Read The Forum Rules: We have a clear set of rules to keep the forum running smoothly. Click here to review them.

Post Reply 
International Corporations
Author Message
Edmund Ironside Offline
Woodpecker
**

Posts: 260
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 7
Post: #1
International Corporations
A rich topic, but I want to start with a fairly simple question.

Why is there such an uproar about the potential that Russia "interfered with the election" but it's perfectly fine for Disney, Time Warner, or Goldman Sachs to try to influence elections in any way they want? (Ok, "any way" might be a slight exaggeration ... but between ownership of media, political donations, and influence over employees ... the influence is huge.)

Answer ... I assume ... these are US companies we are talking about, so it's natural for them to play a part in US politics, unlike outside entities.

Yet, in many very important ways, they don't consider themselves to be "US companies". They consider themselves to be extra-national entities ... citizens of the world ... with no loyalty to one nation over another. Some of them, many, would explicitly trumpet that as a virtue. When it comes time to decide where to build a factory, where to hire workers, where to make any type of investment, they would claim they have no responsibility to the US at all, in fact they would claim they have a fiduciary duty to not favor the US or US citizens in any way.

So, again ... if these are not US entities with any loyalty to the US, why is it ok for them to influence US elections? In my opinion if they aren't required to have loyalty to the nation and its citizens, they should be regarded with as much suspicion as any other outside entity when it comes to influencing politics.
03-27-2017 03:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 10 users Like Edmund Ironside's post:
Handsome Creepy Eel, DamienCasanova, TigerMandingo, MikeMcLaren, Matrixdude, RoastBeefCurtains4Me, Mr. D, sterling_archer, balybary, DJ-Matt
Handsome Creepy Eel Offline
Owl
******
Gold Member

Posts: 12,551
Joined: Apr 2011
Reputation: 169
Post: #2
RE: International Corporations
That's one thing where I've always disagreed with Justice Scalia. A corporation wields too much concentrated and inherently globalist power to be placed on the same footing as a nationalist citizen who personally bears all the consequences of his votes and donations.

Even though Trump beat the corporate behemoth this time, next time we might not be so lucky.

"Imagine" by HCE | Hitler reacts to Battle of Montreal | An alternative use for squid that has never crossed your mind before
03-27-2017 03:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like Handsome Creepy Eel's post:
Edmund Ironside, sterling_archer
The Beast1 Offline
Peacock
******
Gold Member

Posts: 7,610
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 85
Post: #3
RE: International Corporations
Because they own all of the soap boxes so they can claim their the "good guys" .

Obviously, we all know better and the internet helps that.

Shalom Alechem!
03-27-2017 03:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes The Beast1's post:
Edmund Ironside
Simeon_Strangelight Offline
Hawk
*******
Gold Member

Posts: 19,498
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 219
Post: #4
RE: International Corporations
The globalist elite started viewing themselves international/global long before the corporations - back in the 18th century already. They easily left a country after the dabt ratio went to high and set up shop elsewhere. They may live in different places, but have no allegiance to a country. The corporations are the same.

When you think about corporations and about the globalists you have to remember this:

In their imagination they are like the lords of the 18th century and everyone attacking or questioning them from the lower wage-earning classes is literally viewed as a serf/peasant clad in rags. The power differential is probably even bigger and in their mind they simply ignore you. Any opposing journalist, scientist, blogger etc. - that person is a beggar in rags who is questioning his lordship riding through on his horse. Of course as a lord you ignore such a person.

The corporations view all of you just the same way. When you have accumulated 500 mio. $ for your family, then maybe you can start even remotely be viewed as a non-rag person.
03-27-2017 04:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 10 users Like Simeon_Strangelight's post:
Steve McQueen, Samseau, Neo, Edmund Ironside, Matrixdude, Mr. D, sterling_archer, Irenicus, DJ-Matt, Tactician
Neo Offline
Pelican
****
Gold Member

Posts: 1,218
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 16
Post: #5
RE: International Corporations
Trump's victory was just the beginning of the battle. The swamp will not be drained until the universities and corporations are drained.

As consumers we can vote with our wallets and not purchase products from corporations that support liberal causes. Unfortunately it's extremely difficult because the products are everywhere, and several people depend on them for a pay check as well.

It's going to be a difficult road because the elites have been entrenched in this country for decades. Their vast wealth and influence gives them a tremendous head start. Look at the boards and leadership of large US corporations, how many last names do you recognize? I did this once and noticed many of the richest families there. Same with politics.

