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.

 

Corporations and You!

page: 12
3
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Money.cnn.com
"CHICAGO (Reuters) - Bonuses totaling more than $10 million were paid out to five Kraft Foods Inc. executives at the end of 2003, even as the giant food maker made plans to lay off thousands of workers."


As far as megas go, Kraft is only single A, tops. It isn't the biggest hitter on the block. However, this trend is distrubing. It's almost like a pre-emptive grab for cash on a sinking ship. If losses continue, it will probably be knocked back out of the "A" rankings. I could understand the CEO laying off folks to preserve the company, but those bonus are just ridiculous considering the hit that company stock took. It's all greed, all the time in the megas. Makes me feel sorry for the guys who got laid off so that some higher-up could fatten their portfolio or snag some beachfront property. Where's the moral obligation to teh worker?

DE




posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrndLkNatv
If I were the US Government I would encourage outsourcing beyond all belief and here is why.

1. What better way to spy on your enemys?
2. Use corporations to spread technology to every desktop in the world and then use that technology against the enemy.
3. Get every country in the world to base it's communications on technology that our country created and then in the time of war, shut it down, leave the enemy blind and shoot them like fish in a barrel.

Want to bring China to it's knees? Get them all plugged in and then extort money from them, bleed them to death slowly. What would happen if the megacorps decided to remove all of the jobs after the people of China became so dependent on them for a living? The answer, look at the United States today.

The real enemy is not the government but the megacorps. The funny thing is that the megacorps really won't have power once they cross the line to far and the government reals them in. I am sure megacorps could hire a few thousand soldiers but I am more sure China could amass a couple hundred million and kill any army put forth by a stupid corporation. What is really at stake is privacy and freedom, it's time to quit doing business with megacorps and kill them with the very source that feeds them, money!



Im speechless but not in a good way. You do understand that the government is incapable of bringing corporations under control? It took the government ten years to bring De Biers diamonds in for price fixing and while over this ten year period they made billinos now they only have to pay a 500,000 fine. And whats your fascination with China? The battles global and I dont think your thinking about a corp army in the right sense, its not gonna be a standing army, its a security force, ie Gestapo. Outsourcing is the distinct opposite of what we need to snare in Corps because once they are out of country they are out of our control. Go back and read the thread and you might realize how deep this goes.



posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Let's get this party started...


I'd like to start by calling the attention of participants of this thread to this story Money.cnn.com
"CHICAGO (Reuters) - Bonuses totaling more than $10 million were paid out to five Kraft Foods Inc. executives at the end of 2003, even as the giant food maker made plans to lay off thousands of workers."

Please read the entire story, then let's review your comments before I offer mine.



I dont find it shocking but I dont find it threatning. This type of conduct is SOP more and more in corporations and will only continue as profit margins increase and outsourcing sky rockets. What I do find interesting is how they try to defend it.

Kraft said the plan aimed to focus executives on the achievement of long-term financial and strategic goals that have a positive impact on stockholder returns.


And how exactly will stuffing the pockets of your executives help make my Kraft singles? Or my shares in your company? Seems like a fancy way of saying we payed these guys to maybe encourage them to actually work a couple hours for once.

Something different.......

A couple threads ago I posted a story on how the WTO likes to slap tariffs on any country attempting to stop outsourcing, looks like a pretty distinct line from the WTO and the NWO. If you interested read up here.

www.fas.org...

And on another note Id like to bring back my theory on the WTO and China's nuclear arsenal.

The New Times Company set up by the GODI had overall responsibility for the overall plan for import and export of military technology and equipment. Subsequently COSTIND established the China Yanshan science and technology corporation, and the China Xinxing Corporation was established by the PLA General Logistics Department. In 1984 these corporations began promoting Chinese weapons, actively seeking technology transfer and coproduction agreements with Western defense companies at international defense exhibitions.

Now who do you think would encourage such behavior on the part of the New Times Company?

