Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    5:59 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Greedy Corporation Tricks: What Are The Methods Used To Rip Off The 99%? Back to Topics
SemiSteve

Champion Author
Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2014 6:53:36 PM


Post all the ways used by big corporations and the 1% to rip off the rest.

Everything from making products more chincy, failing to stand behind them, deceptive packaging and ads, squeezing ever more out of workers while giving them less and less for their efforts, avoiding costs to properly dispose of polluting by-products, out-and-out fraud, to manipulating the government for profit: (ie: ripping off the taxpayers), etc, etc, etc.

This should be informative and enlightening....

[Edited by: SemiSteve at 2/24/2014 6:54:35 PM EST]
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2014 4:30:21 PM

A good post, MJack.

I still think most large corporations are more about greed than team work (part of which means taking care of the team); but I admire your spirit.
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,519
Points:1,846,255
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2014 2:06:21 PM

Steve, >>And had you been part of the survey of 25,000 people your response would have been overwhelmed by those whose immediate connotation from the word 'corporation' is the word 'greed.'<<
~
I have no problem with that as I often find myself going against popular thought. It has worked for me in the past and I see no need to change to accepting the opinion of the masses because it is popular.

~
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2014 12:13:06 PM

MJack: "I'm an American and the first word I think about Corporations is, EMPLOYER. I don't let the Huffington Post nor Socialists do my thinking for me."

And had you been part of the survey of 25,000 people your response would have been overwhelmed by those whose immediate connotation from the word 'corporation' is the word 'greed.'

No big surprise there.

Corporations earned that connotation.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,609
Points:44,220
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2014 9:02:56 AM

<<My little side businesses is going from something I depended on to more of a side hobby. All the money that comes back out of my salvage and resale will be reinvested to gold, silver or under valued industrial metals that can later be held and traded for gold or silver later on.
So I am turning trash into treasure>>

I run some of my side businesses as hobby businesses to support other hobbies.

For example, I use the profits from marine related work, boat sales, dock rental, boat storage and dock construction to pay for my speedboats, fishing boats, personal watercraft, equipment, tackle, gas etc.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:23,201
Points:3,740,465
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 24, 2014 6:55:54 PM

"I note that the same is true of labor unions, SemiSteve. Or for that matter most organizations of the right or left."

You could add the government into your list, too.
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,544
Points:330,410
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Sep 24, 2014 6:49:14 PM

" hence why I started my own businesses, plus had numerous side businesses since I was a teenager."

My little side businesses is going from something I depended on to more of a side hobby. All the money that comes back out of my salvage and resale will be reinvested to gold, silver or under valued industrial metals that can later be held and traded for gold or silver later on.
So I am turning trash into treasure.
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,519
Points:1,846,255
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Sep 24, 2014 6:44:11 PM

SemiSteve, >>'Greed' is the first word that comes to mind when Americans think about corporations.<<
~

I'm an American and the first word I think about Corporations is, EMPLOYER. I don't let the Huffington Post nor Socialists do my thinking for me.

~

[Edited by: MahopacJack at 9/24/2014 6:45:59 PM EST]
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,544
Points:330,410
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Sep 24, 2014 6:41:10 PM

"CEO of Exxon, which has used tobacco industry tactics to cast doubt on climate change,"

Good, then I expect it to work.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 24, 2014 4:58:35 PM

'Greed' is the first word that comes to mind when Americans think about corporations.

HuffPo

"researchers asked participants, “What is the first thing that comes to mind when you think of corporations?”"

" The survey of 25,000 people around the world -- including 1,000 in the U.S. -- and 1,800 senior corporate executives found that corporate perception is, well, not that good. "

" From 1948 to 1979, productivity rose 108.1 percent, and hourly compensation increased 93.4 percent. From 1979 to 2013, productivity rose 64.9 percent, and hourly compensation rose 8.0 percent."
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,135
Points:2,927,020
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Sep 10, 2014 7:07:05 PM

I note that the same is true of labor unions, SemiSteve. Or for that matter most organizations of the right or left.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 10, 2014 5:43:17 PM

I said this the other day in the flippin burgers topic and nobody had a single comment about it.

Perhaps nobody is willing to dispute it:

'Show me one who expresses full loyalty and trust in a large modern corporation and I will show you a fool.'
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 3:51:10 PM

"1. Environmental Wisdom from Exxon and Monsanto

Rex Tillerson, CEO of Exxon, which has used tobacco industry tactics to cast doubt on climate change, summed up the whole environmental issue with his own unique brand of logic: What good is it to save the planet if humanity suffers?"

