A New American Civil War - West Vs. East?

[Moparmike]

Watch it AZ, Art's Grammaw's wrath will strike you down with all of its 220v tenacity.

{AZ stands there, then "zzzzzzzzzzzzAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPPP"}
Hey, that was kinda entertaining. Mam, would you do that again for a Klondike bar?
"Sure."
"zzzzzzzzzzzzzzAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPPPPPPP"
"Cooooooooolllllll!!!!!"

 

[Art Eatman]

Interactions and unintended consequences: Corporations once filed annual reports. The SEC then required quarterly reports. This reduced the amount of time to improve profitability conditions from 12 months to three, in order that corporations have happy stockholders. This reduced long term planning down to short-term planning. All this accumulated as time pressure on the upper strata of management. Bottom line? They don't really have the time to even think about "good citizenship".

Then factor in that most large corporations, since back in the 1960s/1970s may have corporate hq in the US, but they are actually multi-national, with no national loyalty toward this country.

The primary unintended consequence is that there is no longer any "family" atmosphere, and this adds to the malaise of the workforce--and the population at large.

Esprit de corps is as important to a corporate workforce, or a state agency workforce, as it is to a military unit. Too many people have forgotten this, or never even thought about it.

Art

 

[longeyes]

"Esprit de corps is as important to a corporate workforce, or a state agency
workforce, as it is to a military unit. Too many people have forgotten this, or
never even thought about it."

Truly said. And if so, then a business strategy that discards cohesion
and esprit de corps for continued expansion and escalating profits
may ultimately be short-sighted. It's possible for the goal of a
company to be to provide an honest living for its employees, as with
any family business. The current corporate structure could turn out
to be a two-hundred year failed experiment, just as the "nuclear family"
of two parents and kids, as opposed to the extended family (band, clan),
seems to be wearing quickly around the edges.

 

[Glock Glockler]

Tam,

You mentioned about a corporation 'throwing away it's workers like a kleenex', tell me, should people be able to ditch a company like a used kleenex? So it's bad when the evil corporation lays people off, but if the individual employee ditches a company for a better job we praise them for 'moving up to a better job'. That smacks of hypocracy to me.

Yes, they might have a lot of money but they also might have a lot of expenses. Many companies make tremendous amounts of money yet are not very profitable. Perhaps they should invest in more lobbying to keep he lawyer dominated congress from crafting scores of new laws for them to comply with, it might be effective and it might not be, but I don't understand that alleviates Congress of their responsibility of passing those laws.

To me, part of being a good and moral corporate citizen is taking care of your employees who MADE you profitable and big in the first place.

A corporation is responsible to provide what they promised in whatever contract the employee bargained for, if it's a check for x amount of money and certain benefits, then that's it. They don't owe you life-long employment or anything outside of your contract, just as you don't owe it to them to work for them forever.

Also part of being a good corporate citizen is trying to buy/hire American first.

What is a 'corporate citizen'? I do try to buy American whenever possible, but it's often not. If I want a good pistol, whom do I get it from? The best pistols these days come from abroad. American 'workers' are often lazy, unmotivated, and incompetant. I know plenty of people who own landscaping, carpentry, construction, and other businesses who cannot get poeple to work for them who will consistently show up to work. OTOH, people from Mexico, Guatamala, Hondorus, El Salvador, etc, will work those less-than-pleasant jobs and do a good job to boot. Why work when you can get on the dole and live off the labor of others?

Even when many Americans will work, there is a teamster mentality that is prevelant to the extent that people won't perform the slightest function outside of their job. God forbid that someone cover the phones for an hour on a day when the receptionist is sick.

Or maybe it's the fact that American companies are forced to hire "minorities" to insure a diverse workforce, as if that's what we need as opposed to a productive workforce. My roommate's company was sued for 6 months worth of unemployment compensation because he was "discriminated against due to his inability to read" (wonderful job the govt schools are doing, right?), even though he hadn't even filled out one letter on a job application.