I'm not sure what the answer is. Trump is just buying time. The only solution is for things to just come crashing down triggering a reset. People have been calling for it for years, and nothing. But we're overdue in my opinion and I predict we see something big in our lifetimes.
(This post was last modified: 03-27-2017 07:28 PM by Neo.)
03-27-2017 07:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 5 users Like Neo's post:
Edmund Ironside, Handsome Creepy Eel, Irenicus, ElFlaco, DJ-Matt
Edmund Ironside Offline
Woodpecker
**

Posts: 260
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 7
Post: #6
RE: International Corporations
(03-27-2017 04:26 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  In their imagination they are like the lords of the 18th century and everyone attacking or questioning them from the lower wage-earning classes is literally viewed as a serf/peasant clad in rags. The power differential is probably even bigger and in their mind they simply ignore you. Any opposing journalist, scientist, blogger etc. - that person is a beggar in rags who is questioning his lordship riding through on his horse. Of course as a lord you ignore such a person.

Sure, but theoretically we, as citizens don't have to treat them with the subservience they imagine. So I was pointing out what seems like a double standard that we should try to correct - allowing large corporations to have benefits that seem to assume they are good, loyal US citizens, while at the same time they aren't held to that standard of behavior. If they don't consider themselves part of the US, why do we treat them like they are?

If a major US corporation wants to move its HQ out of the US, or sell itself to a non-US corporation, the government might get involved if they think it is against US interests to allow that. But other than officially moving their HQ, no one questions pretty much anything they do. If Apple or Microsoft started giving every single job, other than board of directors, to non-US citizens ... making all of that "human capital" investment outside the US, and thereby effectively moving their entire knowledge base outside the US ... would anyone question it? Why not? If I owned a ranch in south Texas along the Mexican border, would anyone care if I decided that I wanted my ranch to be in Mexico instead of the US? I think they would. Yet the capital and investment in personnel and all of the intellectual capital from experience that comes with that for huge corporations can be moved overseas without any more justification than claiming that it's a good business decision.

(03-27-2017 07:28 PM)Neo Wrote:  As consumers we can vote with our wallets and not purchase products from corporations that support liberal causes. Unfortunately it's extremely difficult because the products are everywhere, and several people depend on them for a pay check as well.

Choosing what to buy is the easy part (and it's not always easy.) A lot of people in certain careers basically have only large corporations as potential employers. I promise you this right now - there are huge numbers of people right now who would be afraid to do something as simple as "like" or retweet or otherwise show overt support for the President of the US on their personal media accounts ... personal accounts such as facebook or twitter, not even professional accounts like linkedin or anything while at work ... because they fear it would damage their careers. Think about how screwed up that is. That's one form of influence over employees (and potential employees.) It wouldn't be quite so bad if things in the corporate world were a little more 50-50 split. Most employees at big corporations could probably hang a picture of the-grotesqueness-that-was-once-Bruce-Jenner on their cube walls without concern for their reputation, but hanging up a picture of the current POTUS would be considered offensive and likely get them branded as politically untouchable.
03-27-2017 10:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Simeon_Strangelight Offline
Hawk
*******
Gold Member

Posts: 19,498
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 219
Post: #7
RE: International Corporations
(03-27-2017 10:38 PM)Edmund Ironside Wrote:  
(03-27-2017 04:26 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  In their imagination they are like the lords of the 18th century and everyone attacking or questioning them from the lower wage-earning classes is literally viewed as a serf/peasant clad in rags. The power differential is probably even bigger and in their mind they simply ignore you. Any opposing journalist, scientist, blogger etc. - that person is a beggar in rags who is questioning his lordship riding through on his horse. Of course as a lord you ignore such a person.

Sure, but theoretically we, as citizens don't have to treat them with the subservience they imagine. So I was pointing out what seems like a double standard that we should try to correct - allowing large corporations to have benefits that seem to assume they are good, loyal US citizens, while at the same time they aren't held to that standard of behavior. If they don't consider themselves part of the US, why do we treat them like they are?

We here don't treat them that way.
We don't bomb the world equally.
We don't decide anything aside from who is voted into power and then we are almost powerless to do anything aside.

