Wednesday, February 15, 2012
News First Slice 2/15/12: Occupy, still occupying
Posted by Gwynedd Stuart @gwynnstu on Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:28 AM
2. Here's what $11.2 million worth of coke and meth — seized in Gwinnett County — looks like.
3. Yesterday was officially the final day I was able to exist happily unaware of what "Linsanity" is.
Comments (22)
Showing 1-22 of 22
AT&T sucks. The best way to handle this is tell folks to drop the company not stage a stink in in front of the damn building. You guys are not very smart. You need to go home to you mommies and daddies and learn to read your trust fund statements. Once that happens you will be pissed off enough to become rational and come down off this acid trip you dummies are on.
like
dislike
Yeah! It's horrible when companies lay people off in order to stay afloat and preserve the remaining thousands of jobs that they offer. It would be better if they let labor costs sink them, and the entire company, than to allow for a few people to be laid off! We should start a group that protects our wages and our jobs, regardless of our capabilities, productivity, or the competitive environment. I heard the auto companies did it, and it worked out for them...right? Morons.
Really? Though they posted record profits in the third quarter?
You've sorta bought the line, haven't you? The 'woe is me, business in the US is tough'?
@ America -
"Really? Though they posted record profits in the third quarter?"
So a quarterly profit must be the only thing that drives corporate decision making I guess, right? Perhaps they felt like they could improve productivity, and their share value - which, as a public company, they have an obligation to their shareholders to do. Perhaps they are about to spend a lot of capital to improve a section of their business, which requires laying off some of the excess fat.
The reality is that, in AT&T's mind, they could do without these employees. And guess what, they have every right to make that decision.
No, the issue is EXACTLY your line of thought. That profit has become the motivator for everything-- to the detriment of their product's workforce & its consumer. Your free market garbage & your signature of approval allows this kinda horseshit to continue:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/corporate…
You are the type of person who has allowed this to happen unchecked. "It's their right!" It's a corporate entity that has become less & less concerned with serving the community of its CONSUMERS. There is now no end to the desire & lobby for more & more & more earnings at the expense of workers and common fucking decency. Good work, citizen.
You probably think Corporate Personhood is totally nifty too, huh?
@ America -
"That profit has become the motivator for everything-- to the detriment of their product's workforce & its consumer. Your free market garbage & your signature of approval allows this kinda horseshit to continue"
Haha...ok. Well, you keep living in your little world where public companies don't have obligations to their shareholders to create value, and I'll live in the one where they do.
You also realize that the reason most companies go public (and take on the obligation to create value for its shareholders) is to gain access to capital markets, in order to enable them to expand their business, right? You also realize that as business expands, and companies grow, they hire more people, right? Which means that if AT&T never took on the obligation to it's shareholders, it never would have become the telecom giant it is today. Guess what that means? That's right, all those people that work at AT&T right now, wouldn't be working, or they'd be working somewhere else that also has shareholder obligations, and would can their most unproductive people just like AT&T did. Of course, the employees also have the option to find jobs at companies that 'care more about the community and less about profits'...nobody is stopping them.
"It's a corporate entity that has become less & less concerned with serving the community of its CONSUMERS. There is now no end to the desire & lobby for more & more & more earnings at the expense of workers and common fucking decency".
AT&T provides a service. If they provide that service poorly, consumers will switch brands, and AT&T will go under, or they'll find a way to improve to win back those consumers. If they cannabalize themselves, it's creative destruction at the hands of a more formidable competitor...and that's also good for progress.
Fortunately for the rest of the world, we don't live in a place dominated by people who want to cut short the incentives that drive economic progress and quality of life forward.
Please don't try to "learn me" on how the free market works.
Hmm, they hire more people? Really? Here or elsewhere? Is it trickling? How fast does it trickle?
It's amazing how people with such a complex understanding of Economics have such a limited understanding of Ethics.
"Please don't try to "learn me" on how the free market works"
If you weren't so clearly in need of it, I wouldn't.