Marko and Benewton both mentioned the govt imposed obstacles facing companies in the USA, but they really only scratched the surface in the depth of the problem. The USA has rot down to it's very core, in it's founding documents, and it must be corrected if we are to survive. You'd be better served by addressing these problems instead of blaming corporations that are trying to survive govt onslaught by socialist politicians that you have voted for.

 

[Mikul]

Blaming corporations is difficult. Take a look at the United States in early 1900 before regulation began. The working conditions would be considered 3rd world by today's standards. Corporations joined together against the working man across the country. Heck, they had they're own armed police. This is the natural tendency of large companies.

Today, the amount of paperwork, fees, and regulatory compliance necessary to run a simple bakery would make your head spin. I know two people who ran their own businesses with only a couple of employees. They had to fire the employees because they're too difficult to deal with at that size. One of them closed the business down because the state wouldn't let him fire one of his employees even though she could not do the necessary work. This happens in every company to some degree. I work in a company with 15 employees. We could fire seven of them without even noticing. Another friend works in maintenance where the union employees aren't allowed to do more than two maintenance items per day. On his first two days, he did 50 before someone read him the riot act. The only businesses I know making a decent buck have senators and representatives lobbying for specific budget outlays or carving legislation to favor their market.

Normally, Americans would rise up to start their own small businesses to fill the niche, but this is where regulation is truly insidious, it kills the advantage that small companies had over large ones. There are precious few job advertisements in today's newspapers and the few that are there are for large companies. I almost never see small companies advertising anymore.

 

[Glock Glockler]

Take a look at the United States in early 1900 before regulation began. The working conditions would be considered 3rd world by today's standards. Corporations joined together against the working man across the country. Heck, they had they're own armed police. This is the natural tendency of large companies.

Are you saying that the rise in the standard of living is because of or in spite of govt regulation? Help me out here.

Thanks

 

[Art Eatman]

GG, while I don't know about "natural tendency" of large corporations, around 1900 half the workforce was on-farm. The standard non-farm work week was 55 to 60 hours, particularly for grunt-labor blue-collar folks.

There is no doubt that the mix of public sympathy, trade unions and such governmental folks as Teddy Roosevelt brought about much safer working conditions as well as improvements in overall health.

Regardless of subject, this country has always operated like a swinging pendulum, almost always going too far out and not staying near enough to the middle. Doesn't matter if you're talking morality (Puritanism vs. today's Hollywood) or working conditions. In the late 1800s, the unions had little or no political power. By the 1950s/1960s, they had too much (IMO). As another example, we've gone from no safety-net welfare to too much cradle-to-grave welfare. Pendulum.

As far as "natural tendency" to oppress the workers, corporations are no worse than governmental agencies. I think it's more the nature of any pyramidal hierarchy...

Art

 

[Art Eatman]

GG, while I don't know about "natural tendency" of large corporations, around 1900 half the workforce was on-farm. The standard non-farm work week was 55 to 60 hours, particularly for grunt-labor blue-collar folks.

There is no doubt that the mix of public sympathy, trade unions and such governmental folks as Teddy Roosevelt brought about much safer working conditions as well as improvements in overall health.

Regardless of subject, this country has always operated like a swinging pendulum, almost always going too far out and not staying near enough to the middle. Doesn't matter if you're talking morality (Puritanism vs. today's Hollywood) or working conditions. In the late 1800s, the unions had little or no political power. By the 1950s/1960s, they had too much (IMO). As another example, we've gone from no safety-net welfare to too much cradle-to-grave welfare. Pendulum.

As far as "natural tendency" to oppress the workers, corporations are no worse than governmental agencies. (I've worked in both.) I think it's more the nature of any pyramidal hierarchy...

Art

 

[Glock Glockler]

Art,

I agree with you about the pendulum, though I wish there were some way to temper the extremes. Just for arguement's sake, I don't think there should be any govt safety net, butwe can save that debate for another thread.

