Socialist CEOs or Capitalist CEOs: Which is worse?

[Dawkinsrocks]

The wars are going very badly and they will make Vietnam look like a party

 

[bododie]

The wars are going very badly and they will make Vietnam look like a party

Are the suicide bombers the fireworks for the party? Cool.

 

[Andy]

Logic... thought... rational concepts... Thank God for Sih. The first intelligent post by a liberal leaning person.

Good business is made by producing a reliable product that people like. But to keep that product reliable and likeable, you need good employees who are satisfied and giving you their 100%. In order to be a successful business, you need good, satisfied employees who give you 100%.

They innately know and balk at being treated like slaves, and many have resorted to passive-aggression to take out their anger on their employer. Ie: sabotage. (Enjoy the cult movie "Office Space" in your spare time to see an illustration of this basic human edict..)

So, a company that is treating its employees as expendable and replaceable slaves is in danger of being sabotaged. Sabotage leads to poor product performance and whammo, overnight a business can be put under (follow the breadcrumbs backwards now...you can do it! ) by its own mistreatment of its employees.

Now, a socialist CEO would be the most successful over time. And of course the best and most profitable businesses are those that hang in to reap profits over long periods of time. We have some notable exceptions but this seems to be the rule.

Capitalistic CEOs who operate soley on greed and short-sided profiteering at the expense of their foundation, their employees, may get lucky now and then, but by and large they would be like betting on a dark horse with a fractured leg in a race. That weak bone may not break, or it may. The gamble lies with the stockholders.

Nice in theory, but not always true in practice. There are two massive errors in your logic.

First, it is true that you need a good product people want, and good people to make that product. You missed an important thing... the product must be competitive and profitable.

Fannie Mae supplied a good 'product' people wanted. Fannie Mae paid their employees well. But Fannie Mae still wasn't profitable and ultimately ended up bankrupt.

The second error, is the idea of being treated like slaves. The issue is, this is a matter of perspective. On a technical level, no one can be treated like a slave since no one is forced to do any specific job. If you don't like how you are treated... stop being a whiny dork, and leave your stupid job. This isn't communism, and you are not in a Gulag. There is no excuse for committing crimes, and in Office Space, the main char was just a felon.

But, back to perspective. In China, now that they have adopted Capitalism, people are earning $2/hour. An American may claim that's being treated like a slave. But to them, $2/hour is far better than under Communism where they earned less than $1 for the whole day working in a rice patty with no other option. The same would go for any number of countries where people have no options, no freedom, no ability to choose because government controls the economy.

I was in one company where the employees were treated very poorly. I'm in a company now where the employees are treated very well. But I felt like a slave in neither, or any job I've had because I know that if I don't want to work Monday, I don't have to go. We each can choose.

But as far as greed is concerned... why do you give a pass to Franklin Raines and the prior CEOs of Fannie Mae who cooked the books, made false statements about the finances of the company? Franklin Raines did as much or more than what was done at Enron, yet I don't hear the outcry from the left. Why is this? They purposefully shifted and slanted numbers to make it look as though they had made a profit, in order to get an executive bonus. Isn't that greed?

 

[Andy]

The wars are going very badly and they will make Vietnam look like a party

Yes, yes of course. Clearly everything is messed up in your world.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

A British military commander fighting in Afghanistan today says the war is unwinnable.

But you probably know better from watching Fux news.

You gullible fool

 

[Andy]

A British military commander fighting in Afghanistan today says the war is unwinnable.

But you probably know better from watching Fux news.

You gullible fool

I don't watch Fox news. Another sign of the stupidity of your argument.

I know because I've talked to people who are there, and were there. Something you would never know sitting at home looking at your computer screen, writing foolish nonsense online.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

I notice that yet again you don't address the point.

A British Military commander who is fighting there says the war is unwinnable.

There are numerous books out by journalists who have lived and breathed the war who describe it as chaos.

You Americans are just suckers for propaganda.

The US will limp home from both wars in disgrace when they run out of the money to keep fighting them.

They will never win.

It is Nam all over again.

But you think you get the truth from the evil bastards in the whitehouse.

You are too stupid to realise that your government uses propaganda as much as any if not more.

 

[Andy]

I notice that yet again you don't address the point.

A British Military commander who is fighting there says the war is unwinnable.

