Politics

[Sabattiboy]

View attachment 481699

To glue underwear on so monkeypox can't be spread??

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

I know that those who have never been involved with the actual running of a large corporation are eager to blame them for all the nation's economic woes. But that is little more than a display of ignorance with respect to the capitalist business model. That lack of experience or understanding is no doubt why such denouncements against corporations and the capitalist system as a whole are usually shrillest when uttered by the inexperienced and often uneducated AOC's and neo-socialist millennials of our brave new world.

No business has the ability to adjust the dials in the way many suggest. Even the largest corporations have little interest in gross. The model is all about margin. A highly successful defense corporation (the type with which I have the most experience) runs profit margins of around 12%. GM nets 5-8%. A small corporation is striving for 20% and trying to make ends meet at the 10-15% it actually achieves. No one is doubling the price on anything an reaping the rewards of a trapped consumer market. Yes, we fought for every point in margin. And yes, if we did well - say, turning 12 into 13 - we were rewarded by share holder confidence in our stock. But the real advantage was competitive against our peers.

Large corporations do contribute to campaigns - both sides. Mine built the finest military command and control systems in the world (also amazing creations like the Webb Telescope). 90% of our contracts were US government. We owed it to our stock holders (who own a public company), to do everything in our power to insure funding for our contracts.

Did we try to reduce overhead? Of course, just like every family business in the country. My unit closed a major campus in Los Angeles and moved that work to Huntsville, Alabama. There I could hire the same quality software, hardware, and systems engineers for 2/3's the cost of Southern California. We nevertheless moved every single family that was willing to relocate. A software engineer in Alabama at 2/3's the salary of one in California is experiencing 2 to 3X the quality of life of the one who stayed in California. But important to our shareholders was the increased competitiveness of our offerings.

But none of this has squat to do with trying to take advantage of the average guy and his family. It has everything to do with being able to win business in an ever more competitive (internationally as well as domestic) marketplace.

The economic fairyland that was the US in the post World War II world lasted barely two generations - for most - one and a half. It was an anomaly resulting from victory in the greatest war in the planet's history. Things are indeed different now as we look at everything from a 401k rather than a defined retirement to the growing need for skilled (and well paid) technicians rather than history majors.

But it is the idle daydreaming of socialist sophomores to blame the ills and changes in the world on some cabal of greedy capitalist businessmen.

Where there is blame to lay is on the head of the constraints put on the exercise of a free market. For instance I know we built the best C4I systems in the world, and I knew we could compete against anyone on a level playing field. But all that would go for naught if a budget line was struck or reduced. Hence, we contributed

Spot on @Red Leg !


Years ago when I was in grad school, we were given a copy of Johnson & Johnson's Credo to read and discuss. An amazing corporate statement, especially given the fact that it was first published in the 1940s. Having spent nearly 40 years working for a large corporation, I'd say where some companies get it wrong today (and the past 20-30 years) by putting the stock holders interest ahead of others (customers, employees, communities, etc).

Johnson & Johnson "Our Credo"

We believe our first responsibility is to the patients, doctors and nurses, to mothers and fathers and all others who use our products and services. In meeting their needs everything we do must be of high quality. We must constantly strive to provide value, reduce our costs and maintain reasonable prices. Customers' orders must be serviced promptly and accurately. Our business partners must have an opportunity to make a fair profit.

We are responsible to our employees who work with us throughout the world. We must provide an inclusive work environment where each person must be considered as an individual. We must respect their diversity and dignity and recognize their merit. They must have a sense of security, fulfillment and purpose in their jobs. Compensation must be fair and adequate and working conditions clean, orderly and safe. We must support the health and well-being of our employees and help them fulfill their family and other personal responsibilities. Employees must feel free to make suggestions and complaints. There must be equal opportunity for employment, development and advancement for those qualified. We must provide highly capable leaders and their actions must be just and ethical.

We are responsible to the communities in which we live and work and to the world community as well. We must help people be healthier by supporting better access and care in more places around the world. We must be good citizens — support good works and charities, better health and education, and bear our fair share of taxes. We must maintain in good order the property we are privileged to use, protecting the environment and natural resources.

Our final responsibility is to our stockholders. Business must make a sound profit. We must experiment with new ideas. Research must be carried on, innovative programs developed, investments made for the future and mistakes paid for. New equipment must be purchased, new facilities provided and new products launched. Reserves must be created to provide for adverse times. When we operate according to these principles, the stockholders should realize a fair return.

 

[JOHN GRENZ]

 

[Wheels]

 

[cpr0312]

Another gem from the party of anti American filth!

 

[wesheltonj]

Spot on @Red Leg !