Found here.

www.fas.org...



posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 03:52 PM
link   
It will end up being a corp army. When the megacorps get done outsourcing there will be no tax base for the government to survive on, in which case they will declare martial law and force the megacorps to pay up or they will taken, imprisoned, and their assets sold off to get the government $. I can see the CIA taking out a few CEO's here in the next 4 or 5 years max. Watch.



posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrndLkNatv
It will end up being a corp army. When the megacorps get done outsourcing there will be no tax base for the government to survive on, in which case they will declare martial law and force the megacorps to pay up or they will taken, imprisoned, and their assets sold off to get the government $. I can see the CIA taking out a few CEO's here in the next 4 or 5 years max. Watch.


Corporations could easily remedy this by moving even more holdings and possessions to more friendly nations, leaving us with a shattered economy and a pissed off general population.



posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 09:14 PM
link   
OK, Well first proper post on ATS and all so i couldnt be bothered to read all the thread (will do though).

Whats interesting is this isnt from my understanding classical capitalism (which is inherently morally neutral) but corporatism or as mussolini rightly understood it fascism:

" Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
Benito Mussolini (1883-1945)

Now this is in evidence (from a military-industrial hijack perspective) in Dwight Eisenhower's speech:
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

ME: Umm Lockheed martin/USAF/CIA anyone?

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

ME: Black Budget went where now? The tax payer said what now?

Now far from the original and inevitable military-industrial hijacking of the tenuous and hard fought for democracy, the USA in particular has gone beyond the pale. The great Thomas Jefferson has hit 1200RPM in his grave. You now have in the US with the mega corporations, buisnesses where state intervention is totally unneccesary and unjustifiable FFS, and as in every capitalist nation these corporations by dint of "saving jobs " or some such disingenous excuse recieve corporate welfare (fascist/socialist subsidy).

So what went wrong?
Well check the economist op-eds and there is two schools of thought :
1: Too much capitalism (ie free market out of control, result is monopoly)
2: Not enough capitalism (too high taxes for start up enterprise for example)

TRUE CAPITALISM WAS NEVER TRIED IN THE FIRST PLACE!

Both require MORE government (fascist corporatism) control, ie for #1 more regulation, for #2 more specific tax breaks.

The original problem as T.Jefferson would have understood is a Tax system for national defence. To have a national centralised standing army (to which he was opposed) you need centralised power in the hands of the few and herein lies the opportunity along with taxation for tyranny and at the very least massive corruption.

Secondly as taxation, which as Frederik Bastiat will tell you in his book "The Law" is "legal plunder"will have you trying to say "well just steal enough for national defence" is totally foolish. A thief is a thief and he will keep stealing.

Thus years later we have the situation after dogmatic "social justice"; Welfare, social security (collectivist trust and obedience to government basically) where any economic legislation can be justified in the name of jobs/economic development/progressive taxation and any other multitude of double speak NWO elite monetarist buzzwords. This allows complete deference of political partys to corporations (especially in the "global community").

Now for a final thought, this is not true capitalism. Adam Smith "invisible hand" free market economics unlike the modern day offshoots deplored monopolys and greed, indeed he was a great giver to charity although non believing in welfare state (IIRC).

It was never about capitalism in our western society, it has always been about PLANNED corporatism/fascism. Check out Milton Friedman from the Chicago School of Economics. This is also running parallel to the social liberty and personal freedom crackdown the NWO is instigating.


This aint Capitalism its Fascism. Like all the other NWO ism's it was meant to serve a purpose. Checking out the concentration of wealth in the world its a great success.

And Jesus, they still got the Fed reserve and all


Oh and the CIA coc aine drug running to artificially inflate the stock markets and therefore economy. Seriously the US has got MAJOR NWO freinds one way or the other.



posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Interesting you mention Ike. This here is a document that describes how he picked key industrialists to run the country in the event of a nuclear war.

Ike's Board of Executives



posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Whats sickening to me is the greatest growth the USA and world has ever seen by far was in a virtualy libertarian USA where all drugs for example were legal, no welfare state etc etc.

