Who´s going to win ?

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

Ericsson, 2002: ~15 billion euros

Motorola, 2002: ~20 billion euros

Ok, Motorola makes about 5 billion more. I dont beleive a million dollar bonus for keeping ahead of the competition like that is a bad thing. It's not like 2 million out of 20 billion is a lot anyways. Thats what, 1% ?

[denoir 0]

I agree, but I don't know if those numbers are representative in general or not. One must look at a larger number of corporations before any conclusions can be drawn.

Edit: Also, keep in mind that Motorola is at least two times bigger than Ericsson in terms of number of employees.

[m21man 0]

Quote[/b] ]It's just a question of which one is dominant in you. And because you support Buhs, who appeals to territorialism (nationalism), ritualism (religion) and aggression (war), you are obviously letting the reptilian brain to dominate over the cerebral cortex.

And the reptiles eat the mammals .

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

True, but the whole "Amercian CEOs are bad and greedy because they make a lot of money" arguement is about as weak as saying "the rich could buy a car with their tax breaks but the middle and lower class can buy a happy meal". Micheal moore whoever it was that said that didnt explain they probably pay similar tax rates % wise. (assuming that the middle or poor class used all the tax deductions and rebates available to them and the rich guy used all that he has available. I dont beleive that is a bad thing, because that rich guy is probably spending his money on investments and businesses which is good for the economy, while the poor guy is probably spending most the money he makes on himself. However neither could be effective by themselves, without employees the rich wont be rich and with out the rich, nobody would have jobs.)

[denoir 0]

The traditional argument is that the top 1% of the population of USA owns 40% of the country while the bottom 40% own 1% of the country. It points to large social segregation - lots of poor people and very few, extremely rich people.

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

I heard this way:

Quote[/b] ]The top 10% controls 90% of the country and the other 90% owns 10% of the country.

[denoir 0]

Those statements do not exclude each other

Edit: Reference for my claim (PDF from USA today, written by Ted Turner).

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

I know, but it puts a little different perspective on it.... I think, maybe I'm just a bit mistaken as I havent started a business and become wealthy, yet.  

Edit: Well, I guess im in the spammer's club now, 1003 posts

[SpecOp9 0]

Look at my signature.

Bush will be President for another 4 years!

MUAHAHAH!!  This time we blow up Europe! and then Albania!

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

3. US CEOs are largely overpaid. Often CEOs of LLC or Plc s earn 10 times the amounts of their european counterparts. So money makes them horny for the job rather than self-actualisation. And no, money is not always the right motivation.

What's the net worth of those European counterparts?

Comparison:

The CEO of Ericsson (mobile phones, communication systems etc) makes about 1 million euros/year.

The CEO of Motorola makes about 2 million euros/year (1 million pay and 1 million "bonus")

This is just one example I dug up. I'm not sure if it's representative or not.

According to Business Week, the average CEO of a major corporation made 42 times the average hourly worker's pay in 1980. By 1990 that had almost doubled to 85 times. In 2000, the average CEO salary reached an unbelievable 531 times that of the average hourly worker.

Take Mark Swartz, the former CFO of Tyco International who was indicted for fraud. Crystal argues that based on Tyco's three-year revenue, the "going rate" for his job was $4.1 million a year. However, Swartz's three-year pay worked out to $59 million a year, putting him 1,052 percent over the market rate.

But that is old info. If you realy want to know the problem with overpaid CEOs in the US and the "corrupted corporate governance" in the US then read this.

No it is not a socialist thing. It is simply a literature review

The State of the US corporate governance, what is right & what is wrong PDF

And if you really want to see some overpaid CEOs then go to the bottom of this page scroll to bottom of this article

What Accor? I worked for them!

