When Libs talk about "the big corporations versus the little people" are they revealing only their inability

Question

to go to Yahoo! Finance, look up the stock information on the biggest corporations, look up institutional ownership and discover that it is in the 50%-80% range for most of the "big corporations?" In other words, do they fail to realize that there's no "THEM" - - - - that "THEY" are "US" - that the "big corporations" are the "little people" themselves?

(Or do they just not realize that "institution" means your pension, the mutual funds held in your 401-K, etc..... )?

And are they forgetting how these companies got their money? I.e., through exchange in which consumers - i.e., those same "little guys," GIVE them THEIR money in EXCHANGE for some good or service that they WANT?

Rage "protit at the expense of humand beings" makes no sense - - - they earn a profit through transactions with those human beings. Your argument would be valid only if people chose against their own interests....

Are you saying you know better than everyone else what's best for them?

Answer 1

yeah, those big bad corporations employ thousands & thousands, typically for higher wages than smaller companies. Those bastards.

Answer 2

Im a little disappointed in this one...

"Big business" vs "poor"


First, let me point out a few things: big business is not alive to defend itself and anyone who is anyone in a big business is an employee- the owner will just collect dividends, etc...

When anyone generalizes about a big business, there will be no response. The media isnt stupid enough to call a CEO for an interview and risk alienating a sponsor (or potential sponsor) by possibly implying that X business is what this politician is barking about.

"Poor" in this country is so subjective and arbitrary that many people take the word for granted. Media has no trouble finding people who would want to take that role and be on TV- even if they dont have a TV set to see themselves.

Ok, so what we have here is a situation that most people can identify with and nobody will rebut.

All those things you point out are moot. Every company is different and most are pretty fair. What people fail to realize is that no matter how much you may not like what a company is doing, you do not have to work there- find another job.

Small companies that do not treat their people fairly will soon not be a company, and large companies that do not treat their people fairly could find themselves overextended and in trouble if enough of the people take a stand and refuse to work there under X condition.

...just keep in mind that the business is there because of the employer, not the employee- so be fair in your requests.

That was what unions used to stand for...but are now businesses themselves.

Answer 3

No, we're revealing that we understand economics, history, and the problems that are coming.

Capitalism requires open competition, by allowing constant mergers and allowing businesses to grow larger than they should a few bad things happen.

One is that more and more money gets put in the hands of a few people at the top instead of being spread around. Instead of 50 people owning stores and all taking home $500/day, instead one guy will own 50 stores and take home $25000/day. The other 49 people will have to work for him taking home much less than the $500 a day they could have gotten.

Second it takes away the ability of the consumer to influence business. A localized boycott cannot do anything substantial when there are so many other sources of income for the same business, thus it is virtually impossible for us to fight Wal-mart despite them openly selling things that are harmful (lead paint on kids toys, 'Ol Roy dog food and treats being poisoned, etc.)

Third, it takes away the power of labor. Capitalism relies on the balance of power for labor and business. When Business gets so large that they can ignore labor, labro ends up getting screwed.

All three of these things were major issues in the "Roaring 20's" and all three helped lead to the depression. Big Business destroys the economy by only allowing a select few to participate and benefit.

Answer 4

i glance at it this style-i'm no longer a JW btw- i assume you may evaluate that good judgment to a instructor who on the 1st actual day of faculty instructed the full classification, 'each physique gets an A'. Afterall, the instructor is being style to the youngsters. If all babies already gained an A from the gettgo, what's the element of the instructor coaching the class? and what may be the element of the youngsters doing their homework or listening at school in the event that they already have the A? See, the instructor gave the youngsters the possibility for all of them to have that A and yet she keeps to teach in hopes that those babies can shop that A by potential of their overall performance or by potential of their problematic artwork shown at school. in my opinion, and that i'm sorry if this finished good judgment element does no longer make any experience- it extremely is the comparable with God. He gave us all a risk to have eternal existence despite the fact that it extremely is as much as us to maintain that risk he gave. appropriate?? NO? incorrect? oh properly. it extremely is my opinion. a JW might have an entire distinctive clarification or good judgment hehe

Answer 5

Corporations are effectively controlled by those people with the highest percentage of stock. Mr average Joe if he does have stock does not have enough power to dictate what they do.

In democratic government you have one person one vote. In the corporate world the already rich and powerful have more influence then everybody else.

Why do cons fear democratic government so much and instead favor big business?

Answer 6

You may be giving liberals too much credit. Corporations and big business are the primary evil in our society, for liberals aka socialists. The entire issue is really socialism versus capitalism. To convince people that socialism is better, liberals just cannot offer it as a "straight up" choice. They have to fool you, into believing them.

Socialists have identified their strategy to undermine our society- attack the foundation of capitalism. Liberals have been dispatched to attack family, marriage (by trivializing it through gay marriage rights), faith, patriotism and business. Some of these liberals are just lemmings, manipulated by the dedicated socialists, like Michael Moore.

If socialism is so great, why do they have to trick people into getting on their bandwagon?

Answer 7

You're a yuppie, aren't you? Do you know how many Americans do not have pensions, mutual funds or 401Ks for that matter? You need to get out and visit ALL of the United States. 45 million+ people in this country can't afford health care and have no idea what a mutual fund or 401K is. Get over your privileged self! Truth is not back; Truth is confused.

Answer 8

No -- they are acknowledging the reality that what's good for the corporation as a whole may be bad for individuals.

The decisions made by the corporation (directors, officers) are not always in the best interests of individual share holders, let alone individuals who are not shareholders.

Just as decisions made by the govt are not always in the best interests of individual citizens.

Answer 9

Do you realize that 5% of the population earns 25% of the wages in this country?

Do you realize that a fair number of Americans can't afford 401k or IRA plans?

Do you realize that American corporations do not have the interests of the American Public as their primary motive? Try profit.

Do you realize how the "Patrician Families" ie the robber barons got their money?

How much corruption are you willing to overlook?????

Answer 10

Translated:

The big corporations thrive by using the "little person's" money, as well as by having more political influence.

Answer 11

thats like trying to tell us the federal government is nothing more than 100 million voters

it isn't

the whole is more than the sum of the parts