Non-partisan "Fuck the Status Quo" Thread of Dominance

[hornmpa96 2598]

10 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

are you familiar with the recent history of the boeing corporation?

Sure - I’m unfortunately a shareholder. Boeing absolutely lost sight of quality. Planes need to stay in the air and an airplane manufacturer will significantly suffer if that doesn’t happen.

The buybacks didn’t create the scenario allowing Boeing to essentially self-regulate.

My only point here is that buybacks are not some nefarious plot.

[hornmpa96 2598]

41 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

Can we agree vote count should be finished on day of election?  Not talking about any recounts.  But what Arizona and Nevada do is absurd.  They should change their laws.  

I’m not certain that it should be day of election, but it should wrap up in a couple of days. I believe that one set of federal rules should apply for federal elections across the board.

[BurntOrange&White 39605]

8 minutes ago, CTC2 said:

Yeah, you’ve lost me because your response was actually the point I was making.  Geez, has everyone just gone stupid?

YES and that's why their messaging fucking sucks.

[Frank Drebin 5614]

Just now, hornmpa96 said:

I’m not certain that it should be day of election, but it should wrap up in a couple of days. I believe that one set of federal rules should apply for federal elections across the board.

I don’t see why if large states like Florida can’t have their shit counted two hours after the polls close others can’t do the same.  

[Incredulity 11554]

2 hours ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

reinstate the Fairness Doctrine

This is a bit interesting given the self immolation/decimation MSM has undertaken in the last decade.  
 

The Fairness Doctrine was part of the deal for broadcasters to get public spectrum.  I don’t think it would make any  difference unless it’s applied to Social Media and Podcasts and Cable… which is a stickier wicket. 

[hobbes2702 12797]

4 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

This is a bit interesting given the self immolation/decimation MSM has undertaken in the last decade.  
 

The Fairness Doctrine was part of the deal for broadcasters to get public spectrum.  I don’t think it would make any  difference unless it’s applied to Social Media and Podcasts and Cable… which is a stickier wicket. 

Yup I tend to agree. It’s an extremely antiquated idea for modern media/news consumption 

[immamac 42516]

3 hours ago, hornmpa96 said:

I don’t have any insight into the Google situation specifically; however, Google is a massive business with many different segments/operations. Let’s assume a business has 2 different segments: one is wildly profitable and the other is losing money.

Should the business be allowed to layoff people in the nonprofitable operation? Are they required to keep those people forever and siphon the profits from the first business to paying those in the loser?

Stock buybacks are consistently viewed as some terrible aspect of corporate America today. From my perspective, buybacks are merely an indication that the Company generates more cash flow than it can invest in other opportunities profitably. Occasionally buybacks are abused and the Company ends up taking on debt which can have negative repercussions. 

It’s just another way to return cash to shareholders. Are dividends bad?

I’ve worked in and around Fortune 1000 companies for my entire career. Almost every organization has some level of fat which can be trimmed. 

I don't think you understand the point. 

Humans are not fat. You  don't "trim the fat" when it relates to humans. You can do this other ways with cost controls, vendor management, all the other levers are trimming fat. People are always structural  it's bone and flesh and limbs. When you lay off people it's not fat. 

Buybacks serve one purpose, inflating stock valuations and shareholder appeasement. Stock buybacks shouldn't be banned but there absolutely should be additional requirements that make it essentially the last thing on the list to deploy capital. 

In Europe you can't just lay people off cuz of a bad quarterly result. This is what a lot of people like you don't understand it seems. The behavior of American companies towards Americans is dehumanizing and incredibly fucking immoral. What Google is doing is absolutely bullshit. They are suffocating all of the innovation and have a monopoly that makes it impossible to do anything and at the same time are making their product worse and investing less and less on it. 

I'm tired of people defending corporations for severely unethical behavior in the name of shareholder demands or fiduciary responsibility. I suggest you read some wheresyoured.at and understand how fucking rotten all these companies have become. 

