"ATP*" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
m...

"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.

Unfortunately not always true, and that's why corporate governance has
been
an issue. The boards and CEOs have put self interest ahead of shareholder
interest in too many cases.


When they do they breach their duty as fiduciaries and commiting a crime.
This is one of two main reasons outside directors exist.
Small cap's or closely held corporations are another story. The tend to be
both nepotistic and incestuous.
In any event it's all priced into the market and flows out to the public as
increased costs to the consumers. A hidden tax if you will.
An entire industry has been built around insuring directors against the
litigation arising from unhappy shareholders.
There really isn't a level playing field in the equity markets and there
shouldn't be.


--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com