[Apollo 0]

It's not just what the CEO's make ,it's also what the shaleholders are rigging in on divident's on their share's.Divident is a percentage of profit turned out to the shareholders ,they don't work for it ,they just get it for putting moeny in the company.But divident rate's are not set ,it depends on the company ,and some company's turn most of the rofit out to the shareholders.But eventually it's the employee's who realize this profit ,haowever they only get a share if the company does a pay rise ,not bloody likely.

the moral of it is debatable.You can say it's the investors money so they deserve return ,however they always get that eventually if they sell the share's.Minimum wages in Western country's are relativly good ,but for company's opperating in country's with terribly low labour costs ,all the profit is flowing to the shareholders ,While the labourers do all the work.

A employee of Nike working in Cabodia making shoe's gets about 0.05$ an hour.The product is sold for roughly 50$.There is a lot of profit in that ,afcourse resellers get a profit to ,but the profits of the company Nike goes mainly to it's shareholders.

[ozanzac 0]

In short: If Bush wins. The world loses.

[Acecombat 0]

Look at my signature.

Bush will be President for another 4 years!

MUAHAHAH!!  This time we blow up Europe! and then Albania!

How exciting

*Grabs popcorn and waits in the corner for the results*

[USSoldier11B 0]

I'm a Republican and I like Bush. I will vote for him and he will win. There is no way Howard Dean could pull the center of the electorate, he's too liberal. Despite a stong showing in Iowa I don't think Kerry has a chance at beating Dean in the primaries. Hardlining wins primaries, pulling the swing voters wins general elections. Dean is extreme enough to beat any other Dem in the primaries, but not diplomatic enough to attract independents and liberal Republicans. (essential since the GOP is a larger party, Dems usually receive a large percentage of votes from the ignorant and undecided) Of course out of all the Dem candidates, the one that gives me the creeps has to be the strongest. I'd probably even vote for Wesley Clark if he ran indep. and wasn't running against Bush. The idea of voting for a Democrat president is just entirely too distasteful to me.:p

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

I didnt like Sushi either the first time I tried it. But now I love it. It is healthy, cosmopolitan, fresh and only for people with good tastes.

Same is true for the democratic candidates

[Milkman 1]

Yes, thats exactly it, because I support Bush I must be a reptile who can talk, write, and play freaking computer games. I always wondered why my human friends didn't notice the green skin...  

You should have payed more attention in biology. Everybody has as part of the brain the so called "reptilian brain" (located near the brain stem). We all have those impulses and they are balanced against the more evolved cerebral cortex part of the brain.

It's just a question of which one is dominant in you. And because you support Buhs, who appeals to territorialism (nationalism), ritualism (religion) and aggression (war), you are obviously letting the reptilian brain to dominate over the cerebral cortex.

Yes, my biology teacher was bad (I think she said a barnicle is a fish... pretty sure that isn't right.)

But I don't think reptiles have religion, or any sense of political beliefs... What I am trying to get at is your attempt to bash bush supporters doesn't make much sense to me, and if this part of the brain is republican, than what the hell is the democrat side of the brain? Meek, political correctness, poor leadership, the stuff that usually is lost in evolution. (The strongest survive, the weak die off, you know what I am talking about...)

[toadeater 0]

It's important not to re-elect Bush so that we can have an unbiased investigation of 9/11, Bush's WMD claims, Enron, Halliburton, the Anthrax mail attacks, and all the other "mysterious coincidences" that have happened after Bush forced his way into office on behalf of his father's corporate empire of evil.

I don't expect much from the Demorats, but I really do hope to see a real investigation of 9/11 without the Bush administration interfering. I'd be happy if Bush was in even one live debate that wasn't rigged or scripted. Everyone was too busy laughing at Gore to notice what Bush was really saying, even I supported Bush at that point. He (they) fooled us all.

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

I didnt like Sushi either the first time I tried it. But now I love it. It is healthy, cosmopolitan, fresh and only for people with good tastes.

Same is true for the democratic candidates

Yup, great taste.