Monsanto has no such moral compunctions over corporate social responsibility. A company director once said Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible.While Monsanto, according to Food & Water Watch, has “wreaked havoc on the environment and public health” with PCBs, dioxin, and other dangerous chemicals, the company reported in its most recent financial report to the SEC: We are committed to long-term environmental protection.

2. The Art of Delusion: How Business People Fool Themselves

This starts, fittingly, at McDonald’s, where a company representative vigorously defended his burgers and nuggets: We don’t sell junk food…We sell lots of fruits and veggies at McDonald’s…And we are not marketing food to kids.

Next, on to a company that hides overseas earnings, avoids federal and state taxes, makes $400,000 per employee, pays its store workers an average of about $12 per hour, pays its CEO $143 million a year, and operates overseas factories with working conditions that, according to the Economic Policy Institute, “reflect some of the worst practices of the industrial era.” Their CEO Tim Cook says Apple has a very strong moral compass."

Salon.com: Most Delusional Greedy Corporation comments
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 20, 2014 9:10:01 AM

I was screwed by nearly every employer I ever worked for. I was lucky and did have a few jobs where the employer felt a moral obligation to do whatever possible to reward good workers. That was when I learned the difference between a good employer and a bad one. I did run a successful business and only gave it up when offered a job paying more than the business earned working for a good employer who treats workers well.

Typically, the good ones were small business where each worker is more important to operations. The larger the business, generally, the more ruthless. Often the break point is when the business gets so large that management never meets, knows, or looks into the eyes of those who make the profits possible.

A classic scenario is when the owners of a small company who feel obligated to the workers who helped build the business get ready to retire and sell the viable profitable business to raiders who trash it, fire workers, sell assets, make the numbers look better temporarily and the quickly resell it for a profit. Often these raided businesses go belly up or become cruel sweat shops for any remaining workers.

[Edited by: SemiSteve at 8/20/2014 9:12:39 AM EST]
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,609
Points:44,220
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 20, 2014 8:17:16 AM

I was screwed by every employer I worked for, hence why I started my own businesses, plus had numerous side businesses since I was a teenager.

I've never had an employer that paid me close to what a top performing multi-skilled worker with high demand skills should make...

Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:30,853
Points:3,426,695
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 1:27:04 PM

SemiSteve said: "When business needs change workers often get screwed.
The concerns of a family are no concern to the greedy."

--Tell me something, Steve.. what are workers and companies supposed to do when technology changes? Often assembly workers are replaced by robotics, which are usually faster and cheaper and can operate 24/7. What are companies supposed to do - should they shun the new technology, and then get creamed by their competitors?

Or, for example, if your company and your employees are proficient at making buggy whips, and the technology of the day is changing to automobiles, do you keep making buggy whips? (extreme example, but the point is that technology changes) I have an example of this in my own family. Distant family of mine used to own a business manufacturing communications gear in the Northeast. Back then, everything was tube type. In the 60s, solid state came through, and radio gear was starting to come in from Asia (mostly Japan) that was cheaper, lighter, and took less power. In short, they were better in many ways. My family looked upon the imports as a fad - and the business didn't survive into the 70s. They refused to move with technology - and go creamed by their competitors. I'm not sure they did it out of "heart", but nevertheless, whatever the reason, their inability to move with technology cost them the business. If they'd have changed, they would have been fabulously wealthy after the CB radio craze of the 70s-80s...
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,609
Points:44,220
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 12:01:33 PM

<<When business needs change workers often get screwed.>>

The reasons many workers get screwed is due to the massive over-supply of equally, or better qualified job seekers willing to take their place for the same, or less money.

When employers have literally dozens of job seekers per job opening they can be abusive with minimal negative consequences.

With jobs harder and harder for many to land/keep, more and more workers are willing to put up with the abuse.

[Edited by: MarkJames at 8/19/2014 12:02:05 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 11:38:59 AM

When business needs change workers often get screwed.

The concerns of a family are no concern to the greedy.
Profile Pic
samk2012
Veteran Author Michigan

Posts:478
Points:206,835
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 9:30:25 AM

A google search you will find some interesting facts?

Why they don't change the law loopholes if billions of tax dollars are going out of the country ? Who is to blame here National parties, Law makers, Undisclosed funding, Company Share Holders stock options, Undisclosed Heavy lobbying with senators or congressmen or private wealth?