I've been an executive at a fortune 500 company. It's absolutely horrible how the C suite and senior executives view employees. It's disgusting 

[David Dennison 18647]

Just now, immamac said:

I don't think you understand the point. 

Humans are not fat. You  don't "trim the fat" when it relates to humans. You can do this other ways with cost controls, vendor management, all the other levers are trimming fat. People are always structural  it's bone and flesh and limbs. When you lay off people it's not fat. 

Buybacks serve one purpose, inflating stock valuations and shareholder appeasement. Stock buybacks shouldn't be banned but there absolutely should be additional requirements that make it essentially the last thing on the list to deploy capital. 

In Europe you can't just lay people off cuz of a bad quarterly result. This is what a lot of people like you don't understand it seems. The behavior of American companies towards Americans is dehumanizing and incredibly fucking immoral. What Google is doing is absolutely bullshit. They are suffocating all of the innovation and have a monopoly that makes it impossible to do anything and at the same time are making their product worse and investing less and less on it. 

I'm tired of people defending corporations for severely unethical behavior in the name of shareholder demands or fiduciary responsibility. I suggest you read some wheresyoured.at and understand how fucking rotten all these companies have become. 

I've been an executive at a fortune 500 company. It's absolutely horrible how the C suite and senior executives view employees. It's disgusting 

[DixonHur 11167]

Perhaps we should all accept an uncomfortable fact.

Democracy is a horrible system for selecting leaders.

[hornmpa96 2598]

1 minute ago, immamac said:

I don't think you understand the point. 

Humans are not fat. You  don't "trim the fat" when it relates to humans. You can do this other ways with cost controls, vendor management, all the other levers are trimming fat. People are always structural  it's bone and flesh and limbs. When you lay off people it's not fat. 

Buybacks serve one purpose, inflating stock valuations and shareholder appeasement. Stock buybacks shouldn't be banned but there absolutely should be additional requirements that make it essentially the last thing on the list to deploy capital. 

In Europe you can't just lay people off cuz of a bad quarterly result. This is what a lot of people like you don't understand it seems. The behavior of American companies towards Americans is dehumanizing and incredibly fucking immoral. What Google is doing is absolutely bullshit. They are suffocating all of the innovation and have a monopoly that makes it impossible to do anything and at the same time are making their product worse and investing less and less on it. 

I'm tired of people defending corporations for severely unethical behavior in the name of shareholder demands or fiduciary responsibility. I suggest you read some wheresyoured.at and understand how fucking rotten all these companies have become. 

I've been an executive at a fortune 500 company. It's absolutely horrible how the C suite and senior executives view employees. It's disgusting 

I would gladly consider the German system with an employee representative who sits on the Board. I absolutely believe most corporate boards do not properly provide oversight on senior management.

In my post, I specifically stated that I have no knowledge on Google’s situation. I have been through several layoffs and it was always brutal.

Buybacks are already essentially the last place to deploy capital. By providing a buyback, the company is admitting it doesn’t have anywhere else to deploy the cash profitably.

 

 

 

 

[Hornius Emeritus 12413]

2 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Perhaps we should all accept an uncomfortable fact.

Democracy is a horrible system for selecting leaders.

What if there is no good system for selecting leaders?

What if the problems inflicted on a planet with 8 billion people are so severe that no leader can save us from them?

 

[Incredulity 11554]

3 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

What if the problems inflicted on a planet with 8 billion people are so severe that no leader can save us from them?

The pretense of the USA is a leader isn’t supposed to save us.

[DixonHur 11167]

3 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

What if there is no good system for selecting leaders?

What if the problems inflicted on a planet with 8 billion people are so severe that no leader can save us from them?

 

That's certainly possible.

But perhaps after the next mass extinction event the survivors will come up with a better system.

[safe sex 11678]

6 minutes ago, hornmpa96 said:

I would gladly consider the German system with an employee representative who sits on the Board. I absolutely believe most corporate boards do not properly provide oversight on senior management.

