Tuesday, May 21, 2013
Comment Archives: stories: Columns: Hightower
Re: “Wal-Mart hits bottom”
I believe I heard a justification for the act when the story was first reported, but if I did, I forgot it. Probably something about having a level playing field for all American companies, but I do not know if any other nations, particularly European nations, have similar legislation. If not then the act puts all American companies at a disadvantage relative to those other nations, and just as taking bribes is part of many third world cultures, the handing out of bribes is part of the culture of many advanced industrial cultures.
Maybe the US government should be paying out the bribes to Mexico with the proviso that they give the advantage to all American companies equally, and not favor Wal-Mart! (Don't get bent out of shape. It's just a joke.)
Posted by
Mr. K--
on 05/02/2012 at 5:45 PM
Re: “Wal-Mart hits bottom”
Bribery in Mexico is a way of life. Therefore I would caution against passing (too much) judgement looking at it from the US perspective. Now, in the USA it seems it is the other way around. Local governments effectively bribe companies to entice them into their environs.
As to the "Foreign Corrupt Practices Act", I know nothing about it other than it was drafted by politicians. Consequently, I am more than a bit skeptical.
Posted by
smartestman
on 05/02/2012 at 4:19 PM
Re: “Wal-Mart hits bottom”
smartestman, you have addressed only the side issues. How do you feel about the bribery and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act?
Posted by
Mr. K--
on 05/02/2012 at 1:59 PM
Re: “Wal-Mart hits bottom”
Jimmy, it is obvious that you have never met a capitalistic institution that you like.
In your warped world, price negotiation ("squeezing suppliers") is bad because everyone should get whatever they ask; competition ("crushing competitors") is bad since it might lead to hurt feelings; and not caving to unions ("exploiting employees") is bad because you are a communist and a union sympathizer.
Posted by
smartestman
on 05/02/2012 at 6:16 AM
Re: “They grab the money and run”
C - so you believe you, cranky and sniff constitute the rest of the world?
Posted by
smartestman
on 04/26/2012 at 9:32 AM
Re: “They grab the money and run”
smartestman, when will you learn that your vituperative attacks only serve to confirm to the rest of the world that you have no intellectual ammunition and you are not too proud to sling mud when you run out of ideas.
Posted by
Mr. K--
on 04/26/2012 at 8:55 AM
Re: “They grab the money and run”
Cranky, Mr. c and sniff - the three little pigs. The way you huff and puff and blow, one might confuse you with the big bad wolf (albeit, without any teeth).
Posted by
smartestman
on 04/26/2012 at 6:22 AM
Re: “They grab the money and run”
One more thing about these dirty schemes, the taxpayer also gets to eat the pension costs of the workers via the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC).
When the corporate raiders grab a firm, they not only raid the assets, they plunder the pension fund too. They then let the empty dead shell of a firm file for bankruptcy and dissolution.
A Federal entity, the PBGC assumes the obligations owed to workers, whose pension is usually about a third of what they should've gotten.
Private equity types are swell guys, and if we give Mitt the chance, he'll finish the job Bush started of destroying the country.
Posted by
OldCrank
on 04/25/2012 at 8:19 PM
Re: “They grab the money and run”
This article elucidates why Mitt Romney, noted political chameleon, never changed his position on the auto bail out, even in the face of its overwhelming success. The entirety of his business experience and acumen tells him that Bain Capital could have made a killing by acquiring GM dirt cheap, selling off its many valuable capital assets, (probably to Japanese companies), and decimating the auto workers union. As a current stock holder in Bain Capital, Mitt Romney ought to recuse himself from making any comment whatsoever about the auto bail out, because he has a vested interest in its failure.
Posted by
Mr. K--
on 04/25/2012 at 8:04 PM
Re: “They grab the money and run”
dumbarseman, you have to stop listening to faux news and limp balls...facts don't matter to them. GE has dontated to both parties almost equally for decades. i see mint rawmoney is their top recipient lately...so are you for or against changing the tax system?? Obama is all for it.
Posted by
Daytripper
on 04/25/2012 at 1:24 PM
Re: “They grab the money and run”
Let me see, didn't I just read that your buddies at GE (a huge Obama supporter) doesn't pay any corporate income tax? Is that who you are taking about Jimmie?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-200…
Posted by
smartestman
on 04/25/2012 at 12:50 PM
Re: “The tea party's Maddest Hatter”
Interesting new development: today John Huntsman characterized the Republican Party as acting like the Chinese Communist Party. Apparently, it's the conservatives, like Alan West himself, not the progressives, who are the subversives in Congress.