I think the main point that I was trying to make was that blaming 'those evil, greedy corporations' is not only inaccurate as to where the true heart of the problem lies, it's a cop out. Corporations are outsourcing stuff to India these days because it's economically viable to do so, but no one mentions that within the past few years the Indian govt actually pulled back a decent amount of the socialist nonsense regulations that have been strangling their economy. It's kinda funny how Indians can be successful aywhere in the word they go, to the US, Great Britian, Australia, Europe, but not in India!

Are Americans that are blaming the corporations even taking the slightest look at the amount of poison that the US govt is shoving down our throats? Every business day the govt adds 200 pages of legalese nonsense to the books, which we then have to hire scores of lawyers to interpret, and complying with further add to the already huge cost of doing business? What about the asset forfeiture that is going on across the country, why would you want to build an apartment building if you're worried about the govt seizing the whole thing from you because someone claims to the got that a drug deal took place there? Sorta kills any profit motive. What about the EEOC levying fines against businesses because they didn't have AA policies in place, and awarding those fines to people that never worked in said business?

This is just the slightest scratch in the surface of what the govt is doing to strangle our economy, so I find it odd that so many Americans are so eager to point fingers at other countries when our own backyard is in shambles.

 

[TamThompson]

Lysander,
The corporations started the trend of disloyalty by doing lay-offs in the late 70's and early 80's. Once employees figured out that there was no such thing as job security anymore, they started job-hopping.

Why are you sticking up for the corporations? Do you own lots of stock, or are you a high-level manager?

 

[Glock Glockler]

Tam,

Lysander is a dead, 19th century, anarchist who was one of the few decent lawyers ever to come down the pipe. I am not he, though I do think he has some pretty insightful comments about the Constitution. Feel free to call me Glockler, all my friends do and most of my enemies

I'm not sticking up for corporations per se, I'm just trying to view the situation objectively. No corporation owes you or me a job for life. Downsizing is natural for companies, they do it when they have to tighten their belt and cut back on expenses. Has your financial situation ever changed where you and your family had to cut back on expenses? Maybe going out to eat less, maybe taking a smaller and more affordable vacation, but you are essentially downsizing and laying off the businesses you don't then patronize.

I own very little stock, I'm actually looking to invest in art cause it can have very good profits and the tax man won't know about it. I'm not high-level management though I am basically an entry level employee. I'm 3 yrs out of college with 2 working in corporate America. The reason why I'm not caught up in the anti-corporate ferver is because my parents own a small business and I've known a lot of people who are small business owners. That has given me a lot of insight of how things work, and not just from the employee perspective. I've seen how govt nonsense poisons small business, and how it's intended to do exactly that so it can help the bigger corporations run them out. My folks recently had to spend thousands to try to get in compliance with HIPPA, which was passed under Clinton, and imposes scores of regulatory nonsense on businesses that you cannot be in compliance with though the govt has carte blanche to fine you unspecified amouts for.

What could my folks have done with the thousands they had to needlessly spend, could they have given certain poorer folks a price break, or maybe gone one a vacation, or maybe have put that money towards retirement? That is just one example, there are plenty more. I've seen how people like Gore propose myriads of lush govt programs, none of which they have constiutional authority to do, that come at the expense of others.

It's a whole lot easier to blame other countries, but's it's not as easy to take a hard look at ourself and fix what's wrong here. There are scores of things we could doright now tha woud improve our economy tremendously, but various special interests would loose their gravy train, though the nation as a whole would benefit.

So tell me, if it would benefit the national economy and put us back on track, would you give up your favorite govt program?

 

[Waitone]

Hey, Tam

Here's some more red meat for ya.

www.zazora.com The site is devoted to statistics related to imported workers being hired by US corporations.


http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/7/29/180447.shtml Diane Alden is an op-ed writer who has drawn a bead on offshoring jobs. As good research in the issue as I've ever seen.