Years ago when I was in grad school, we were given a copy of Johnson & Johnson's Credo to read and discuss. An amazing corporate statement, especially given the fact that it was first published in the 1940s. Having spent nearly 40 years working for a large corporation, I'd say where some companies get it wrong today (and the past 20-30 years) by putting the stock holders interest ahead of others (customers, employees, communities, etc).

Johnson & Johnson "Our Credo"

We believe our first responsibility is to the patients, doctors and nurses, to mothers and fathers and all others who use our products and services. In meeting their needs everything we do must be of high quality. We must constantly strive to provide value, reduce our costs and maintain reasonable prices. Customers' orders must be serviced promptly and accurately. Our business partners must have an opportunity to make a fair profit.

We are responsible to our employees who work with us throughout the world. We must provide an inclusive work environment where each person must be considered as an individual. We must respect their diversity and dignity and recognize their merit. They must have a sense of security, fulfillment and purpose in their jobs. Compensation must be fair and adequate and working conditions clean, orderly and safe. We must support the health and well-being of our employees and help them fulfill their family and other personal responsibilities. Employees must feel free to make suggestions and complaints. There must be equal opportunity for employment, development and advancement for those qualified. We must provide highly capable leaders and their actions must be just and ethical.

We are responsible to the communities in which we live and work and to the world community as well. We must help people be healthier by supporting better access and care in more places around the world. We must be good citizens — support good works and charities, better health and education, and bear our fair share of taxes. We must maintain in good order the property we are privileged to use, protecting the environment and natural resources.

Our final responsibility is to our stockholders. Business must make a sound profit. We must experiment with new ideas. Research must be carried on, innovative programs developed, investments made for the future and mistakes paid for. New equipment must be purchased, new facilities provided and new products launched. Reserves must be created to provide for adverse times. When we operate according to these principles, the stockholders should realize a fair return.

When was in Grad school getting my Masters in Business, a mission statement was never to be more than 3 sentences long. I would have failed writing something like this. And the goal of the firm was to maximize shareholder wealth. Of course, that was in the 80's when "Greed was Good." Thankfully, I went to law school too and did not have to deal with modern Corporate speak.

 

[John Wasmuth]

 

[Red Leg]

When was in Grad school getting my Masters in Business, a mission statement was never to be more than 3 sentences long. I would have failed writing something like this. And the goal of the firm was to maximize shareholder wealth. Of course, that was in the 80's when "Greed was Good." Thankfully, I went to law school too and did not have to deal with modern Corporate speak.

I think the larger the enterprise and more diverse the product set, the more difficult it is to create a traditional mission statement. Northrop Grumman uses a "Values Statement." To the company's credit, other than incompetence, the surest way to be fired as a director or appointed officer was to be perceived out of step with corporate values.

Our Values​

Our Values support our ability to deliver on our shared purpose. And while our purpose reflects what we do and why we exist, our Values reflect who we are and how we behave. Collectively, our purpose and values are what make our company special. These Values are the bedrock of our culture. What makes them real is our collective actions, decisions and the commitment of our team.

We do the right thing​

We earn trust, act with ethics, integrity and transparency, treat everyone with respect, value diversity and foster safe and inclusive environments.

We do what we promise​

We own the delivery of results, focused on quality outcomes.

We commit to shared success​

We work together to focus on the mission and take accountability for the sustainable success of our people, customers, shareholders, suppliers and communities.

We pioneer​

With fierce curiosity, dedication, and innovation, we seek to solve the world’s most challenging problems.

 

[mdwest]

I think the larger the enterprise and more diverse the product set, the more difficult it is to create a traditional mission statement. Northrop Grumman uses a "Values Statement." To the company's credit, other than incompetence, the surest way to be fired as a director or appointed officer was to be perceived out of step with corporate values.

Our Values​

Our Values support our ability to deliver on our shared purpose. And while our purpose reflects what we do and why we exist, our Values reflect who we are and how we behave. Collectively, our purpose and values are what make our company special. These Values are the bedrock of our culture. What makes them real is our collective actions, decisions and the commitment of our team.

We do the right thing​

We earn trust, act with ethics, integrity and transparency, treat everyone with respect, value diversity and foster safe and inclusive environments.

We do what we promise​

We own the delivery of results, focused on quality outcomes.

We commit to shared success​

We work together to focus on the mission and take accountability for the sustainable success of our people, customers, shareholders, suppliers and communities.

We pioneer​

With fierce curiosity, dedication, and innovation, we seek to solve the world’s most challenging problems.

My company is substantially smaller than Northrop.. but we are also a defense firm...

and we hold a very similar position... the fastest way to be shown the door is to demonstrate nonadherence to corporate values.. (it will get you pushed out of the organization much faster than even incompetence will more often than not..)..

 

[Sabattiboy]

Spot on @Red Leg !


