|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
As a shareholder of GE, I don't remember agreeing to this package of
retirement perks. In fact, I only found out about it because of his
divorce case. I certainly would have voted against it, as I don't
believe in post-retirement benefits of this kind (apartments, jets,
etc.) There should be a bonus at departure, partly cash, partly stock
with a long-term vesting period, fully disclosed to the shareholders.
Then we would have the ability to make a free choice.
Regards
DanG
Jim Johnson wrote:
>
> Hello BobsKC,
>
> you can't hold teachers accountable--they're unionized AND they have
> tenure. what's that all about?
>
> about money--PAC money mainly. the largest contributors to Democrats
> are unions, teachers associations and trial lawyers.
>
> the liberal philosophy continues to eat away at our way of life. even
> last night on the WSJ editorial board roundtable--when asked about
> Welsh's retirements perks, not one of those presumably free market
> conservative writers observed that what he got was given to him
> freely. Even they seemed to be tacitly buying into the implication
> that somebody (government I assume) should get involved in this. the
> title of van Hayek's book is chilling--The Road to Serfdom.
>
> Best regards,
> Jim Johnson mailto:jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> --
> Saturday, September 21, 2002, 10:29:59 PM, you wrote:
>
> B> Unions. I watched the UAW refuse to give back a dime to Cat when things
> B> got tough in the early 80's even in the face of warnings they would move
> B> their Iowa plants. Well, they moved them. To France! My company provided
> B> two way radio and closed circuit tv services to those plants and it was a
> B> tough loss for us.
>
> B> There was a time for labor unions. That time was 80 years ago. Most of
> B> the money they pull in goes to organized crime and they have caused
> B> manufacturing to depart wholesale. Besides, I am suspicious of anyone who
> B> wants to work at a job where they tell you how much you can make.
>
> B> So, greed has driven out the manufacturing jobs. Our education system has
> B> lowered the bar for the few until the majority are getting a second rate
> B> education and can not compete in the world market place. Education is not
> B> the same as corporate earnings. You can't just lower the estimates. I
> B> worry a lot about our youth .. kids coming out of high school today are
> B> less informed that kids coming out of 8th grade 30 years ago. The damn
> B> bar better get put back up where it belongs and teachers held accountable
> B> and tested.
>
> B> Bob
>
> B> At 05:57 PM 9/21/2002 -0700, you wrote:
> >>Did the US have a choice in its conversion? It was convert or die. The
> >>manufacturing went elsewhere because they could do it just as good and a lot
> >>cheaper. The only other alternative we had was to become isolationists again
> >>and ban imports. Our agriculture is going the same way right now. Garlic
> >>is coming in from China at 1/2 the price it can be produced for in the US.
> >>The same with oranges, grapefruit and other citrus from Australia and South
> >>America. Are the grain markets in the same shape? Brazil, Australia, and
> >>other countries are producing product for less. How long can a subsidy
> >>last? Where is our vaunted fishing fleet. Are there any American flag
> >>vessels left afloat, outside of the Navy and coast guard. Do we produce
> >>shoes or clothing any more? We still have a thriving wine industry.
> >>
> >>I have a question. Who does the service industry service? We have banks
> >>that lend money to foreign countries that don't repay the loans. We have
> >>computer companies that import all of the parts they assemble here. So we
> >>did save those high paying assembly line jobs. The fast food restaurants
> >>are expanding overseas instead of in the US so those high paying service
> >>jobs at Wendy's and McD aren't going to shrink the unemployment rolls. The
> >>banks can now lose money in insurance, brokerage and other non banking
> >>endeavors. Even the federal government is sending our armaments for
> >>production overseas.
> >>
> >>Were is the talent coming from to operate the high tech companies? That
> >>talent is coming from oversees. We can't even produce an intelligent work
> >>force. There is one ever expanding area of the economy. Tattoo parlors and
> >>body piercing salons are popping up all over. Now there is a real future
> >>for your kids. Am I missing something here? Ira
> >>
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: "Earl Adamy" <eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 4:54 PM
> >>Subject: Re: [RT] Service vs Manufacturing economy
> >>
> >>
> >> > Gary, do you have a URL for that article, sure would like to read the
> >>whole
> >> > thing?