"Hmm, they hire more people? Really? Here or elsewhere? Is it trickling? How fast does it trickle?"
What does it matter? I guess the ethical component of hiring and firing is only relevant if it happens in America? Or if it benefits the people in your community? That's quite an interesting take on ethics...
The layoffs were in the landlines operation. I wonder how many of the Occutards have a landline?
Go for it guys! You are providing a valuable educational service.
AT&T's CEO received $27 million last year.
How does that create value for shareholders? And how do you square that with eliminating 750 decent jobs and replacing them with lower-paying jobs with no benefits?
So you're saying that AT&T is hiring 750 low income workers? What a nice gesture from such a benevolent company!
AtlantaAdvocate, you have some cojones if you thought to string a sentence together with corporate ethics & foreign workers. Hilarious.
What does the trickle down matter?It matters a alot to the purposes of your argument. You stated that the more profitable a company becomes, the more people they hire. Incorrect.
If corporations have posted the record profits that they have, that should mean jobs for everyone, right? I don't live in a "little world where companies don't have obligations to their shareholders" (but your condescension is breathtaking).
Using your illogical argument-- if the issue at hand is the obligations to shareholders, are those obligations realistic? Or have we now allowed through legislation & free market blathering to completely clear the way for the shareholder quest for more & more profits at the expense of workers (both American & foreign)?.
The answer is yes.
"you have some cojones if you thought to string a sentence together with corporate ethics & foreign workers"
So what you're saying is that ethics should be applied subjectively, and not objectively, based on where a company chooses to hire workers? Yeah, I have such cajones because I don't think ethics is a regional thing.
"You stated that the more profitable a company becomes, the more people they hire"
No I didn't. I said companies access the capital markets to help their companies grow. When companies grow, they hire more people. When companies access the capital markets through an IPO, they take on the obligation of providing value to shareholders. Without the public status of AT&T's shares, I think it's pretty obvious that many of the people that work at AT&T wouldn't have a job, or would have to find work elsewhere.
"your condescension is breathtaking"
And very much deserved.
"if the issue at hand is the obligations to shareholders, are those obligations realistic"
How could they not be? People invest in companies to earn a return on their investment, and the company has an obligation to do the best job it can to provide that. So if that means cutting a handful of workers - particularly when those workers are cut from a business line that is soon to be obsolete - to increase profitibility and thus shareholder value, then by all means, cut away.
"Or have we now allowed through legislation & free market blathering to completely clear the way for the shareholder quest for more & more profits at the expense of workers"
Legislation? You mean the right to hire and fire as a company sees fit? Which means the freedom to choose how to conduct business without some outside authority regulating that? By the way, every shareholder's quest is more and more profits. That's the nature of investing and credit extension...which is the foundation of modern economics...which is what drives growth and properity.
Again, I know you'd like to think that AT&T has an obligation to saddle themselves with unecessary expenses, and to burden their shareholders with lower valuations than possible, but that's not the way the world works. And hell...even if AT&T followed your "how to fail at business" guideline, they'd become a prime takeover target. Then how many jobs do you think would be lost?
The point is, nobody has an obligation to hire or continue to employ someone who they don't see as maximizing the value of their organization. Your employer clearly does it, but that doesn't mean everyone else should
AA, What AT&T is doing is a perfect example of one reason the middle class. Bottom line while the Executive Suite is seeing obscene increases in compensation they are reducing pay scales to their workers.
Yes Landlines are going out as a business, and their new technology Uverse with its Fiberoptic cables that need skilled labor to splice and install properly is replacing the the Landline workers.
Fine shift the workers. Problem is AT&T has created a new type of job for the Uverse installers. Sure they get paid more than a McDonalds employee but they are receiving significantly lower wages, benefits and work conditions than their counter parts in the Land Line division.