There is no we.
The majority of the population venerates wealth and power, they think that if someone has multiple degrees, a high level position, then he won't lie to you or be unethical. The majority of the population believes in a just government for the people, in a just leadership of business leaders, in a just assessment of science and technology. Surely a climatologist who has an IQ over 160 and makes millions of the global warming field would not lie to you?

The same is true with everything else.

Our system is one con after another. Corporations have come to power when they started to tax individuals more some 100 years ago. That was also the time when the trillionaires of the world transferred their wealth to foundations. The same foundations bought shares in a multitude of companies. The concentration of wealth is much greater than it seems in our world.

Until more people become aware of this, then there is no change.
03-28-2017 01:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 7 users Like Simeon_Strangelight's post:
Samseau, Handsome Creepy Eel, amity, TigerMandingo, Mr. D, sterling_archer, DJ-Matt
amity Offline
Pelican
****
Gold Member

Posts: 1,307
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 20
Post: #8
RE: International Corporations
I work for a multinational corporation and in recent times especially they have ramped up the Diversity, LGBT, Gender Equality stuff and also they're pushing the UN Global Goals bigly.
It doesn't affect me much on a personal level, even if I dislike the way things are moving.
I sometimes point this stuff out to colleagues, but 90% are too plugged into the Matrix to have any curiousity about it or care, also I have to be careful about not being too vocal about my beliefs as anyone does in an organisation like this.
Although not directly related to the thread discussion, I thought the following video, which I saw earlier today might interest people.
David Icke gets abuse for his "conspiracy theories" and here and there he cucks out by not addressing problems with Islam or migrants, but for the most part, he's good, very switched on.
This Richie Allen fellow too seems aware to what's happening (I find this particular Irish accent a bit grating but much of what he says here is spot on):


(This post was last modified: 03-28-2017 08:56 AM by amity.)
03-28-2017 08:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like amity's post:
Handsome Creepy Eel, Irenicus
TigerMandingo Offline
Banned

Posts: 4,016
Joined: Dec 2013
Post: #9
RE: International Corporations
Joseph Stiglitz has been writing about this stuff forever. I think Globalization and its Discontents was the first major study of its kind to critique big business and the way they conduct themselves. I know lefties get a lot of hate on here but No Logo was another great book about the insidious nature of multinationals.

Stiglitz has been warning that the growing wealth inequality in the West is going to lead us into some deep shit if we don't get a handle on it. Yet, I've never seen Stiglitz being interviewed on any MSM outlet despite the fact that he was actually an industry insider and worked for the IMF for quite a while.
(This post was last modified: 03-28-2017 12:20 PM by TigerMandingo.)
03-28-2017 12:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 5 users Like TigerMandingo's post:
Handsome Creepy Eel, RaccoonFace, Samseau, RoastBeefCurtains4Me, TravelerKai
Kid Twist Offline
Hummingbird
*****

Posts: 3,120
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 35
Post: #10
RE: International Corporations
Tiger, I have occasion to meeting with Mr. Stiglitz for reasons I won't share here due to anonymity. Even though I'm moderate to "right" leaning, I'm quite sure that he has seen a lot of shady stuff in the top rungs of world business. What's more, I called him at the WorldBank one time (story too long to repeat here) and his secretary actually answered and took a message. I can confirm that he is very accessible, and now that he is much older, he may be even more if he stays healthy.

Check out Jordan Peterson talking about the Gini coefficient. That relates well to this topic, and is something I figured out on my own apparently convergently when I found that someone had studied it. Amazing stuff.
03-30-2017 10:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 3 users Like Kid Twist's post:
amity, Irenicus, TravelerKai
kavi Offline
Banned

Posts: 229
Joined: Dec 2016
Post: #11
RE: International Corporations
There are many issues here but the main one I believe is that the employee-employer relationship in the west is far too much skewed in favour of the employer.

There are many reasons for this but the main problrm is the general docility and subservience shown by the average western person (man).

These are the things that need to be enacted

1. All corporations should be owned by the employees or atleast the employees should have the most control, not the shareholders. Money is just a commody and can be obtained from a number of different sources. Talent is not a commody as each individual is unique and a company simply will not function if all its workers upped and left. Ergo, takent is more important that money.

Forget shareholder value, the purpose if each and every business is to add value to it's employees lives.

2. No more of this secrecy crap, all employees should know how much their co-workers get paid.

3. Management should be selected by the workers rather than by the shareholders.

4. Companies should.pay men more than women.

5. All.workers should go on strike until the above has happened.

6. All workers should be part of a union.

The fact is employees are only subservient because they themselves allow it. Take Goldman Sachs, it's value must be in the 100s of bilions but all those shareholders would get bumraped when the employees decide to leave enmasse, now whats the value of a few IT systems and a little money in the bank. Fuck all.