> >> >
> >> > I have long believed that true economic strength is built upon a strong
> >>and
> >> > resilient manufacturing base. I have also been saying for many years that
> >> > the US would suffer deeply in the next recession/depression for having
> >> > converted to a service based economy.
> >> >
> >> > Earl
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: "Gary Funck" <gary@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> > To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> > Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 3:23 PM
> >> > Subject: RE: [RT] 10 year note near 40 year highs ?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > > From: Daniel Goncharoff [mailto:thegonch@xxxxxxxxxx]
> >> > > > Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 9:37 AM
> >> > > > To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> > > > Subject: Re: [RT] 10 year note near 40 year highs ?
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I think there are two sides to this point. Isn't a service-based
> >>economy
> >> > > > more flexible than one based on large factories? It may mean that
> >> > > > changes come more easily, and that new industries can develop using
> >>the
> >> > > > excess information-based labor from weaker sectors.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > In this respect, telecoms will be a good real-life example. It will be
> >> > > > interesting to see what happens to all the people getting laid off by
> >> > > > the telecoms firms that won't be growing for several years. If they
> >>end
> >> > > > up having no place to go, that would indicate your believe is
> >>validated.
> >> > > > If they find new jobs in a similar field, I think the economic hit
> >>will
> >> > > > not be very big at all.
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > In this week's Business Week, there's a rather disturbing article that
> >> > refutes
> >> > > the theory that a service based economy should be more resilient.
> >>Excerpts
> >> > > below:
> >> > >
> >> > > SEPTEMBER 30, 2002
> >> > >
> >> > > NEWS: ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY
> >> > >
> >> > > The Educated Unemployed
> >> > > The jobless rate for managers and professionals is likely to rise
> >> > >
> >> > > [...]
> >> > > Here's why joblessness is likely to rise: Across the board, companies
> >>are
> >> > > facing an unholy trio of low profits, weak demand, and falling
> >> > prices--with no
> >> > > relief in sight. Revenues for the companies in the Standard & Poor's
> >> > 500-stock
> >> > > index are down 2% over the past year, adding to the pressure on
> >>businesses
> >> > to
> >> > > cut costs by cutting workforces. At the same time, productivity is
> >>soaring
> >> > at a
> >> > > rapid clip--a 6% gain over last year at nonfinancial corporations.
> >>That's
> >> > > allowing businesses to meet flat demand with fewer workers.
> >> > >
> >> > > Even more distressing, some of the sectors where the job market has
> >>stayed
> >> > > relatively strong--including health, education, finance, and retailing,
> >> > which
> >> > > together make up about 40% of the total workforce--are showing signs of
> >> > > cracking. And the already grim labor picture in the airline, energy,
> >> > > technology, telecom, and media sectors--some 7% of the workforce--keeps
> >> > > deteriorating.
> >> > > [...]
> >> > > This is the dark side of the productivity boom. During the second half
> >>of
> >> > the
> >> > > 1990s, output per worker rose, but soaring demand and revenues, driven
> >>in
> >> > part
> >> > > by the technology and telecom boom, helped boost hiring and push down
> >>the
> >> > > unemployment rate below 4%. Wages and bonuses soared, and it seemed like
> >>a
> >> > > golden age for workers.
> >> > >
> >> > > But rising productivity without rising demand is a recipe for
> >>disappearing
> >> > > jobs. If companies can't raise prices, the only way they can boost
> >>profits
> >> > is
> >> > > to cut workers--and higher productivity makes that possible.
> >> > > [...]
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >> > > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> >>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >> > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >>realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
> B> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> B> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> B> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Sell a Home for Top $
http://us.click.yahoo.com/RrPZMC/jTmEAA/ySSFAA/zMEolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|