In my post, I specifically stated that I have no knowledge on Google’s situation. I have been through several layoffs and it was always brutal.

Buybacks are already essentially the last place to deploy capital. By providing a buyback, the company is admitting it doesn’t have anywhere else to deploy the cash profitably.

 

 

 

 

Investing in your employees is profitable. Just not in the next quarter

[David Dennison 18647]

17 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Perhaps we should all accept an uncomfortable fact.

Democracy is a horrible system for selecting leaders.

Thanks, Plato.

[David Dennison 18647]

15 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

What if there is no good system for selecting leaders?

What if the problems inflicted on a planet with 8 billion people are so severe that no leader can save us from them?

[DixonHur 11167]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Thanks, Plato.

Technically Socrates 😛

[pacman 7324]

1 hour ago, Frank Drebin said:

Can we agree vote count should be finished on day of election?  Not talking about any recounts.  But what Arizona and Nevada do is absurd.  They should change their laws.  

Day of election? As in midnight? Midnight local time? Pacific time?

I think we(citizens) all want elections to be fast and quick. 8 hour lines. Everybody working until 5pm on election day, means closing hours are busy. It should be a national holiday.

[Fudge Nuggets 19146]

3 hours ago, pacman said:

Speaking of truce, can we all agree the Russian interference and disinformation in this country is out of control? Highlighted by 100s of bomb threats from Russia at polling stations on Tuesday. Highlighted by influencers being paid by Russia to spread lies in the USA 

That can't happen.

Is that an agreeable stance for all?

Dude, bomb threats are free speech in this timeline.

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20342]

43 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

The pretense of the USA is a leader isn’t supposed to save us.

Where does it say this? 

 

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

1 hour ago, Incredulity said:

This is a bit interesting given the self immolation/decimation MSM has undertaken in the last decade.  
 

The Fairness Doctrine was part of the deal for broadcasters to get public spectrum.  I don’t think it would make any  difference unless it’s applied to Social Media and Podcasts and Cable… which is a stickier wicket. 

This is actually a good idea. Well done.

[Incredulity 11554]

1 minute ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

Where does it say this? 

 

It being the constitution? Or ?

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20342]

2 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

It being the constitution? Or ?

Refresh my memory. Which article says that the pretense of the U.S. is that a leader isn't supposed to save us? 

[hobbes2702 12797]

57 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Perhaps we should all accept an uncomfortable fact.

Democracy is a horrible system for selecting leaders.

An uninformed populace is going to cause problems anywhere. 
Here we add in the issues of binary choice and numerous anti democratic measures and it’s amazing we haven’t had this happen more often.

[TwiceHorn 31259]

12 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

So, I'm wrong in my perception that having non-party line ideas that fall on both sides of the teams is openly accepted? 

Yes, come into CR with a reasoned opinion and not something semi- or non-factually based, you get a dialog.

No one does that.

[BurntOrange&White 39605]

11 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yes, come into CR with a reasoned opinion and not something semi- or non-factually based, you get a dialog.

 

Edited November 8 by BurntOrange&White

[DixonHur 11167]

7 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

An uninformed populace is going to cause problems anywhere. 
Here we add in the issues of binary choice and numerous anti democratic measures and it’s amazing we haven’t had this happen more often.

Completely agree.  I wasn't speaking only about the US.

[TwiceHorn 31259]

5 hours ago, BevoAbyss said:

Hey, look:

It's a thread where everyone can kumbaya themselves to the fact that they are living in a Christian Misogynist Fascist Nation-State. 

Lulz. 

Brisket and I (and some others) warned y'all of this.

 

And no one disagreed with you.

You have become a beating.

[Guadaloopy 10918]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Thanks, Plato.

 

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

Technically Socrates 😛

Morons. 

[Incredulity 11554]

22 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

Refresh my memory. Which article says that the pretense of the U.S. is that a leader isn't supposed to save us? 

I never said the Constitution said that.

I’d say Lincoln said something to that effect in the Gettysburg Address.

