Republican vs. Democrat = two sides of the same coin. Companies are in business to make money... duh. Our representatives are "supposed" to represent our interests--"our" as in "we the people". Of course, if they were ever to do that, I'm sure half the population would faint from the shock.
you have a choice though: You're not forced to do business with anyone...Except the Gov't.
I can't see why making a profit = evil If I am selling something, I want the highest price I can get for it. Does that make me evil? If I am buying something I want to pay the least amount I can for it. Does that make me evil?
Except corporations earn their money, they don't steal it by Federal mandate just to set it on fire in corrupt waste-filled bullcrap.
Just look at oil, with all the screaming that goes on about Exxon profits, government makes 6X the "profit" off a gallon of gas than Exxon does. Exxon makes about $0.10/gal profit per gallon and when you sell as much product as they do it equates to insane amounts of profit, in the tens of billions of dollars.
BUT, the Federal government excise tax is $0.184/gal plus there is state excise tax, sales tax etc. In California for example, while Exxon makes their hefty $0.10 per gallon, government makes $0.639/gal. »www.californiagasprices.com/Tax_Info.aspx So when evil corporate Exxon makes $10B, the goverment rakes in well over $60B. When evil Exxon makes $40B, the government rakes in well over $240B.
PLUS government gets to tax Exxon on those billions in profit and they tax the crap out of everyone who works at Exxon (in the U.S.)...even more insane government profit off Exxon's efforts. Meanwhile government didn't do a damn thing for it except endlessly vilify them. -- POKE 65495,1
It's not that profit is evil. It's the lying that people do to get it, and get more of it, that's evil. It's that whole "money is the root of all evil" thing. Those who seek it go to the places where they can get it.
No, I'm just pointing out that when someone claims that Gov't is just plain wasteful, the other option is to hire a company to do the same job. When the Gov't does it, there may be waste, but not necessarily. When a company does it, much more cost will be extracted from the citizens because a profit *must* be earned. And typically, gov't waste is a pittance compared to corporate profits earned on our backs. This is particularly inherent is gov't backed monopolies like communications.
Wrong. It was supply and demand. Increased demand from China and India put pressure on a limited resource along with speculators and it was OPEC and other petro-nations that got the biggest money...funding idiots like Hugo Chavez.
Exxon got their money from the pure volume of purchases and government got theirs by theft.
And given that sales tax (8.75% here in Cali) is on the price of the gas, the more expensive the gas got, the more insane profits the government made on it. The California sales tax alone eclipses the profits Exxon makes on the gas in this state.
In fact when prices started to drop, Sacramento pissed and moaned, wanting to raise the excise tax to compensate for the drop in obscene sales tax revenues that they had reaped and quickly wasted. -- POKE 65495,1
Oh, sorry, you're right. China and India went out and found their own supply - that's why the price went down. NOT! If you understood how the futures market (and other trading) works, you'd understand that the cost was a result of artificial demand. Why do you think the cost dropped by 50% in 1 month - right around the threats of investigation?
Enron's stock jockies did the same thing in CA. They went down for it.
But I didn't say that companies should give away their goods/services for free? Did I? It is worse for the citizen because they are paying more for the same thing. But companies have a right to earn a profit. If I can get health care as an option from the gov't for less because no profit, I'll appreciate that option.
No guy, the world economy took a massive shit over a period of just a few weeks and that is the ONLY reason the price dropped. Oil is sold on the futures market and you had oil producers producing and stockpiling tons of oil based on economic conditions and demand before the economy went over the cliff. Oil traders see the economy instantly tank and they get out and fast, futures prices tank. So now you have few takers for the supply and like all inventories they were far larger than any demand...so the price dropped.
Now we are starting to see the signs of an economic recovery so what is happening, oil is back to $70bbl because traders see increases future demand, oil producers are producing at rates suitable for a tanked economy instead of a recovered one.