Your local economy is good for you and your country ? Your local economies tank your house value decreases to almost null, No Jobs,No city expenditure and no Clean drinking water and more many which can't be explained. Don't save pennies and leave the Big Foot elephant to take a ride to China, Netherlands and other country economies.See that the local economies are giving away marijuana licenses for state income ,what next public stripping,sex licenses
or what disturbing licenses you cannot think of?

Did you ever tweet or reach your congressmen about the potential facts the local economies are facing ? Do you ever tell your congressmen about more transparent government is needed?

I read from internet , you do the same and help yourself , tweet the law makers.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:23,201
Points:3,740,465
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 9:18:24 AM

"I'm not sure it that would work with military service, but when a person re-enlists they pledge to do four more years, and they are probably under an enlistment contract at 19.5 years. Why should the government be allowed to breach an employment contract?"

Active military may reenlist for 3, 4, 5, or 6 years. The contracts contain a "needs of the service" clause, which basically allows them to screw you if they "need" to.
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,502
Points:3,008,020
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 8:47:15 AM

Steve, the phenomenon you describe is all too real. Smart workers might be able to cash in accrued vacation time of personal/sick leave time, take a leave starting at 19.5 years and ride past the 20 mark while still "employed". I'm not sure it that would work with military service, but when a person re-enlists they pledge to do four more years, and they are probably under an enlistment contract at 19.5 years. Why should the government be allowed to breach an employment contract?

I have a friend who turned the tables on a clueless employer. He was promised a new IT position, after completing further education at the employer's expense. The only stipulation to getting the free education (Master's Degree) was that he had to remain employed for at least six months after finishing the degree. He finished, asked about the position, got the cold shoulder (WHAT position?) So he cashed in six months of accrued vacation days and told them Sayonara! And went to work for their major competitor, doing the new job he had just been educated to do!

[Edited by: I75at7AM at 8/19/2014 8:48:26 AM EST]
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 8:39:40 AM

Many workers have their work stolen by unscrupulous employers. Beware working on the 1099.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,609
Points:44,220
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 8:10:54 AM

Here's a ripoff used by one of our competitors.

Many prices of products at their store aren't marked, likely since they have the highest mark-up of any similar business in their region.

Customers wouldn't pick up the products to begin with if they saw the price, yet many will pay for it at the register despite the high price.

.We employ 2 workers that used to work as cashiers at this business. They were trained not to give sale discounts to customers unless they mentioned the sale and/or complained.

They also rip off their employees. Many work many unpaid hours to keep their jobs.



[Edited by: MarkJames at 8/19/2014 8:11:18 AM EST]
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 18, 2014 2:17:46 PM

"Here's a classic greedy corporation trick. Tell your workers that they will qualify for a lifetime pension after they work 25 years. Then lay them off at 24.5 years. Seeya, sucker!"

SE3.5: "Greedy corporations learned that trick from the US government. It frequently discharges military personnel after 19 to 19 1/2 years of service when it takes 20 years to "retire" with a pension.

Which came first? The chicken or the egg?
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 11, 2014 1:43:51 PM

I checked out your link, fly.

"The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Steyer, 57, a board member of the environmental activist group Next Generation, donated a whopping $21.9 million to Proposition 39 in 2012, a proposition closing tax loopholes for multistate corporations."

Oh how horrible! Take away tax loopholes? Why, those greedy big corporations might have to pay more of their taxes!

btw, your link, brietbart is totally right-slanted.

But interestingly enough, they acquired this information from OpenSecrets.org, a website run by the Center For Responsive Politics, a organization which attempts to track the money going into politics.

Some excepts from wiki on that:

"Sheila Krumholz has been the Center's executive director since December 2006, having served for eight years as the Center's research director.

Director Dave Levinthal, who serves as the Center's spokesman and edits the OpenSecrets Blog, joined in 2009 after working for seven years as a political reporter at The Dallas Morning News.[4]

Krumholz and Levinthal regularly appear as commentators and analysts on national news networks and programs, including ... Democracy Now! ... ."

Does this mean Democracy Now has some legitimacy?

Perhaps it is not part of the Democratic Party after all! (As some here are foolishly maintaining in another topic)

Oh, and per your indication that the top political giver is a liberal, the individuals ranked in this record are the ones which are giving directly; and are also thus open and up-front about their giving. This is a record of 'clean' political giving, with a liberal topping the list. Since there is no way to keep a record of unreported giving and secret giving via blind organizations, which do not report on their funding, this does not paint a complete picture of the influence of money on politics.
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:1,727
Points:14,805
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2014 8:22:34 PM

flyboyUT, please. Don't confuse SemiSteve with facts.