 

[shinRaiden 0]

It's important not to re-elect Bush so that we can have an unbiased investigation of 9/11, Bush's WMD claims, Enron, Halliburton, the Anthrax mail attacks, and all the other "mysterious coincidences" that have happened after Bush forced his way into office on behalf of his father's corporate empire of evil.

Add to that the USS Cole, the embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya, the USMC barracks in Beiruit, the Iran hostage debacle, the cold war, WW1 & 2, (his [great?]-grandfather was in the civil war - so investigate the family for that too), also his brother is govenor of Florida - so investigate Dubya for all the cuban catastrophes, and since he's a white guy he's inherently ... (nm), and since he claims to be christian also investigate him for ancestrial culpability in the English medival era, lets see... partial liability for all pogroms and anti-islamic crusades, barbarian invasions, heck lets add the great flood and original sin for good measure.

Kruschev[?] said Stalin was a bad man, who went to Budapest?

Now seriously...

For those of you who will be legally voting in the US elections, make a speadsheet of EVERY canidate as your row leads, and the issues across the top as column headings. Make a check in each box where a canidate has a PROVEN history on an issue that you agree to, or are willing to accept. He (or she) who has the most check boxes and is on your ballot (see state rules) deserves your vote. But that's not all. Now that you are making informed decisions, do all you can to help others do likewise, rather than running around yelling "The sky is falling". My response is "That's nice, what are YOU going to do about it?"

If you choose to turn politics into jihad, it makes no difference whether you vote for Dean or Bush or Sharpton.

[shinRaiden 0]

In follow to my earlier post sticking the economic burden on mismanagement, and not directly on Clinton or Bush, all I can say is go troll the list of 'former' Arthur Anderson clients. But it's not our problem only. Will Italians have milk to drink? Welcome to the club. Why did the US pick up mad cow (BSE)? Same mind set - to heck with the comapny and the stockholders, gimme (the CEO & board) a 'good' (ie cooked-book) quarter or two, and bail. Supplement that with expense account padding as well.

So CEO screws staff and kicksback to CFO who covers both guys and a cut for himself. This guts budgets, and besides projections are cooked as well - leading to wildly missed expectations, or safer 'adjustments'. Line departments lose all work motivation, and seek to entrench themselves by multiplying paperwork and management. Floor grunts now can't achieve basic business functions, leading to further lost productivity so non-technical marketing accounts can advertise non-performing ISO 9000 services.

Of course, having mugged the goose that laid the golden egg for its feathers, the division is liquidated, folks fired for non-performance, and accounts outsourced to where folks are grateful for beans and rice.

Boeing, Enron, Tyco, --(current employer)--, Citigroup, First Boston, Parmalait, Arthur Anderson, Qwest and other Baby Bells, Lucent, SCO, it goes on down the list.

NOW, what do you propose the President, (whoever he be) do about this?

[toadeater 0]

Add to that the USS Cole, the embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya, the USMC barracks in Beiruit, the Iran hostage debacle, the cold war, WW1 & 2, (his [great?]-grandfather was in the civil war - so investigate the family for that too), also his brother is govenor of Florida - so investigate Dubya for all the cuban catastrophes, and since he's a white guy he's inherently ... (nm),  and since he claims to be christian also investigate him for ancestrial culpability in the English medival era, lets see... partial liability for all pogroms and anti-islamic crusades, barbarian invasions, heck lets add the great flood and original sin for good measure.

Holy crap! You're right! Bush really is the antichrist after all!  

Even though you're joking, in everything you mentioned after WW1, the Bush family was involved in covertly and overtly. For instance, while George Bush Sr. was a fighter pilot fighting the Japanese, his father Prescott Bush still made some money on the side financing some of Hitler's companies. That's a well known cliche by now I guess... but that doesn't make it untrue.

Fast-forward to Vietnam, Halliburton was already there getting no-bid contracts and overcharging taxpayers. Bush figured if he could get into the CIA, he could really start moving the money around because the CIA's  budgets could be classified. The silly voters would never even know where their money was going.

