defeat for Obama's US Senate win where sealed divorce papers were
used. Nasty business.
On Dec 16, 7:49 pm, Don Johnson <daj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's interesting. I'd love to read more about what you are talking
> about. I'm casually interested in the Corzine/WF Global investigations
> currently going on but I doubt the justice dept. can touch him. He's
> just too smart and has too many powerful friends. Unlike the crass and
> apparently unsophisticated Gov. Blagojevich who will be spending the
> next 15 years in a federal prison for his stupidity. Unless a person
> is the CEO or CFO and can be proven to be lying or cooking books I
> don't see how you can go after the personal wealth of an individual
> just because they own stock. They would have to be decision makers to
> be liable I would think. It will be interesting to see how things play
> out.
>
> By no means do I advocate no regulation at all. Some is required to
> prevent monopolies and help stabilize production to avoid severe boom/
> bust cycles. It's the social engineering aspect of regulation that
> irritates me. Economic engineering is necessary and desirable for
> stability. The social part is insulting.
>
> dj
>
> On Dec 16, 1:21 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Don business is bound by the same moral code as the rest if humanity, in
> > the s when you form a corporation you agree to abide by the laws of the
> > state and the laws of the United States .. basis requirement now the real
> > question is how many of the major corporations really still exist because
> > if you violate the law you lose the corporate veil exposing all the share
> > holders to full exposure including all of their wealth. All of it every
> > last penny. Not just what they have invested
> > Allan
> > On Dec 16, 2011 7:56 AM, "Don Johnson" <daj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > This is true Allan. However, business is business. You can only lose
> > > what you invest so one should never invest more then they can afford
> > > to lose. Another way to put this is don't hate the player; hate the
> > > game. Don't sit at the table and ante up if you can't handle the loss.
> > > Stay outta the kitchen if you can't stand the heat. And so on. If a
> > > businessman is breaking the law then let's put him in jail and fine
> > > him. If he's done wrong by someone then let's sue his ass. Let a jury
> > > of his peers judge him. What frustrates me is how often I see
> > > government picking the winners and losers. Or powerful entities like
> > > the FED Reserve picking winners and losers. I'm still baffled why
> > > Lehman Bros. got the shaft back in 2008 when Washington and the Fed.
> > > couldn't pass out bail out money fast enough to just about every other
> > > bank begging. Must of been politics. The better course would have been
> > > to let them all go bankrupt. The vast majority of investors and owners
> > > would have been wealthy and they can withstand the loss. Instead, the
> > > tax payers are on the hook for billions in sub-prime mortgages.
> > > Shameful. Even more shameful is the new Regulations prop up these
> > > oligarchical banks even more while forcing me to pay fees I've never
> > > paid in my entire life. Bwankers indeed.
>
> > > dj
>
> > > On Dec 15, 10:09 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Don you also have to take into account how that money is acquired. When
> > > > others are harmed in the process of the gathering of that wealth then
> > > you
> > > > have a question of morality and the violation of the ethics involved.
> > > > Allan
> > > > On Dec 15, 2011 11:42 AM, "Don Johnson" <daj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > No need to get all snippy Vam. My comment was honest and wasn't meant
> > > to
> > > > > be insulting. Human nature isn't going to change to fit anyone's ideal
> > > of
> > > > > how we should all get along. It's just not going to happen. Ever. There
> > > > > will always be winners and there will always be losers. The vast
> > > majority
> > > > > of us plod along somewhere in the middle. I believe in giving others
> > > > > opportunity and encouragement. I do not believe in hand outs and the
> > > > > perpetual Nanny State. Enabling, indeed, actually fostering a lifetime
> > > of
> > > > > dependance on other's blood, sweat and tears is degrading in the
> > > extreme.
> > > > > Both to the giver and the receiver.
>
> > > > > I think you understand how bad the world economy is. I think you're
> > > aware
> > > > > of the massive political chicanery known colloquially as "crony
> > > > > capitalism." When we are at the point where you must be in Government
> > > to
> > > > > succeed then that's where the sharks will gravitate. And us tax payers
> > > will
> > > > > give them our money and they will decide which monopolies to give it
> > > to so
> > > > > they can receive their kick backs. I mean campaign donations. Laws
> > > will be
> > > > > passed to protect the favored companies(such as GE) while rivals(energy
> > > > > companies) are punished with regulation and perpetual dragging of feet
> > > to
> > > > > get permission to run a pipeline or drill. Thus is the way of the
> > > world and
> > > > > wishing isn't going to change it. I'd rather instill in our youth a
> > > burning
> > > > > ambition to succeed. To become the next Steve Jobs or Carlos Slim or
> > > John
> > > > > D. Rockefeller. Telling them the government owes them a living probably
> > > > > isn't the best way to accomplish this.