He'll just demand more that he'll also ignore while demanding proof...

Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,799
Points:1,495,120
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2014 8:20:49 PM

Man oh man --- worse than them evil Koch bros for sure....
.
.
>>>For those who complain that the GOP is the party of the rich, consider this: according to OpenSecrets.org, in the 2013-2014 electoral cycle, the leading individual political donor in the nation was billionaire Tom Steyer, the leftist hardliner, joined by his wife, who gave a staggering $20.4 million to Democratic and leftist causes.

That figure was more than double the second-highest donor, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who gave 95% of his roughly $9.5 million in donations to Democrats and leftist causes.

We’re not done yet; the third highest donor was Fred Eychaner, who gave 100% of his 5.8 million to Democrats and leftist causes.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Steyer, 57, a board member of the environmental activist group Next Generation, donated a whopping $21.9 million to Proposition 39 in 2012, a proposition closing tax loopholes for multistate corporations. In 2014, Steyer intends to use his super PAC NextGen Climate Action to spend up to $100 million on climate change issues and candidates who support them.

Sabrina Lockhart, communications director for Californians Against Higher Oil Taxes, pointed out, "It makes sense that a billionaire who can afford to dump millions to play in politics is willing to 'spend what it takes' to make energy costs soar for hard-working Californians. After all, he's already promised to 'penalize' those who don't agree with his out-of-touch agenda."<<<

Look at the picture and that evil grin he has.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,799
Points:1,495,120
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2014 5:01:07 PM

Steve the point I was trying to make is that the control isnt overt as you imply - its much more subtle than that. I say again my friend - the golden rule - He who has the gold makes the rules.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2014 4:46:10 PM

You mention two names, fly. Holder and Lerner. But no tone single person you think has oversight over public media.

I'll take that as a 'I can't answer the question so I'll try to divert.'

OK, you know people who lost their shirt in the stock market. You know people who know nothing about the stock market. And that's just the ones you know. There are a lot of people out there. What percentage of them do you think are going to be too dumb to even do as well as Social Security?

What is supposed to happen to those people when they get old?

They just starve and die?

You like to see old beggars everywhere?

That's what will happen without retirement programs for dummies.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,799
Points:1,495,120
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2014 4:35:07 PM

"Just who in government has this fictitious editorial oversight over non-profit media, fly?" Criminey Steve - do you think they are going to advertize it???? Grow up will you - figure out how the real world works...

Look at how Holder is operating or people like Lois Lerner operated. Those are the ones that were so egregious that they got caught. If you really don't think there are strings attached with the so called grants of money your living in a dream world.

Steve I kind of think my experience with investing is the norm. The only folks who dont do well are those who are greedy and dont understand how real life is. Either they want to "beat the market" with schemes or they dont invest at all and depend on the gubbiment to take care of them. I had a couple of folks I worked with who listened to this guy who promised returns that were outlandish. They asked me to look at the stuff this guy was telling them and I told both of them to run from him as fast as possible - that he was doing something wrong because those returns are not realistic. They believed him and not me - they both lost their shirts. Remember if it sounds too good to be true - run like he**.....

My net return - after taxes and fees etc have averaged about 7-8% per year over the last more than 40 years. No trick just pick good solid mutual funds and do dollar cost averaging - IE - invest the same percentage per paycheck regardless of what the market is doing. I would recommend shooting for 10-15% goal of the net of each paycheck..... It is doable if you want to. If you start young and keep it up the probability is you will be comfortable in your old age. That level is if yo will get a company pension to supplement what you have saved. If not then jack up the rate to 15-25% or more.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 8, 2014 4:09:53 PM

Just who in government has this fictitious editorial oversight over non-profit media, fly?

Can you name a single person?

***

As far as the pension thing goes, you may have done well with your own investments, fly, but not everyone does. Yours is one case and not representative of the citizenry.

Here is the real question: Would the general public, including all the irresponsible ones, be better off or worse off if they were solely entrusted with building their own retirement fund in the stock market?

We know that some would and some would not.

This would lead to a secondary question.

How many people would suffer and become desolate if there were no safety net such as Social Security to ensure their minimal sustenance in old age?
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,799
Points:1,495,120
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2014 5:57:19 PM

Steve says - "Just because the money comes from the government does not mean it comes with any editorial oversight. "

My answer is - You have got to be kidding --- really if the govt pays some or all of the bills you think they dont have some degree of control over the product???? Your kidding right??????
\
Major rule to keep in mind - "He who has the gold makes the rules"....

