6x)
         Smash and grab! - (nking) - (13)
             All that's true, but I'm terribly... - (Ric Locke) - (12)
                 Share your pain, but pretty much inured by now.. - (Ashton) - (2)
                     ::sigh:: No, I don't expect - (Ric Locke) - (1)
                         Not a bad angle, that - (Ashton)
                 Marx was innocent - (mhuber) - (8)
                     Forget Marx, Jesus had it right. - (nking) - (7)
                         Equally unrealistic, in a changed world. - (Andrew Grygus) - (6)
                             Not sure much has changed - (mhuber) - (3)
                                 Small disagreement - (Ashton)
                                 I'm not sure the Roman occupation was anything new to them. - (tseliot) - (1)
                                     At times, things went bad - (nking)
                             Hate to poop on your parade... - (inthane-chan) - (1)
                                 It may be that it doesn't matter, too. - (Ashton)

Laugh it up, fuzzball.
52 ms