Meanwhile in the middle-east, the Bush family is busy making oil and real-estate deals with the Bin Ladens and other Islamic terror leaders. Later they make a deal with a guy named Saddam, and give him free reign to gas those evil Iranians. They'd be sure to get rid of him once they didn't need him anymore though.

Then there's their South American operations with the right-wing narco-militias and various dictators. Similar things go on in Southeast Asia and Pakistan.

The key thing to remember here is that the Bush family and their allies involved in all this did much of it through private business dealings, behind the scenes, even while people like Carter and Clinton were in office. It's business, but it involves things like terrorism, war, and drug smuggling... that's national security I'd say. Reagan probably wasn't lying when he said he didn't know what the hell was going on either, because Bush was the one that did it!

Quote[/b] ]If you choose to turn politics into jihad, it makes no difference whether you vote for Dean or Bush or Sharpton.

Nice how you threw in the word jihad there.

Quote[/b] ]Of course, having mugged the goose that laid the golden egg for its feathers, the division is liquidated, folks fired for non-performance, and accounts outsourced to where folks are grateful for beans and rice.

Boeing, Enron, Tyco, --(current employer)--, Citigroup, First Boston, Parmalait, Arthur Anderson, Qwest and other Baby Bells, Lucent, SCO, it goes on down the list.

NOW, what do you propose the President, (whoever he be) do about this?

Start throwing the crooks in jail as fast as you can round them up. Don't tell me they're irreplaceable, that's exactly what they'd like you to believe. Gee, that would be woefully ineffecient, wouldn't it? Why, stockholders might actually lose a great deal of money in the short term.

They'll lose alot more than money if this keeps up.

[IceFire 0]

Ofcourse President Bush will win. He is the best president of out time. He is strong, decisive, and moral. He knows what needs to be done in the world and he does it. Even if it is against popular opinion among liberals.

He is truly a great leader. He doesn't waver, and he does and saysa what he believes in, which is the defense of the country against foreigners who want to destroy us and showed us how willing they are to do so on Sept 11.

Bush is willing to say and take action on things that most conservative Americans believe, but gets little coverage by most liberal media.

While I am not religious, I was raised in a christian environment. And Bush is willing to stand up for his beliefs. That takes real guts in typical "politically correct" american politics BS.

Anyone who says that he should not let his personal religious beliefs affect his policy are idiots. How can one not let their personal beliefs affect your decisions. Fact is what you believe in is obviously going to affect your decisions. No way around that fortunately.

Bush is a nationalist. He is willing to do what it takes to defend the United States.

Liderals/democrats are by their very nature spineless cowards. They will do whatever to please the public and will change their beliefs to accomodate the media. They have no solid ideas because of this. They have no sense of purpose. They are just there to paint a pretty picture and make all the world a happy place like some fairy tale.

I don't believe for a second that Howard Dean has a solid belief system. He is just faking energy and anger to stir up popularity. Bush has a solid belief system. I would never hesitate to follow him because he obviously thinks about issues in the same manner that I do.

Not only that, thanks to Bush, Saddam Hussein, the most hated dictator who reigned free up to some weeks ago is now in PRISON! Can you really imagine that? I mean could you have some months ago?

Bush also went after terrorists wherever they live. Those words are so true. They killed almost 3 thousand of us on 9/11. Now we are killing them wherever we can find them. What other president would do what needed to be done with such honesty and passion?

I honestly believe that President Bush is the greatest president of our time. There is so much that he has done since 9/11, and the bold straight honest way he has done so is the way a leader should be.

Thank god for Bush.

[shrike 0]

Quote[/b] ]I honestly believe that President Bush is the greatest president of our time.  There is so much that he has done since 9/11, and the bold straight honest way he has done so is the way a leader should be.  

*giggle*

Sorry for not replying to this in a constructive manner I wouldn't even know where to start....