Then came the damn government.

Morals, prosperity, freedom all took a SHARP decline.



posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Fifth Column
Whats sickening to me is the greatest growth the USA and world has ever seen by far was in a virtualy libertarian USA where all drugs for example were legal, no welfare state etc etc.

Then came the damn government.

Morals, prosperity, freedom all took a SHARP decline.


Now which reform era are you talking about because I would have to disagree if you mean the Progressive movement of the early 20th century. The Progressive movement although morally driven did help snare in some powerful companies threatening to dictate what the national government could and could not do so in that case it was a positive movement.



posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 11:38 PM
link   
Sorry Agent 47, i meant the original ~1700's "frontier america".

Seriously Thomas Jefferson GREATEST WORLD POLITICIAN EVER, hell he tried to abolish slaves and treated "his slaves" like workers in contrast to G.Washinton.

The man was a straight up libertarian, no other way to describe him.

Maby im seeing it through rosetinted glasses though correct me if im wrong. But free NATURAL (christian) laws = ultimate prosperity. Of course this can not be proven to be directly proportional, but gubberment can certainly IMO be proven to fook things up no doubt.



posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 07:52 AM
link   
morals, prosperity, and the other thing you said allt ook a sharp decline because laws wereput on them. it hasnt gotten any worse, that laws have just gotten more strict, making them seem worse.



posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scat
laws have just gotten more strict, making them seem worse.


That only seems to be true for individuals today and not mulit national law breaking corporations.



posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Fifth Column
Sorry Agent 47, i meant the original ~1700's "frontier america".

Seriously Thomas Jefferson GREATEST WORLD POLITICIAN EVER, hell he tried to abolish slaves and treated "his slaves" like workers in contrast to G.Washinton.

The man was a straight up libertarian, no other way to describe him.

Maby im seeing it through rosetinted glasses though correct me if im wrong. But free NATURAL (christian) laws = ultimate prosperity. Of course this can not be proven to be directly proportional, but gubberment can certainly IMO be proven to fook things up no doubt.


Well I agree but I think in this day and age you cant revert to a libertarian system.



posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 04:46 PM
link   
hey agent- found alink to project redwood.

www.senderbase.org...



posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scat
hey agent- found alink to project redwood.

www.senderbase.org...


Thank you this is gonna help me solve the riddle.



posted on Mar, 14 2004 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Employment Update
Institutional Affiliations
Project for the New American Century: Signed PNAC's founding statement of principals as well as several other sign-on letters (3)
Heritage Foundation: Paid speaker (2)
Hudson Institute: Paid speaker (2)
Rand 2001 Transition Panel: Member (4)
Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies (SAIS): Dean (1994-2001) (1)
Yale University: Professor (1970-1973) (1)

Corporate Connections/Business Interests
Northrop Grumman: Former consultant (2)

War Profits

Fact:

While Paul D. Wolfowitz was working on his pre-emptive strike position paper he was being paid by Dreyfus to sit on their board of directors for various mutual funds. In 1994 his compensation was $32,631 but by 2000 it was $47,000 a year. Today he is Secretary of Defense and that position paper, penned while he was a trustee, serves as the blueprint for the Iraq war.


Hypothesis: As a multi-million dollar organization the Dreyfus Fund would see substantial gains from a sucessful military operation.

Fact:

As a former consultant to Northrop Grumman, Wolfowitz has various connections to the military industrial complex. As the third biggest defense company in America, Northrop Grumman has a vestiged interest in a war in Iraq. As a member of the PNAC, Wolfowitz has helped craft the policy of a 5-8% increase in defense spending. This has been achieved under the Bush administration.


Northrop Grumman hopes to help build 3,000 new F-35s for the U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps and the British Royal Air Force and Navy. Meanwhile, Northrop is busy working on low-volume initial models of the Global Hawk, expected to enter full-scale production in 2004.
The new aircraft are part of a major "transformation program" by the Defense Department aimed at enabling the military to deter and preemptively strike forces inimical to U.S. interests around the world. "Over the next five years, we plan to invest more than $136 billion in transformation technologies and systems," says Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of defense.