 

that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth

[Pancho 44452]

When Florida was a more bipartisan state, they actually passed pretty fucking decent laws that resulted counting ballots faster. They were embarrassed over the hanging chad shit, so that’s partially why they did this. 

Florida passed a law that allows for them to start counting mail-in ballots 22 days before Election Day. State law says early voting ballots must be completely counted before Election Day as well. In Florida, the mail-in ballot has to be received by a certain time on Election Day. In Nevada, it just has to be postmarked by that day. Part of the reason Nevada has that law is because of those citizens who live in the remote areas of the state mail takes longer or they don’t have access like those in Reno or Vegas. 

Republicans go against bills to help count faster because the slower tabulation time feeds the narrative republicans want which is “rigged” when it’s really not. Dems want to be able to count faster—republicans don’t.

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20342]

3 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

I never said the Constitution said that.

I’d say Lincoln said something to that effect in the Gettysburg Address.

 

that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth

You said that the whole pretense of the United States is that leaders are not supposed to save us. Your Gettysburg Address quote says nothing about leaders not being supposed to save us. 

And Lincoln literally saved the United States. 



 

[mchookem 16194]

1 hour ago, immamac said:

I've been an executive at a fortune 500 company. 

[Frank Drebin 5614]

2 minutes ago, Pancho said:

When Florida was a more bipartisan state, they actually passed pretty fucking decent laws that resulted counting ballots faster. They were embarrassed over the hanging chad shit, so that’s partially why they did this. 

Florida passed a law that allows for them to start counting mail-in ballots 22 days before Election Day. State law says early voting ballots must be completely counted before Election Day as well. In Florida, the mail-in ballot has to be received by a certain time on Election Day. In Nevada, it just has to be postmarked by that day. Part of the reason Nevada has that law is because of those citizens who live in the remote areas of the state mail takes longer or they don’t have access like those in Reno or Vegas. 

Republicans go against bills to help count faster because the slower tabulation time feeds the narrative republicans want which is “rigged” when it’s really not. Dems want to be able to count faster—republicans don’t.

Don’t democrats control Nevada politics?  Haven’t they for a long time?

[TwiceHorn 31259]

3 minutes ago, Pancho said:

When Florida was a more bipartisan state, they actually passed pretty fucking decent laws that resulted counting ballots faster. They were embarrassed over the hanging chad shit, so that’s partially why they did this. 

Florida passed a law that allows for them to start counting mail-in ballots 22 days before Election Day. State law says early voting ballots must be completely counted before Election Day as well. In Florida, the mail-in ballot has to be received by a certain time on Election Day. In Nevada, it just has to be postmarked by that day. Part of the reason Nevada has that law is because of those citizens who live in the remote areas of the state mail takes longer or they don’t have access like those in Reno or Vegas. 

Republicans go against bills to help count faster because the slower tabulation time feeds the narrative republicans want which is “rigged” when it’s really not. Dems want to be able to count faster—republicans don’t.

You know what makes vote counting faster?  Dominion machines and similar.

[Incredulity 11554]

3 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

You said that the whole pretense of the United States is that leaders are not supposed to save us. Your Gettysburg Address quote says nothing about leaders not being supposed to save us. 

And Lincoln literally saved the United States. 



 

The US was founded based on the rejection of a King and forming a government as Lincoln put it, “Of the people, by the people, for the people”. We are the government not some all powerful leader.

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20342]

3 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

The US was founded based on the rejection of a King and forming a government as Lincoln put it, “Of the people, by the people, for the people”. We are the government not some all powerful leader.

I agree with you. But that's not what you said, nor is it what I took issue with.

 

[Incredulity 11554]

6 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

I agree with you. But that's not what you said, nor is it what I took issue with.

 

No, it’s exactly what I said.

[Sawbonz 27396]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Thanks, Plato.

