|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Does that mean that everyone on Social Security is involved
in an illegal contract ? ? ?
And every retiree on a Defined Benefits Plan ? ? ?
Frankly, with a 2800% increase in share value it would
seem to me he earned a very "perky" retirement.
Clyde
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Clyde Lee Chairman/CEO (Home of SwingMachine)
SYTECH Corporation email:clydelee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
7910 Westglen, Suite 105 Office: (713) 783-9540
Houston, TX 77063 Fax: (713) 783-1092
Details at: www.theswingmachine.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Goncharoff" <thegonch@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: [RT] GE and Welch
> I call a contract that means my assets are used to pay someone
> indefinitely for not providing any work on my behalf abridging my
> property rights.
>
> You may also want to consider that just because there is a signed
> contract, it doesn't make a transaction legal.
>
> Regards
> DanG
>
> Jim Johnson wrote:
> >
> > Hello Daniel,
> >
> > Then you shouldn't own shares in a company whose bylaws/policies don't
> > stipulate that all executive comp plans be put to a shareholder vote.
> > That is rare to nonexistent. You need to understand how the process
> > works. You elected the board and gave them the latitude to make these
> > decisions for you. If you don't like that arrangement you can: sell
> > your shares, use options, start your own conglomerate, agitate for
> > board/comp policy reform etc. But the inference I make is that you
> > would prefer to abridge rights of property ownership.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Jim Johnson mailto:jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > --
> > Sunday, September 22, 2002, 7:21:37 AM, you wrote:
> >
> > DG> As a shareholder of GE, I don't remember agreeing to this package of
> > DG> retirement perks. In fact, I only found out about it because of his
> > DG> divorce case. I certainly would have voted against it, as I don't
> > DG> believe in post-retirement benefits of this kind (apartments, jets,
> > DG> etc.) There should be a bonus at departure, partly cash, partly
stock
> > DG> with a long-term vesting period, fully disclosed to the
shareholders.
> > DG> Then we would have the ability to make a free choice.
> >
> > DG> Regards
> > DG> DanG
> >
> > DG> 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/
> >
> > DG> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > DG> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> >
> > DG> 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/
>
>
>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now
http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/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/
|