Simply put, with the dying economy you had dying demand, price drops. With a recovering economy you have resurgent demand, price is going up. And even with a mediocre recovery, the huge inventory imbalance that got the price way down so fast, starts to correct itself and the price goes back up just as it is doing now.
But I didn't say that companies should give away their goods/services for free?
You very clearly stated that making a profit is worse than government waste. Hence, you are saying that a company making no profit is good. A company making no profit (a non-profit if you will) is essentially giving its goods/services away for free after they have covered their own expenses. The economy couldnt exist if every company was non-profit, so your argument is fundamentally flawed.
It is worse for the citizen because they are paying more for the same thing.
How do you figure that? The money needs to come from somewhere. If you arent paying for it directly it is financed by taxes. Given how badly the government manages these programs, the end result is you will pay more that you would have for an inferior product/service.
But companies have a right to earn a profit. If I can get health care as an option from the gov't for less because no profit, I'll appreciate that option.
You arent really getting it for less. The money for health care still needs to come from someplace, so the gub'ment will need to raise taxes to cover the difference. -- D-Day; If you can read this thank a soldier -The United States of America-
Hey, one thing can be better or worse than another, but rating the value doesn't invalidate the service. You insist on stating that I said that services should be given away - this was never said or implied. It's a stupid idea anyway.
typically, gov't waste is a pittance compared to corporate profits earned on our backs.
I read that statement in utter disbelief. You actually mean that? Has any corporation EVER wasted even half as much money as the recent stimulus package?
There's no doubt that many (if not most) corporations are run by greedy people that would sell everything good and wholesome for a buck. There's also no doubt that many (if not most) politicians - especially at the federal level - are greedy people looking out solely for their own careers and back pockets who will sanction absolutely anything that's politically expedient, regardless of how badly people get hurt.
I think you have some serious blinders on. -- It's a trick. Get an axe. - Ash
Sure, but since no profit needs to be earned on the gov't insurance, the cost will be much lower to the citizen,or they'll get more for their money.
Thats a total fallacy. Unlike a "regular" company that needs to make a profit in order to survive, the government doesnt have that restriction. They will (and have!) run the program into the ground and simply raise taxes to cover their inability to manage it properly.
Look at any gov run institution if you dont believe me. Since nobody is held to a standard (since they arent out to make a profit right?), it foments a culture of laziness. Take the DMV for example, those people are total bums and literally dont care about anything other than stamping their time cards. Now take those same "overly qualified " morons and simply place them in the back office that controls nationalized health care. Is THAT really your idea of how things should be?? -- D-Day; If you can read this thank a soldier -The United States of America-
And typically, gov't waste is a pittance compared to corporate profits earned on our backs.
Total government liabilities now exceed $63,000,000,000,000.00, that is over $500,000.00 per household. National yearly deficit has quadrupled in just 1 year to $1,800,000,000,000.00. The CBO projects that our national debt will DOUBLE in just the next decade to $20,000,000,000,000.00. Servicing that debt alone will cost $1,000,000,000,000.00 a year.
Don't even think of comparing corporate profit which is EARNED as a productive element of society to the level of government waste that we are seeing and have seen over the last 30 years and particularly over the last 8-9. -- POKE 65495,1
footballdude There's no doubt that many (if not most) corporations are run by greedy people that would sell everything good and wholesome for a buck. There's also no doubt that many (if not most) politicians - especially at the federal level - are greedy people looking out solely for their own careers and back pockets who will sanction absolutely anything that's politically expedient, regardless of how badly people get hurt.
Isn't that the truth...its as if people believe that corporations have a monopoly on greed. The same types of greedy people running the corporations are also running the government. Corps at least have competition and shareholders to keep themselves in check. The gov't? There's no competition to keep the gov't in check, they can tax all they want and waste all they want. No one is going to run the gov't out of business. I guess technically the gov't answers to the voters, but when voters only have two choices, there's not much accountability...