As far as the pension thingy - better yet let people make their own decisions as to a pension. Do what lots and lots of folks have done - take a portion of your wages and invest it well. When I got my permanent job after college I asked if I could just keep the money from each paycheck that was kept to "buy into the pension plan" plus what the company was supposed to put in and let me deal with it and I would never ask for a pension from the company. I was emphatically told I could not do that. I wish I could have as I would be at least as well off today and the principal could be passed on to my heirs. Now after I croak the retirement fund is gone....
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2014 5:28:26 PM

A better structure would be a minimal pension after just a few years which gets larger as the years pile on; up to a maximum.

But then, the greedier route would be to simply end pensions.

We've seen a lot of that.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:23,201
Points:3,740,465
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2014 5:14:14 PM

"Here's a classic greedy corporation trick. Tell your workers that they will qualify for a lifetime pension after they work 25 years. Then lay them off at 24.5 years. Seeya, sucker!"

Greedy corporations learned that trick from the US government. It frequently discharges military personnel after 19 to 19 1/2 years of service when it takes 20 years to "retire" with a pension.

[Edited by: SE3.5 at 8/7/2014 5:14:46 PM EST]
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,609
Points:44,220
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2014 11:28:12 AM

Here's a greedy trick used by employers.

They tell their part-timers and temps that if they stick with it they'll give them more hours, regular hours, better hours, permanent status and eventually a chance at full time work.

They have no intentions of making good on their promise (at least not for most workers) however feed them a line of bs to minimize performance/morale related issues and prevent workers from quitting their crappy low paying part time dead-end jobs.

Another dirty trick is the permanent temp worker trick.

New workers are hired as temps for 180 days, after which they're terminated and then have to re-apply for their jobs.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 7, 2014 10:10:45 AM

fly, you have no proof that the government controls the non-profit media. Just because the money comes from the government does not mean it comes with any editorial oversight. That is why there are frequently stories critical of government on NPR.

But when was the last time Fox news had a story critical of Rupert Murdock?

***

Here's a classic greedy corporation trick. Tell your workers that they will qualify for a lifetime pension after they work 25 years. Then lay them off at 24.5 years. Seeya, sucker!
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:1,727
Points:14,805
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Aug 4, 2014 11:38:13 AM

You're wasting your time, flyboyUT. It's fairly obvious that SemiSteve doesn't reply to anyone's questions or comments, nor does he actually bother to read them.

After all:

“A wise man never knows all, only fools know everything.”

- unknown.

[Edited by: Troller_Diesel at 8/4/2014 11:46:11 AM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,799
Points:1,495,120
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 4, 2014 11:34:41 AM

Non-commercial media - paid for by who and how? Will the media be controlled by the state? Don't you see any possibility of minor problems here Steve? Remember the paper in Russia called Pravda? Now the lose translation for the word Pravda means 'truth'. But the thinking people in Russia had a phrase that means I know they say 'truth' ---- but is it truthful?Steve once more it seems your only answer to one of your perceived problems is more control by the govt and more force being used to make others pay for what you want.

As ol Ronnie Raygun used to say - Govt isnt the answer tot he problems - govt is the problem!
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 4, 2014 11:13:34 AM

That's precisely why it is so important to have non-commercial media, SE3.5.

It is truly disturbing that some would want nothing but for-profit media.

Once again, the for-profit media has zero interest in informing you. That is not their goal. They present what is interesting enough to the masses to get them to pay attention to advertisements. That means shallow attention-grabbing fluff stuff and emotion-evoking stuff is what they present. In-depth informative stories have gone by the wayside. Most investigative journalists have been fired. The commercial media get their stories from the news feed and in many cases no longer even has a news department which they deemed too expensive and not worth the expenditure in terms of raising profits.

The commercial media are greedy corporations in this respect. Your needs are not their concern.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,799
Points:1,495,120
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 4, 2014 11:11:57 AM

"Maybe we should tax the living who-ha out of cable. That's where is all starts. Use the proceeds to pay for universal health care."

Steve ----- why is your only answer to a problem you think need fixing to tax other people and make them pay for something they dont want to buy. Why do you constantly want to use the naked force of the govt to get someone else to pay for what you think should be done.

