It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Elizabeth Warren’s Batty Plan to Nationalize . . . Everything

page: 4
28
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Sure. If this isn't how businesses are run then why was I hearing so much about how Trump was going to run America like one of his businesses?

If businesses have no business having their bosses "elected" by the employees then why did you guys think that America should be run like a business with Trump when he is elected by the "employees" (citizens) of America?

And don't you even think about denying you said Trump was a good choice because of his history as a successful businessmen, you know for a fact that was one of his own selling points for becoming president.




posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: DBCowboy




So corporate America can look like Amtrak?


Corporate America will look like Union America.

With people still searching for Hoffa's body.

But their version is 'better'!



It's times like this that I'm glad I'm old. I'll be long dead by the time Comrade Running-Crap puts this in effect.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

True, but it would be great for unions. They exist to represent the workers after all.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

The DNC is a CORPORATION.

Apply Warrens model to it.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Threads like this remind when that time when Warren's party rigged their own GD primary.

And pulls this rabbit out of their.................'hats'.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

I like the idea myself. This country desperately needs to restructure the way our corporations are ran and the power they hold in the country.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Well, since her actual plan is behind a paywall, and I don't think the Wall Street Journal is in that desperate a need for my money, I'll have to go off the editorial from The Hill. Now, why Sen. Lie-a-watha would publish her wonderful new plan where people couldn't actually read it is beyond me, but I'll just go with what I have available.

From The Hill:

The act will require corporations with more than $1 billion in annual revenue to procure a federal corporate charter, which mandates that directors consider “all major corporate stakeholders” in decisionmaking

OK, which directors do NOT consider major stockholders' best interests? That's who puts them in power... oh, wait, she said "stakeholders," not "stockholders." This next piece might make a little sense then...


Corporations would also be required to have at least 40 percent of their directors elected by employees and at least 75 percent of directors and stakeholders would have to approve any “political expenditures.”

In other words, screw the investors... we have to run this business for the employees!

Yeah, I know, that sounds great to most people, because most people are employees. But here's the rub: As an employee of various companies, I have talked to other employees quite a few times, and I have heard far too often ideas that would literally bankrupt the company overnight. One example comes to mind easily... a great fellow who I am still friends with, but who made the following statement (we worked for a trucking company):

"If I ran this place, every driver would get a new truck."

Nice. I would have loved a new truck. But the simple fact is that that one move would have bankrupted the company literally overnight. My truck was something like 5 years old, if I remember correctly, and his was three. The company kept them in good repair and serviced them regularly, so there were very few breakdowns. Now, under Fauxcahonta's plan, would that company have been required to buy all new trucks?

The simple fact is that an adversarial relationship exists between employer and employee by definition. That's the very reason there are unions... the power the employees have is the power to not work and hurt the company financially. That power is increased exponentially by employee coordination - one person striking makes little difference, but 90% of them striking simultaneously will cause the company to grind to a stop.

Of course, the company grinding to a stop causes the workers to lose the jobs they were refusing to do in the first place, but they really don't have a lot invested in the company anyway. They can get another job. The owners of the company, the people who have their capital tied up in the future of that company can't just go get more money to invest in the next company. They lose money overnight; the employees deal with a temporary loss of income.

I get the concept that it is the employees that make the money for the company... but too many don't seem to get the concept that it is the company that allows them to do so. Without a company to work for, their labor is worthless. the relationship must be symbiotic, benefiting both employer and employee. What the Indian Princess is suggesting places far more power in the hands of those who often don't look beyond their next payday. No business can survive like that.

I will say this: back during the era of "you didn't build that" I would not have even considered starting a business in the USA, for any reason. I am not going to waste a ton of money that I would have to borrow to start up a venture when I wasn't even going to get credit for doing so and would likely not have been able to clear the financial hurdles to success put in place by an anti-business government. Wasn't gonna happen, and nobody could force me to do it. Recently, I had begun toying with the idea again... but if ideas like this gather any traction whatsoever, I'm back to "no how, no way" status. And I believe my feelings are reminiscent of others who have the ability to create new businesses.

And that doesn't even take into account that the requirement for a "Federal charter" can be twisted to mean that the Federal government can step in at any time and make business decisions for a business they have no earthly idea how to run. Sorry... if I start a business, it's MINE, dammit, and no one, period, will tell me how to run it. I'll close the doors in a New York heartbeat if anyone tries. I've been poor before.

That applies to me working as an employee. It ain't my company, and I got no say-so in how it runs. If I think I can do better, maybe I should quit and start my own company. As long as I get my paycheck and I am not expected to do anything unreasonable, I should be good with what I do. I even carry that belief to my position on ATS... I do not make the rules. I only enforce them. Not my business. Not my prerogative.

So yeah, great idea... IF the goal is to place the entire US economy into the hands of an oligarchy. This will kill any new startups.

But, then again, what else would I suspect form someone who has already openly insulted my heritage by claiming to be someone she is not without any evidence?

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Sure, sounds like a great idea. What was your point though? Why did you and other Trump supporters want to elect Trump because he was going to run America like one of his successful businesses if that's not how businesses should work?

Care to explain that mind bender for me?
edit on 8/17/2018 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: DBCowboy




So corporate America can look like Amtrak?


Corporate America will look like Union America.

With people still searching for Hoffa's body.

But their version is 'better'!



It's times like this that I'm glad I'm old. I'll be long dead by the time Comrade Running-Crap puts this in effect.


Well, I still consider myself relatively young. But if the left passes socialism in America, I'm definitely not working again until they break out the whips and gas chambers. I mean why work when I can be lazy and have all the same things as everyone else.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

I think you are blowing things out of proportion there. The only power that the employees would be given in this situation would be access to deciding 40% of the directors that run the company.
edit on 17-8-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: toysforadults

That's what I'm saying. It sounds like a really good idea and could potentially go a long way to helping the ongoing wage stagnation our country is experiencing. IF implemented properly. Big if there I guess.


REally?

So the guy on the assembly floor who only knows he's supposed to push screw A into button hole B and not a bit about how or why that happens in the product, is expected to now be entrusted with making competent voting decisions about how to run the company?



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
I like the idea myself. This country desperately needs to restructure the way our corporations are ran and the power they hold in the country.

If that is what is needed, this is not the plan that will get you there.

Cap political donations across the board....done. Easy.

This is something entirely different. There is a reason they are looking at one specific area, not a relatively easy fix all.

One will affect her (and every politico's) pocket book. The other keeps their pockets flush at everyone else's expense.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1




What was your point though?


That idiots think a business should be run like a democracy by people that RIG their own elections.

Clearly it went over some peoples heads.

IT's a 'great' idea.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

So a guy flipping burgers at McDonald's is supposed to know how to run the country? I mean, why even give burger flippers a vote if they have no experience in politics?



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I'll pose the same situation I posed to neo. If the QA department of a corporation needs a new director, would asking the QA department to review applications to fill that position be a bad idea? Wouldn't they know what the QA department needs being QA and all?



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Yet you guys were so gung-ho about Trump running our democracy like a business. Funny how that works.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




I think you are blowing things out of proportion there.


Nope.

They stated a FACT.

Remember people can't be trusted.

After all look whose running the show in the White House right now.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: peck420
If that is what is needed, this is not the plan that will get you there.

Cap political donations across the board....done. Easy.

I mean I'm all for ending Citizens United as well, but this idea won't restructure how corporations are ran. Which is what I wanted here.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:20 PM
link   
So now you want politicians to run campaigns and solicit votes to get "elected" to run a company??

GTFO. Seriously.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Who is "they" and what fact did "they" state?



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join