John R. Carroll wrote:
"Stuart Grey" wrote in message
...

John R. Carroll wrote:


Sue,
Any large organization has high and low value emps. Governments are no
different in this regard. I here a lot of blow hard talk to the effect

that

the government work force is useless and overpaid at any price. That

simply

isn't true and I wondered if it wouldn't be productive to demonstrate

that.

You here a lot about 200k per year tit's on a bull but it's rare to see

the

opposite. Must not be as news worthy as Natalie Holloway but it's much

more

important in the grand scheme of things.
I will say this, however. At 40K and living where you do, you are 3 to 6
months from homelessness, public assistance or both after 18 years of
service. At least you are if you are on your own and absent an

inheritance

or really substantial savings or assets. That's not right. You probably

see

exactly this every day at work. I hope Arnold doesn't **** up your

pension.

You'll need it.

One of the things taught by the Harvard Business School in their MBA
program is how to do hit and run management.

You literally hand the shareholder's equity back to the shareholder to
get the stock price up. Then you take your bonus and stock options and
get the hell out of dodge and move up the ladder to your next CEO job
before the company you plundered hits the dirt.

None of these nitwits, and they are nitwits, is worth multimillions of
dollars. No way.

And if you look at these particular five, they have lost money for the
shareholders BIG TIME.

The reasons why they can do it is because of things like interlocking
boards of directors (you help me plunder my company, and I'll help you
plunder yours) and set ups to thwart the will of the shareholders. These
people are flat out criminals who should be thrown in the deepest,
darkest jails, they are a true threat to our capitalist economy, and an
enemy of free people everywhere.



Stuart,
You won't get much of an argument from me beyond the fact that unethical and
illegal are two different thing.
The boards of directors acts for the share holders in any corporation. They
always reflect whatever the actual owners think they want.

No they don't. Some businesses set up stock programs where the company
buys stock and the board of directors control it and vote the stock. Of
course, they vote themselves their own jobs.

Since many retirement funds and mutual funds vote their shares in
proportion to the votes of other shareholders, these shares owned and
kept by the company leverage a larger percentage.

And when was the last time a board member up for election wasn't someone
picked by the board itself? They make the rules as to who can get on the
ballot, and unless some outsider buys a whole lot of shares, it's pretty
much closed to their plundering.

That is really the key you know. Greedy owners beget greedy management. If
that weren't true, hit and run wouldn't work. One fix is to make owners
responsible for the outcome - personally. You'd get good behavior then - I'd
guaranty it. This model gets that result everywhere it is operating.