There are numerous books out by journalists who have lived and breathed the war who describe it as chaos.

You Americans are just suckers for propaganda.

The US will limp home from both wars in disgrace when they run out of the money to keep fighting them.

They will never win.

It is Nam all over again.

But you think you get the truth from the evil bastards in the whitehouse.

You are too stupid to realise that your government uses propaganda as much as any if not more.

There have been the same people said the exact same statements about Korea, WW2, the Soviet Union, and about a million other things. And even in the 1991 gulf war. And like all those before them, they too will be sent to history's unmarked grave of discarded lies.

As for general who says it can't be won... This isn't 'evidence'. It's his opinion. The opinion was that when we fought Saddam, it would be like Vietnam. Instead we trashed him and defeated the entire Iraqi army. They said the same with the Surge. Instead we wiped out the vast majority of the resistance, and turned more provinces over to local Iraqi control.

So... unless you have some actual evidence... like real numbers, or can show we have lost province after province to insurgents, or have something else quantifiable, then your whine session, really is meaningless to me.

If you want to fight with opinions, I can spam a bunch on here that are just as irrelevant as one general complaining they can't win.
(moving to a new thread. All whine sessions off the topic of socialism will be ignored)

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

There is the utter chaos and continued fighting in country.

And it is not getting better.

It is gettinng worse.

That is why all these people who are not prepared to just go along with the US propaganda state that the wars are going very badly.

I suppose you think the troups are all at home and the Iraqis are singinging the star spangled banner.

The Russians couldn't conquer Afghanistan and they live next door.

 

[bododie]

Dawkinsrock,

Is there anything that you do like? lol. I hope you don't make those around you as miserable as you are. You actually actively hate Americans. I think that's hilarious beyond words. I'm starting to thrive on your anger. Cool.

 

[Andy]

He's just a really whiny person. We'll see if he responds to the evidence in the other thread. Of course I already know the answer, but... I like to give people a chance to prove they are not closed minded idiots. That way I can 'show' their stupidity and foolishness, by their own responses.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

Look guys, if the wars were going well you wouldn't have your current leader and the two challengers all with different ( and useless) ideas on what to do next.

It is chaos and the US will limp out of Iraq and Afghanistan in a humiliating withdrawal.

The fact that Andy doesn't understand how much propganda is used in the US illustrates the gullibility of your average American.

That is why they bought that **** about the cowboys being the goodies and the Injuns the baddies.

You will see.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

Bobodie

I am not alone in my disdain of the US right now.

Why?

It is a nation in the grip of relgious fundamentalism

It practises gross abuses of human rights.

It has attacked 50 countries since WW2 mostly to destabalise left of centre Governments even though they were democratically elected. The rest were to steal resources.

It consumes most of the planets resources and pollutes massively.

It is institutionally racist

It is an international bully.

It has a president that came to power through a clearly rigged election.

And yet it preaches democracy, equality and peace.

It is disgustingly hypocritical and it has no regard for the lives of anyone who stands in its way.

That is why I and millions of others want to see the end of this millitarist Junta.

And make no mistake, it is nearly upon us.

 

[bododie]

It is a nation in the grip of relgious fundamentalism

You read too many comic books. Just isn't true.

It practises gross abuses of human rights

. Like China?

It consumes most of the planets resources and pollutes massively

Actually, 25%. Pollution? Again. China, and let's not forget Ganesha land.

It is an international bully

Can you name one world power in history that gained that status by not being a bully? It's man's nature, it's not unique to modern America. This is just another chapter in the history of man.

Believe me Americans want to see the end of our involvement with other countries too. We're tired of feeding them. Those millions around the world who hate us sure as hell take my tax money, and then complain that we try to run the show. Beggars can't be choosers.

Do you think America owes your country something?

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

So you agree but you seem to think that two wrongs make a right by naming China as a bad nation too.

The difference is that China isn't invading every country it doesn't like destabilsing the economy and impoverishing the people.

Nor does it stand up on the world stage preaching freedom and democracy.

Nor is China exporting a hideous bubble-gum celebrity obsessed 'culture' around the globe.

China has a long way to go but it is nowhere near as dangerous or hypocritical country as the US.

And the Chinese are just not as nauseating as Americans who are on the one hand religious fundamentalists but who hate the poor and love killing people in kick ass wars.