Years ago when I was in grad school, we were given a copy of Johnson & Johnson's Credo to read and discuss. An amazing corporate statement, especially given the fact that it was first published in the 1940s. Having spent nearly 40 years working for a large corporation, I'd say where some companies get it wrong today (and the past 20-30 years) by putting the stock holders interest ahead of others (customers, employees, communities, etc).

Johnson & Johnson "Our Credo"

We believe our first responsibility is to the patients, doctors and nurses, to mothers and fathers and all others who use our products and services. In meeting their needs everything we do must be of high quality. We must constantly strive to provide value, reduce our costs and maintain reasonable prices. Customers' orders must be serviced promptly and accurately. Our business partners must have an opportunity to make a fair profit.

We are responsible to our employees who work with us throughout the world. We must provide an inclusive work environment where each person must be considered as an individual. We must respect their diversity and dignity and recognize their merit. They must have a sense of security, fulfillment and purpose in their jobs. Compensation must be fair and adequate and working conditions clean, orderly and safe. We must support the health and well-being of our employees and help them fulfill their family and other personal responsibilities. Employees must feel free to make suggestions and complaints. There must be equal opportunity for employment, development and advancement for those qualified. We must provide highly capable leaders and their actions must be just and ethical.

We are responsible to the communities in which we live and work and to the world community as well. We must help people be healthier by supporting better access and care in more places around the world. We must be good citizens — support good works and charities, better health and education, and bear our fair share of taxes. We must maintain in good order the property we are privileged to use, protecting the environment and natural resources.

Our final responsibility is to our stockholders. Business must make a sound profit. We must experiment with new ideas. Research must be carried on, innovative programs developed, investments made for the future and mistakes paid for. New equipment must be purchased, new facilities provided and new products launched. Reserves must be created to provide for adverse times. When we operate according to these principles, the stockholders should realize a fair return.

Does "A fair return" still fit these days?

 

[Sabattiboy]

Remember Pharma bro that sat in a congressional hearing and laughed at them?
Facebook leader at a congressional hearing getting winked at and promising to "Look into the facebook allegations?
Leaders that used to have character, morals and personal integrity.
Those would be considered weaknesses in a leader by many today.

AND YES, THERE ARE STILL LEADERS AND PEOPLE WITH THOSE ATTRIBUTES.

1 Kings 18:1-16
Although he served as overseer of the household of the evil King Ahab, this Obadiah remained a devoted servant of God. He is known for safeguarding 100 prophets of Yahweh from Ahab’s wife, the wicked Queen Jezebel, by secreting them in a cave and bringing them food and water. He also served as emissary between Ahab and the prophet Elijah.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

View attachment 482026

"And the trees are now all kept equal by hatchet, axe and sword."
-- Neil Peart

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Spot on @Red Leg !


Years ago when I was in grad school, we were given a copy of Johnson & Johnson's Credo to read and discuss. An amazing corporate statement, especially given the fact that it was first published in the 1940s. Having spent nearly 40 years working for a large corporation, I'd say where some companies get it wrong today (and the past 20-30 years) by putting the stock holders interest ahead of others (customers, employees, communities, etc).

Johnson & Johnson "Our Credo"

We believe our first responsibility is to the patients, doctors and nurses, to mothers and fathers and all others who use our products and services. In meeting their needs everything we do must be of high quality. We must constantly strive to provide value, reduce our costs and maintain reasonable prices. Customers' orders must be serviced promptly and accurately. Our business partners must have an opportunity to make a fair profit.

We are responsible to our employees who work with us throughout the world. We must provide an inclusive work environment where each person must be considered as an individual. We must respect their diversity and dignity and recognize their merit. They must have a sense of security, fulfillment and purpose in their jobs. Compensation must be fair and adequate and working conditions clean, orderly and safe. We must support the health and well-being of our employees and help them fulfill their family and other personal responsibilities. Employees must feel free to make suggestions and complaints. There must be equal opportunity for employment, development and advancement for those qualified. We must provide highly capable leaders and their actions must be just and ethical.

We are responsible to the communities in which we live and work and to the world community as well. We must help people be healthier by supporting better access and care in more places around the world. We must be good citizens — support good works and charities, better health and education, and bear our fair share of taxes. We must maintain in good order the property we are privileged to use, protecting the environment and natural resources.

Our final responsibility is to our stockholders. Business must make a sound profit. We must experiment with new ideas. Research must be carried on, innovative programs developed, investments made for the future and mistakes paid for. New equipment must be purchased, new facilities provided and new products launched. Reserves must be created to provide for adverse times. When we operate according to these principles, the stockholders should realize a fair return.

That last part about responsibility to stockholders is in my opinion where things have gone astray with too many public companies in the USA. J&J acknowledged it was a responsibility and I agree with that, but they listed it as the final responsibility. And it came with some caveats. Too many companies in my opinion are focused first on stockholders and with a short term view. This leads to decisions that appear to be good in the short term, and may very well be, but all too often ignore long term impacts and therefore a negative result for the future.