[havocsquad 0]

Obviously you live in a make believe world IceFire where foriegn policy is black/white clear and everyone is doing great and there is no economic problem.  This thinking also treats allies like they can be used as tissue paper and then discarded at will.

The defense of the U.S. is a very large priority, but it comes SECOND to the domestic needs of the people it is supposed to protect.  Without properly taking care of these domestic needs first, the greatest national defense in the world can be reduced to a third world class military.  

That's what happened to the USSR, they put national defense and military spending above all else, including putting it above economic stability and look what happened, their socialist government collasped and eight years of extreme economic hardships resulted after.

Without a solid and well performing economy, there IS NO prosperity and thus national defense is weakened.

In addition, tax cuts do NOT help the economy.  Most people saved that money instead of spent it because most average Americans can't take risks with times still being VERY hard.

Tax cuts also don't address the long term needs of the lower class income and those in poverty, 400 dollars MIGHT give you one month's worth of food and pay off a few bills, then it is GONE for that year.

Right now the U.S. Congress needs to focus on finding effective ways to control health care costs and finding ways to make health insurance more available.

The tution for many public universities in the U.S. has increased a HUGE amount because federal funds have been comming up short and states have to raise prices because tax cuts are gutting federal services to states and people in need.

True, there will always be abuses of the government and its programs to help others.  However, many programs are vital to helping Americans so they can focus on their jobs and improve their ability to function in the economy and take care of vital needs.

I can personally vouch that for the working poor, lower class, and many of the middle class that unemployment is pure hell in the U.S.  Finding any job will insurance or benifits is about next to immpossible, especially now since most companies are going overseas and most U.S. companies rarely offer full time positions anymore.

Basically, if you don't have a college degree, you don't have much of a chance of any decent employment in the U.S. now.     That means most of the lower class and working poor are screwed...

[Acecombat 0]

Ofcourse President Bush will win.   He is the best president of out time.   He is strong, decisive, and moral.  He knows what needs to be done in the world and he does it.  Even if it is against popular opinion among liberals.

He is truly a great leader.  He doesn't waver, and he does and saysa what he believes in, which is the defense of the country against foreigners who want to destroy us and showed us how willing they are to do so on Sept 11.

Bush is willing to say and take action on things that most conservative Americans believe, but gets little coverage by most liberal media.

While I am not religious, I was raised in a christian environment.  And Bush is willing to stand up for his beliefs.  That takes real guts in typical "politically correct" american politics BS.  

Anyone who says that he should not let his personal religious beliefs affect his policy are idiots.  How can one not let their personal beliefs affect your decisions.  Fact is what you believe in is obviously going to affect your decisions.  No way around that fortunately.  

Bush is a nationalist.  He is willing to do what it takes to defend the United States.  

Liderals/democrats are by their very nature spineless cowards.  They will do whatever to please the public and will change their beliefs to accomodate the media.   They have no solid ideas because of this.  They have no sense of purpose.  They are just there to paint a pretty picture and make all the world a happy place like some fairy tale.

I don't believe for a second that Howard Dean has a solid belief system.  He is just faking energy and anger to stir up popularity.  Bush has a solid belief system.  I would never hesitate to follow him because he obviously thinks about issues in the same manner that I do.

Not only that, thanks to Bush, Saddam Hussein, the most hated dictator who reigned free up to some weeks ago is now in PRISON!   Can you really imagine that?  I mean could you have some months ago?

Bush also went after terrorists wherever they live.  Those words are so true.  They killed almost 3 thousand of us on 9/11.  Now we are killing them wherever we can find them.   What other president would do what needed to be done with such honesty and passion?

I honestly believe that President Bush is the greatest president of our time.  There is so much that he has done since 9/11, and the bold straight honest way he has done so is the way a leader should be.    

Thank god for Bush.

So what did you get after this post?

A no-hassle ticket to getting a Green card or what?

Like shrike i dont even know from where to start so sorry.