 

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

Technically Socrates 😛

[tx 3 putt 76309]

 

[Born to Run 6565]

2 hours ago, DixonHur said:

Technically Socrates 😛

 

Edited November 8 by Born to Run

[David Dennison 18647]

2 hours ago, DixonHur said:

Technically Socrates 😛

[Ted Lange 16040]

15 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

'd love to be able to engage in conversations, not team red or blue matching order shouting matches.

It’s pretty easy actually.   Pick a specific policy and discuss, once you filter out the culture war BS that gets pushed (mostly by the people who claim to hate it but know it lines their pockets and wins elections ) you’d be amazed how unfar people are apart.  It’s my go to when around republicans.   Don’t talk politician X vs Y,  just talk specific items.  See the trumps economy thread for a good example.

[Hookah Horns 3073]

4 hours ago, Incredulity said:

No, it’s exactly what I said.

Nah, you said the US isn't supposed to need a savior leader, and then provided a quote referring to the basic concept of govt of the people for the people in support. And then you argued that saying the US isn't a monarchy is the same as saying the US doesn't need a leader to save it.

Apparently you think only a monarch could save a country(?) It doesn't really make sense. Hopefully you're drunk or something. 

[SydneyCarton 47843]

7 hours ago, Incredulity said:

This is a bit interesting given the self immolation/decimation MSM has undertaken in the last decade.  
 

The Fairness Doctrine was part of the deal for broadcasters to get public spectrum.  I don’t think it would make any  difference unless it’s applied to Social Media and Podcasts and Cable… which is a stickier wicket. 

Well it took the overturning of the fairness doctrine to create cable news. It popped up after once Ted Turner realized he could make a profit. And it’s been downhill since. So yeah, you eliminate what can’t fit into the boundaries, or it conforms to the rules. 

7 hours ago, hornmpa96 said:

I would gladly consider the German system with an employee representative who sits on the Board. I absolutely believe most corporate boards do not properly provide oversight on senior management.

In my post, I specifically stated that I have no knowledge on Google’s situation. I have been through several layoffs and it was always brutal.

Buybacks are already essentially the last place to deploy capital. By providing a buyback, the company is admitting it doesn’t have anywhere else to deploy the cash profitably.

 

 

 

 

Well, I can think of one way buybacks can be nefarious. When you lay off a fuck ton of employees, then a couple weeks later say “well, we’ve got all this extra money and nothing to do with it. Buybacks I guess.”

[WhatTheBuck 28705]

7 hours ago, DixonHur said:

Perhaps we should all accept an uncomfortable fact.

Democracy is a horrible system for selecting leaders.

When the electorate is uninformed it is. Or in the current case, misinformed. 

[WhatTheBuck 28705]

5 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Well it took the overturning of the fairness doctrine to create cable news. It popped up after once Ted Turner realized he could make a profit.

Ted Turner launched CNN seven years before Reagan revoked the Fairness Doctrine. 

[SydneyCarton 47843]

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Ted Turner launched CNN seven years before Reagan revoked the Fairness Doctrine. 

You’re right, I thought the beginners doctor was revoked in 80. Guess we’re all just stupid?

[TwiceHorn 31259]

I heard, I think on NPR, a history of CNN.

In the early days of cable, Turner had his stations that made their money off sports broadcasting and syndicated content, ie re-runs and old movies.  So, kind of lowest-common-denominator entertainment.

The FCC notified Ted that to retain its broadcasting license, it would have to provide news content, pursuant to the Fairness Doctrine (which required not only fairness in content, but required news content).  Ted hated this and created CNN specifically to be infotainment, presumably to sell more ads.

Edited November 8 by TwiceHorn

[Incredulity 11554]

3 hours ago, Hookah Horns said:

Nah, you said the US isn't supposed to need a savior leader, and then provided a quote referring to the basic concept of govt of the people for the people in support. And then you argued that saying the US isn't a monarchy is the same as saying the US doesn't need a leader to save it.

Apparently you think only a monarch could save a country(?) It doesn't really make sense. Hopefully you're drunk or something. 

Your two paragraphs here directly contradict each other.