 

[sgt_zim]

My .02 HIstorically, the middle class is an anomaly. It grew out of the ruins of WW2 when the rest of the world's manufacturing and infrastructure was basically in ruins Once the rest of the world rebuilt, it was game over for our manufacturing and some service monopolies. Who would have ever imagined General Motors going bankrupt? It also didn't help when the U.S. stuck with th e imperial measuring system.

Kinda depends on how you define middle class. If you're speaking specifically about the blue collar middle class, I'd largely tend to agree with you. A healthy middle class grows or shrinks in proportion to the amount of liberty a given society enjoys, at least in my view.

Post WWII was certainly an anomaly within that context, but not in the way you might think. Income taxes were ridiculously high back in the 1950s, over 90% for the top marginal rate. If we hadn't been the only game in town with a productive, non-war-torn economy that wouldn't recover until the 1970s or 1980s, the tax scheme back then would have crippled us and all but destroyed the middle class. The middle class flourished precisely because if anybody in the world wanted anything useful, they had to buy it from us, irrespective of cost.

Look at what taxes and regulations are doing to the US middle class today, now that we live in an uber-competitive world. Too many in our government think we can tax/regulate ad infinitum and have the economy in this market environment suffer no consequences, the way there appeared to be on consequences for such mischief 70 years ago.

If you've read Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson," you'll understand the seen vs the unseen at play here.

 

[sgt_zim]

Ah, "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead", two works that have been very formative for my younger years. A good core set of beliefs can be extracted, but the philosophy, in order to work in real human populations, is incomplete in my opinion. The philosophy needs to be softened a little towards that bottom 10th percentile, IQ of 80 or below, equivalent to about 1 in 20 people. The reason being that those people have very little options remaining to be net-contributors to society, they often have difficulty in making the right financial, family, substance usage choices, and therefore will always need extra help and protection by the rest of the population. (The US military for instance has a treshold of 80 IQ points or so, below which they have determined that someone will not be in a position to be a net contributor to the mission). A philosophy that does not account for (almost) all members of the population, as well as (almost) all kinds of personalities, is doomed not to work. Another reason why communism can never work, neither can hard core libertarianism. Both can work perfectly with certain types of people, but not with an overall population.

I believe that the US value system, where charity is much more engrained into the culture, combined with Rand's philosophy, is why it had that much traction there. In Europe this charity in financial contributions, is much less present. Which is why Rand's philosophy was much less appreciated here and seen as way too harsh.

Funny, in a way. Rand wasn't even opposed to charity, it was simply her view that charity isn't the great virtue that people believe it is.

She actually touched directly on this in The Fountainhead. If she made much reference to it in AS, I don't remember it.

 

[JOHN GRENZ]

 

[Wheels]

 

[cpr0312]

View attachment 482062

It's comical, typical two faced liberal! I'll endorse it as long as it doesn't affect me!

 

[Doug3006]

Seems to me that the ”need” for 2 incomes is partially self-inflicted for many of us. Our expectations as consumers have grown exponentially over the last 65 years. Some examples:

We’ve bought into the belief that everyone should go to college. So before lots of people turn a productive screw in life, they blow $100k or more on college. For too many, it’s a bad investment no matter who pays for it.

When you first got married, how many of you even dreamed that you’d spend 20 grand (or a whole lot more) to marry off one of your kids?

My mom and dad had one car that satisfied all of our transportation needs for years before we got a 2nd car. My neighborhood resembles a used car lot. Every driving-age member of the family has one. Yes, I’m part of the problem here.

Kids on my street participate in “select” sports teams that cost their parents thousands of dollars a year. Traveling outside the state is common, and expensive. Plus, their kids are generally awful at sports. Same thing for dance lessons, riding lessons, etc.

My wife had a great job as a systems analyst when we had our first child. We agonized over the decision but ultimately decided that she would quit to stay home until the kids were in all day school. Then she took a MUCH lower paying, part time job so she could drop them at school and pick them up at the end of their school day. Sacrificing 50% of our income was not something we did without big adjustments in our standard of living….but totally worth it.

It’s hard to argue this way while planning a 5th trip to Africa, but I guess the point I’m making is that no one is forcing us to live the way we do. We don’t have to buy into everything our consumeristic society says we “need,”

 

[Hogpatrol]

@sgt_zim Adding to your post. After WW2, there were cheap VA and FHA mortgages, veterans pensions, along with the GI bill which allowed the middle class to flourish. My father, a disabled WW2 vet, paid the mortgage with his monthly pension check. Fast forward three decades, rebuilt economies in Europe and Japan spelled the end of U.S.'s monopolies. Put the Far East and now China in the mix and it's game over for the middle class in this country.. The general public just doesn't know it yet because government debt is still just a number. At some point, that chicken will come home to roost.