So Workers are being squeezed to fund obscene levels of pay for executives. You can list this as one of the reasons the top is taking an ever increasing slice of the pie at the expense of the rest of us. What's the answer? What's the fix? I'm not sure, but dismissing and ignoring the problem sure isn't the answer. A vibrant middle class is necessary for a successful capitalist system.
Really, AA? You've reduced your argument to shitty barbs? You have this delusion that you are super urbane & everyone else is a buffoon. Thanks, but Machiavelli doesn't do it for me.
Again, every post is merely illustrating how the market works now (ad nauseam). I understand how the market works now. That's the not the point I was making. Yes, legislation. No, not the right of companies to hire as they see fit. That is not what I meant by 'legislation'. No, that's not what I meant about 'ethics'. But keep putting your spin on every one of my comments.
Every post you make is an attempt to "educate" commenters on the free market & economic theory. We are not commenting on how it works. We are very clear on how it's working & it's not working for the American people. We don't need a lesson in that.
I have almost completed excising AT&T from my life. I cut the landline, traded DSL for ComCast, and will soon switch to Sprint wireless. BellSouth was decent, but ever since AT&T bought it out, just horrible.
This the power you have when you think a company is screwing somebody somehow. Take your business elsewhere. I'm doing it because I think their service sucked but you can do it because you think their CEO is a pig.
All CEOs who run comparable companies make millions. Why? Because that what CEOs make. When you think about their compensation, you have to ask, how much did they make for the company? Their decisions resulted in how much more revenue or caused how much loss in revenue? What do we have to offer in compensation to attract people who are capable of doing the job compared to other companies? You can find 500 linemen in a couple of hours but how long will it take and what is the talent pool for someone who can competently shepherd a multi-billion dollar operation?
What on earth does the CEO's compensation have to do with anything? They cut these jobs because they don't need them. They pay the CEO what they pay him because he has the skills and talent to demand every penny that the market will bear in compensation. Don't every one of you do the same?
Have any of you leftists ever run a business? A business is absolutely NOT in business in order to hire people. In fact, as a business owner, the very last thing you want is to hire more people. They are usually your biggest cost and highest risk. you don't hire them until you absolutely have to. And you only keep them as long as they are creating value.
The job of management is to wring out every penny of value. Creative destruction. Deal with it.
Oy you really think CEO's are that much better than they were 20 years ago?
No the matrix for calculating their "worth" is way out of wack. In part because the folks that approve their compensation are compensation committee made that include "independent" board of directors. Sounds like that should work, only problem is those "independent" board of directors are highly compensated executives from other major corporations so of course they think their shit is worth more than gold.
Kind of like picking a sampling of people on unemployment set what they think the unemployment benefits should be.
dancamp691 read all the comments there is a connection that's pretty obvious. At least Oy recognizes it even if he may disagree with it.
Love how some people can't even see what's right in front of them.
I love the way the commenters a) defend CEOs' rights to make every penny they can while b) simultaneously defending the idea that workers should race to see who will work for the tiniest paycheck.
"I love the way the commenters a) defend CEOs' rights to make every penny they can while b) simultaneously defending the idea that workers should race to see who will work for the tiniest paycheck."
well, you see, it's important to defend one person's right to a fantastic otherwordly paycheck over the masses' right to a living wage because One Day I will be That Person being paid millions of dollars
what? stop laughing! it's true!
Latest in Fresh Loaf
-
Time and Place: Read between the lines
To me this photo is about doing your own thing and following your own path in life.
-
Vernon Jones wants to return to the Gold Dome and other interesting qualification tidbits 2
Qualifying period ends, dust settles, campaigns begin
-
Suspects in Pittsburgh gay bashing slated to go to trial Tuesday
The men accused of beating Brandon White in Southwest Atlanta already headed to court
- More »
More by Author
-
Did the government kill Andrew Wordes? 66
The tortured life and sudden death of Roswell's Chicken Man
-
Gwinnett County libraries won't carry '50 Shades of Grey' because it's smut, which is true 16
It really is garbage
- More »