Hypothesis: Northrop Grumman has made billions not only from the increase in defense spending, Long advocated by PNAC but the Iraq War. As a former consultant Wolfowitz has time and again advocated Northrop Grumman in context of the defense build up.

Fact:
As a former paid consultant to Hughes Electronics, Wolfowitz cemented more ties to the Military Industrial Complex. Hughes Electronics provides key military components to the American armed forces.

In radar systems, Hughes provides the APG-series of airborne fire control radars for the F-15, F-18, and AV-8 Harrier. Ground-based radar programs include the TPQ-37 fire direction radar and the Ground Based Sensor.

Hughes' missile programs include Maverick, TOW, MEADS, Tomahawk, Stinger, RAM (Rolling Air Frame Missile), AMRAAM, Sparrow, Evolved SeaSparrow, Standard (as part of Standard Missile Company, a wholly owned Raytheon-Hughes subsidiary),and the new AIM-9X Sidewinder.

Hughes is also a provider of tactical communications and military radios, including the U.S. Army's Tactical Command and Control System, AFATADS (Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data Systems) and a wide array of tactical radios. Hughes also provides trainers and simulators for helicopter and fixed-wing aircraft.



Hypothesis: Hughes Electronics is another company who profits from the ongoing conflict in Iraq. The components that Hughes provide are key to the current war effort, and Wolfowitz knew this in the ramp up to the war.

Future Focus: The earnings Hughes and Grumman have generated in context of the Iraq War. More of Paul Wolfowitz's unlisted employment history.

Overall Hypothesis: Wolfowitz may be secretly receiving kickbacks from Hughes Electronics and Grumman in return for his services in creating the Iraq War and furthering the goals of the PNAC, in relation to a 8% increase in defense spending. Paul Wolfowitz is creating global conflict for personal gain.

Sources:

Wolfowitz Employment

Dreyfus Connection

Grumman Contract

Hughes Military Production Sector



posted on Mar, 14 2004 @ 07:07 PM
link   
Hmm... Its a tangled web this military-industrial-INTELLIGENCE-EXECUTIVE complex where the players seem to pop up as interested parties on all sides.

Good sniffing Agent47.

Whats great now of course is any military project and funding
cannot seriously be contested thx to the 'war on terror'.
Also 'war on terror' gives free hand to > PNAC = Kerry's "Progressive Internationalism: A Democratic National Security Strategy".

So the 'complex' thrives kerry & UN/bush & Neo-Cons/whatever.



posted on Mar, 14 2004 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Fifth Column
Hmm... Its a tangled web this military-industrial-INTELLIGENCE-EXECUTIVE complex where the players seem to pop up as interested parties on all sides.

Good sniffing Agent47.

Whats great now of course is any military project and funding
cannot seriously be contested thx to the 'war on terror'.
Also 'war on terror' gives free hand to > PNAC = Kerry's "Progressive Internationalism: A Democratic National Security Strategy".

So the 'complex' thrives kerry & UN/bush & Neo-Cons/whatever.



Good point, I had been running on the assumption that Kerry would shift away from the goals of PNAC, but it seems same problems different names. Im pro defense spending but not when you have shady connections to those who get the contracts at the top.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 09:33 PM
link   
In closing, its been a great thread and I enjoyed the ride, but whoever the hell decided they would give the thread a one to knock its ranking around, and didnt even have the nerve to post one word, well your a duchebag. With that unless there is some sort of public interest I want the thread locked.



posted on Mar, 17 2004 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Well if it'll make you feel better I'll give it a read. This may take a while.

The only thing I know we can do is support the little man as much as possible. We stay out of Wal-Mart as much as possible. I don't like to spend one dime in there I don't have to. It makes very little difference though. If everyone did that it might help.

[Edited on 17-3-2004 by TgSoe]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join