>
> > > > > Not sure what you mean bringing up Africans and Indian aborigines.
> > > That is
> > > > > a problem for Africa and India, no? I would welcome them here, of
> > > course.
> > > > > We need all the immigrants we can get to help pay my social security in
> > > > > about 30 years. It's the only way I'll ever see a dime. Come on down
> > > but
> > > > > bring a healthy work ethic. Freeloaders get the boot. Well, in my
> > > little
> > > > > fantasy world they do anyway. What, Capitalists can't dream? There are
> > > no
> > > > > race cards in my deck buddy.
>
> > > > > I have no objection to a people "growing as they will" either. I'm
> > > sure we
> > > > > have something they want. In fact, Vam, I wonder if that really isn't
> > > at
> > > > > the root of much of the trouble? Could it be......Envy? Everybody
> > > looooves
> > > > > to bash on the Big Bad USA but looking around I still see we seem to be
> > > > > doing......better then most. Even if the whole thing IS a house of
> > > cards.
> > > > > Where will your high-minded ideals come in when those cards come down?
> > > > > It'll be every man for himself and dog eat dog. Family and friends
> > > first.
>
> > > > > Oh my I think I may have gone off the reservation here. Morals. No,
> > > > > tithing doesn't necessarily equate to having a high moral standard.
> > > > > However, in the case of JD Sr. and Jr. their largesse knew no bounds.
> > > > > Excessively frugal in their personal lives and excessively generous in
> > > > > their public lives. Honestly, with a simple look at history and current
> > > > > events I don't see how ANYONE could dislike or resent rich people as a
> > > > > class. They give more than anybody else. By a fairly large margin.
>
> > > > > dj
>
> > > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >> " morals = tithe faithfully "
>
> > > > >> That's how pathetic the belief springs from :
> > > > >> " Without an avenue to create wealth people will be less productive
> > > > >> which means there will be less largess for the needy and helpless."
>
> > > > >> The people " here " are less naive than you, Don. Much, much less, I
> > > > >> must point out.
>
> > > > >> It's not the absence of avenues of wealth creation they seek. They
> > > > >> seek people who can create wealth and disown its power of becoming a
> > > > >> weapon to enslave others, deny others, own others, influence public
> > > > >> policy, affect electoral outcomes, buy off common resources for
> > > > >> commercial and personal gains, acquire rights to do as one pleases
> > > > >> with the right to ownership of property, skew world world markets,
> > > > >> twists financial structures...
>
> > > > >> In short, stop creating lesser " dog-like " mercenary humans amongst
> > > > >> us, degrade environments, and actually reduce opportunities for
> > > > >> populations everywhere to grow, as they will, not as they are
> > > > >> commanded by the money bags for the latter's feudal interests.
>
> > > > >> They can keep all their wealth and splurge it in the luxury market.
> > > > >> But not in owning people, markets, finance structures and instruments,
> > > > >> land, natural resources, investing in electoral outcomes and public
> > > > >> policy, etc.
>
> > > > >> I hope you now understand the people " here " ... they believe the
> > > > >> Rockfeller is no more or less than Indian aborigine you've denied or
> > > > >> the African native who is yet to learn to be as smart as the white
> > > > >> folk, or the homeless tramp closer home. If he can't be homeless,
> > > > >> because of his wealth, he at least can extend his understanding and
> > > > >> initiative for their benefit, being only as human and no more. If he
> > > > >> can't be as unsmart as the African, he can at least enable them and
> > > > >> not derive advantage. If he can't undo the fate if the Indian
> > > > >> American, he can at least stand with them and admit his wrong.
>
> > > > >> On Dec 14, 4:45 pm, Don Johnson <daj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> > I'm couldn't disagree more. The most successful people in the world
> > > > >> > are often driven by a high sense of morals. J.D. Rockefeller in
> > > > >> > particular was scrupulously honest and even before
> > > > >> > he obtained success and could afford it. Without an avenue to create
> > > > >> > wealth people will be less productive which means there will be less
> > > > >> > largess for the needy and helpless. I wonder at the naivete I see
> > > > >> > here. Will everyone truly be more happy when we are all distitute? I
> > > > >> > think not.
>
> > > > >> > dj
>
> > > > >> > On Dec 6, 1:47 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >> > > Francis of Assisi once said that it is better to understand than
> > > be
> > > > >> > > understood. there is a time to understand what the wise men of the
> > > > >> past had
> > > > >> > > to say and why
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário