"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.net...
"John T. McCracken" wrote in message
...


You may want to consult the big stock holders about that. They'll tell
you
that the businesses are run for the CEO's and other top executives,

The CEO and other top executives ARE the people that actually run the
company.

Yeah, but that isn't what I said. I said they run it FOR the CEO's and top
execs., and, if you read your large-print edition of the Wall Street
Journal
every day, you'll learn that there are a hell of a lot of stockholders --
particularly big fund managers who have serious fiduciary
responsibilities -- who are screaming their heads off about it as we
speak.
They probably don't use the word "fiduciary" in the Flypaper Edition, but
you'll get the idea. g

Now Ed, you are being rude. True, I chose not to live in NY, but I have
lived in many places, some quite urban and urbane.


The human element guaranties that some will operate in a corrupt
self serving manner. As we have seen, some of those will be caught, and
serve time in prison, in spite of previous fame or position. Most, will
run
the business in a way to gain max benifit for the stockholder, that is
where
the money comes from.

Oh, come, all ye faithful...

John, the fact is (and this has been editorialized like crazy over the
past
year, in the financial press) that the corporate crooks are popping up
like
groundhogs on a sunny day because so many regulations have been dropped,
especially banking regulations, which has encouraged a whole swarm
of...er,
indiscretions, some of which have led to outright lawbreaking.

I'm pretty sure I haven't refuted that statement.



The reason that Ken Lay isn't in prison right now is that the prosecution
has been having a hell of a time finding a law that he broke, and the only
way they're going to get him is to get someone else from Enron (at least
several someone-else's, actually, or he'll go scott-free) to turn state's
evidence. The financial evidence they have, which should get him 20 years
if
there was real justice in the current regulations over executive fiduciary
responsibility, isn't worth squat, because everything that's on the books
is
legal. That is to say, he isn't legally responsible for it.

His final fate is still uncertain, the market has punished him quite a bit,
hopefully the legal system will too, we will see.


The "working stiffs" are 'way down the totem pole. Wealthy
individuals and institutional investors...

Those institutional investors are many times the "working stiff" that
you
say has little influence, an example, the United Brotherhood of
Carpenters
and Jointers (the carpenters union), is a huge investment machine, they
have
many billions to invest, all belonging to those working stiffs.

Yeah, that's nice. So the union has institutional clout. Is that who you
have your 401K with? Do they do what you tell them to do with your money?
Or
do they tell YOU what they're going to do with your money?

I don't have a 401K.




control the market. The 401K's are a
pile of money that other people use for their own purposes.

Of course they are! When you deposite money in the bank, buy a bond, or
invest in any vehicle available, someone is using your money for their
own
purposes, that's the whole point. In return, I get a return.

No, no, no. That isn't what I was talking about. The point is that your
401K
is being used for its voting power to control as much of the company as
possible. Whether it's being controlled in a way you might want is
problematic. In fact, it's probably invisible, as your institutional
investor strong-arms the BoD in the back room...


The actual 401K
holder is just there for the ride. He can check his investments all he
wants
but his control over anything is largely illusory.

He has control over what he invests his money in. Of course he doesn't
get
to run the company, he is an INVESTOR. He can and should expect a
reasonable
return on his money, he gets to choose when and where and even if he
invests. If you want to have "control", then start and run a company.
This
is totally seperate from the role of investor.

John, let me ask you this: What would you do if your investment stayed
flat,
or lost a little, with no dividends, and you learned that the CEO just
cashed in a stock option for $50 million and got a $12 million bonus for
his
miserable performance last year, which he jumped on the company Gulfstream
to take to his account in the Caymans?

Would you be a little ****ed? Might you want to take your stock investment
elsewhere? Where might that be? Maybe your sock? Because a whole lot of
those CEO's are packing off with their stock options and bonuses these
days,
and it's getting harder to find a company that won't **** you off -- if
you
really know what's going on there, that is.

I don't think I have ever defended crooked CEO's, I'm pretty sure I have
never defended any crook. I'm aware of what many CEO's and their cohorts
are doing to the companies they run, and don't condone much of it. In the
industry I often work in, oil & gas, or the popular term today "energy",
companies are on a path to disaster in search of the holy grail of the
moment - the next quarters returns. Planning for the long term health of an
"energy" company is becoming rare. My little company was working for Enron
when they crumpled by the way.




Yes, please tell us about the Enron executives who are doing time. g
What
kind of time is Ken Lay doing? His last big stock sale netted him
$101.3
million, which, by all accounts, he still has. It's probably some very
good
time indeed.

You let cases of unethical business practices taint the entire system.
On
this planet you will NEVER be free of greed and corruption, the best you
can
hope for is a reasonable amount of corrupt individuals being caught and
punished, hopefully persuading others that the choice to defraud and
cheat
others is a poor choice that can lead to ruin.

How about reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act? That will at least get their
sticky little fingers out of the big-time stock-hyping business. The
harder
you make it for them to be crooks, the better it will be.

Agreed, and the harsher the punishment for being a crook the better.




The "free market" system has its ups and downs. As a principle, it has
a
lot
going for it. If it were practiced according to the principles, it
would
be
terrific.

Name me ONE economy in the world where you would rather try and excell,
outside the U.S. People die trying to reach the shore, not because of
the
weather, because of the freedom, and freedom of opportunity.

Why should I name one? What does that have to do with the point, unless
your
position is that we have a stinking mess in our banking and corporate
management systems, but they have even bigger stinking messes elsewhere?

I'm pretty sure that comment had nothing to do with you or your comments, it
was a responce to that cat claiming that China is as free market as the U.S.


Is that where you are with this?



The valid argument here is over who is establishing the context. It
isn't
easy to see from the ground. Given the opportunities we have, many of
us
may
not care how the tune is being called. Many others do.

I pity anyone that thinks others are "calling their tune", you and only
you
are responsible for your position in this life, given the limitations of
your circumstances. At no time on earth has a population had the freedom
and
opportunity afforded you and I. I chose to try and take advantage of
that
opportunity, knowing it is less than perfect. Indeed, power brokers
wheel,
deal and operate at every level from my county planning and zoning dept.
to
the highest levels of international banking. I know and recognize these
things, I don't however let them affect my ability to enjoy my short
little
life or my pursuit of my version of the "American Dream".

I don't either, John. I just try to avoid self-delusions. In fact, I spend
a
large part of my week studying such things, including whose pockets are
being lined with money from your 401K, which should be going to you.

I'm pretty sure you're not talking specifically about "my" 401K, but again I
don't have one

JTMcC, uneducated hick : )



--
Ed Huntress
(remove "3" from email address for email reply)