I have a idea - why not leave people alone and stop robbing of income because you wish to steal their money to do what you in your infinite wisdom know should be done.
.
.
How about you for once come up with a solution that fits in with the freedom principles of the country you live in.
.
.
How about for once you just leave people alone to make their own decisions.
.
.
That is what freedom really is all about - leave people alone and stop trying to use the forces of the king and or big government to steal their personal time and wealth for your ends.
.
.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:23,201
Points:3,740,465
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 4, 2014 9:30:33 AM

When i fired up my internet this morning, the lead "news" story was titled: Kim K.

Made me want to puke, but then I remembered what I posted on 8/1.

No one ever went broke supplying what the people want.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,609
Points:44,220
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 2, 2014 11:03:01 AM

More and more don't waste time, money and gas traveling to stores since they're often out of stock, restocking is poor, lines are long/slow, cashiers are slow.

The other day when I went to Walmart they had 0 of 5 items I wanted.

I picked up some other items, however set them down and walked out since only 3 of 20 some registers were open and they had 3 of the slowest cashiers working.

Several others walked out of the store as well including 1 with 2 large carts of groceries.

I've never seen such poor management or workers.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 2, 2014 10:43:09 AM

It is clear that retail is going online and brick-mortar stores are tapering off. Walmart and target both see this trend.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,609
Points:44,220
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 2, 2014 7:45:20 AM

Another ripoff is Walmart's price matching policy. They won't match their own online prices.

If you want an item in the store at the online price you have to order it online, then they'll take it from the store, but you can't pick it up until the next day which is a big waste of time, money and fuel.

Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,609
Points:44,220
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2014 12:49:03 PM

Many unhealthy habits are due to laziness and increasing demand for instant gratification.

People favor speed and convenience more than health.

Unhealthy stuff not only sells better, but the shelf life is much longer due to ingredients and preservatives.

Many are addicted to various unhealthy foods and beverages as well.

Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2014 12:31:35 PM

Our commercial media is complicit in this national addiction to unhealthy habits.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,609
Points:44,220
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2014 12:19:27 PM

When you sell people What They Want - beer, cigarettes, soda, chips, candy, lottery tickets, scratch-off tickets and other non necessities for example, the economy is less of an issue as well.

Many customers will stop paying for necessities to pay for non necessities.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2014 12:10:30 PM

There ya go SE3.5.

It's all about greed. Once again.

There is no marketing visual audio bombardment about establishing healthy habits. It is the exact opposite.

Maybe we should tax the living who-ha out of cable. That's where is all starts. Use the proceeds to pay for universal health care.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:23,201
Points:3,740,465
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2014 11:55:52 AM

You can make a living selling people what they need, but YOU CAN GET RICH selling them what they want.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,609
Points:44,220
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2014 11:54:36 AM

One of my suppliers asked why we stopped carrying many fruits and vegetables. I told them because they weren't selling well - even though we were selling them @ break even, or even a loss as a value add service for relatively few customers.

Now that cooler space is occupied by bottled water, sports drinks, energy drinks, beer and soda.

IMO, bottled water is one of the biggest rip-offs, yet it's one of our best selling and highest margin products.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,173
Points:428,385
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 1, 2014 11:33:42 AM

Processed food suppliers know full and well that they are selling unhealthy junk. It is obvious they don't care. Their concern is making profits, the more the better. They try their bet to float the impression out there that they are providing a good service but they are quite aware that they really are providing a fix for those hooked on sugar, fat and salt. These ingredients are varied in their proportions in each product, trying to find that right balance of flavoring to keep buyers hooked on what is otherwise not very nutritious food. Packaging is a huge part of the sell.

Generally the more processed a food is, the more profitable it is and the less nutritious it is.

One could die an early death eating nothing but frozen foods and stuff loaded with preservatives.

It's all part of the boob tube life. Pay for the cable which gives one the ability to sit in front of the TV, eating prepackaged garbage and be shown commercials for more garbage. The images, the flavors, the addictive quality of that junk, the mindset, the marketing, the smiling faces, the shallow brainless urge to satisfy the created urge, it's all part of that loop.

Most people would be far better off to cancel cable, begin an organic garden, and start buying food from small local suppliers. Some things cost more, others less, you'll be shopping more often, but buying less at a time, food prep takes just a bit longer but is well worth it. Once off the fat-sugar-salt addiction you never want to go back. Too bad most people don't get this. It is part of why health care costs so much in the US. Because we get so sick!

Those who never consider changing their habits and let slick marketing companies implant their habits instead are under the spell of the big corporate plan for your life.

People who like to fear that government is taking over our lives don't even realize that in many cases corporations already have.
Post a reply Back to Topics