Posted by
Mr. K--
on 04/23/2012 at 6:19 PM
Re: “The tea party's Maddest Hatter”
No, smartestman, I am sure I was speaking of communists, although it does apply equally as well to fascists, nazis, some, but not all, socialists, and finally some, but not all, anarchists, at least in theory. Whereas communists, fascists, and nazis have a successful track record when it comes to overthrowing established governments, anarchists never even tried.
The only instance in the history of the world, of anarchists holding and exercising political power, occurred in 1936 Spain, but these anarchists were elected to public office by the popular vote. The democratically elected government of Spain was subsequently overthrown by the fascist dictator Generalissimo Francisco Franco in the Spanish Civil War.
Posted by
Mr. K--
on 04/20/2012 at 7:50 PM
Re: “The tea party's Maddest Hatter”
Mr C: you are so full of crap. I believe you have communist mixed up with anarchist.
You really do believe yourself knowledgeable, don't you? Her is a clue - YOU ARE NOT.
What is it like to be self-deluded?
Posted by
smartestman
on 04/20/2012 at 10:34 AM
Re: “The tea party's Maddest Hatter”
Since so many people do not understand the difference between liberalism and coummunism, due to years of being spoon-fed anti-communist propaganda, I will try to explain it concisely.
smartestman seeks to label Jim Hightower as a communist mainly because Hightower advocates for more, and more effective, government regulation of the more rapacious aspects of our economic system. We all know the conservative arguments against government regulation, but I think many will be surprised to know that communism is against government regulation in a capitalist economy. To ask a capitalist government to regulate its own abuses is like asking the fox to guard the hen house. The purpose of a capitalist government (from the communist point of view) is to keep the foxes from killing each other over the hens, but it is not there to protect the hens from the foxes.
A true communist does not advocate for more regulation in liberal newspapers. A true communist advocates for revolutionary overthrow of the government. (Which, by the way, is why true communists are opposed to gun control, as well. In fact, communism has much more in common with right-wing extremism than most people realize.) But I digress.
To finish off my original line of thought, communists advocate for revolution, and the case is easier to make when there are no regulations to protect the average citizen. After the revolution, when the government is no longer capitalist, but communist, *then* they will start advocating for more government regulation.
Posted by
Mr. K--
on 04/20/2012 at 9:32 AM
Re: “The tea party's Maddest Hatter”
smartestman, Woody Guthrie is one of the most admired men in American history, in spite of his association with the Communist Party, which is why that association is often soft-pedaled by progressives. They are afraid the truth might inspire some of our young rebels, such as the 99%-ers, to emulate their hero and take a closer look at communism.
Mr. Hightower, although a progressive, is adamantly anti-communist, and cannot bring himself to believe that his hero was tainted by his association with the party. Being a progressive, Hightower must often be labeled a communist, as your comment amply illustrates. It is not a very far leap for him to assume that Woody Guthrie was similarly maligned by right-wing hyperbole.
Posted by
Mr. K--
on 04/20/2012 at 9:02 AM
Re: “The tea party's Maddest Hatter”
He (West) deserves the ridicule he's getting.
Posted by
gregR
on 04/19/2012 at 9:07 AM
Re: “The tea party's Maddest Hatter”
Jimmie: why do you and your commie friends hide from what you are? You stated "When Woody Guthrie was smeared with the same baloney ...". How is it smeared when one points to the truth? As discussed earlier, Guthrie may not have been a card carrying communist, but was certainly one at heart and proud of it. Why are you ashamed of it? I wager you far left loons spend fortunes on psychotherapy. Quit hiding from your true nature, Jimmie. Come out of the proverbial closet and admit to what you are.
Posted by
smartestman
on 04/19/2012 at 7:25 AM
Re: “The tea party's Maddest Hatter”
Alan West's ignorance is only exceeded by his arrogance. His recent remarks are nothing less than slander and treason.
Posted by
Mr. K--
on 04/18/2012 at 11:21 AM
Re: “The Bentonville stench spreads”
"Apparently a skunk doesn't smell its own stink - or at least its not offended by it."
No kidding Jimmie. I presume this is how you live with yourself.