Ultimately the biggest evil.in our society is the stock market.
03-30-2017 07:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes kavi's post:
TigerMandingo
Simeon_Strangelight Offline
Hawk
*******
Gold Member

Posts: 19,498
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 219
Post: #12
RE: International Corporations
< Actually the measures above are on the level of communism - also cannot be achieved - ownership of a company will never be given to the employees and is frankly not fair. Wealthy folk would stop having corporate entities with shareholders and would all go private.

The economy would be booming already if you got rid of usury, initiated social credit money creation with demurrage. Usury saps out 50% of all prices and restricts money supply. Currently the concentration however is so steep that you would have to engage in some forms of forced sales. But they would stop being able to squeeze out everyone.

And of course - workers should have a good strong representation in the form of super-strong unions. The pendulum is lopsided, but Germany and France had those unions, also the US ones in the 1960-70s were not that bad. Yeah - ending secrecy is a good thing.

But this is akin to asking unicorns for everybody. Will not happen.
(This post was last modified: 03-31-2017 01:24 AM by Simeon_Strangelight.)
03-31-2017 01:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like Simeon_Strangelight's post:
Samseau, username
kavi Offline
Banned

Posts: 229
Joined: Dec 2016
Post: #13
RE: International Corporations
It's not communism and I dont see what is unfair about it. The fact is employees already have the most power in a company as all they have to do is get up and leave and that company will be worth zero. The fact that they dont is what makes the system so lopsided.
03-31-2017 07:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Simeon_Strangelight Offline
Hawk
*******
Gold Member

Posts: 19,498
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 219
Post: #14
RE: International Corporations
Bullshit.

If I create a company based on my idea, maybe funded by a credit I take or money I get from my family, then this company is successful, then why the fuck should I give everybody I hire 90% of my company? If I hire 15.000 people, I will own pretty much nothing.

This is bullshit and is communism, actually even something worse. Ridiculous idea. Those people I hire can all walk out, I hire the next bunch and the company is still worth something so long as not everyone walks out at the same time. This is utter Antifa marxist crap.

And I am a guy who is for strong unions and interest free money creation with social credit which would be wired to everyone each month - the government would have to tax the budget from the the people instead of printing and borrowing from the super-rich.

But even I would not disincentivise entrepreneurship.
(This post was last modified: 03-31-2017 07:42 AM by Simeon_Strangelight.)
03-31-2017 07:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Simeon_Strangelight's post:
username
kavi Offline
Banned

Posts: 229
Joined: Dec 2016
Post: #15
RE: International Corporations
Not really you will still own a large chunk of it depending on how much is given away, maybe upto to 50%. Although this is a big hypothetical. Also remember the incentives of becoming a an entrepreneur need not be that one becomes a multi-billionaire when because even making a a few million or thereabouts is pretty good. You dont need to look at the likes of Philip Green, Mark Zukerberg, Sergei Brin or whoever as some sort of role model.

In a small business the owner is normally working there whereas we are mostly discussing large corporations which are mostly owned by capital rich shareholders who dont work there or know about the industry or have the skills to make the business work. Those shareholders are not important and do not add value in any way, they are mostly there because owners have floated their companies in order to take a massive payout. My point is that it is not healthy for a society for people to make money without adding value but just buy passively buying up shares and taking advantage of others talent and hard work.

Your example of a small business is different, Yes, if your 5 or 6 employees left you could recover. If Goldman lost even 20% of their employees tomorrow I think their business would be dead so it is not the same thing.

A good example is the privatization of Royal Mail, the state owned British mail delivery company. When this happened a few years ago funds in the city made huge sums because the shares were initially sold at a discount to their fair value. But the people working there didnt make as much even though thehy are the ones keeping the place moving. Now, if these guys went on strike or even just upped and started a new company the old Royal Mail would be worth only it's current assets (buildings and cash) and the new company set up with borrowed and employee money could be up and running in a few weeks.

My point is where is the value in these organizations? Is it with the owners or with the employees? In a small business it will be with the owners but in floated companies it will be with the employees so they should have more power and gain from their success. This is the natural way and I expect once a solution is found these types of companies will become more prominent.
03-31-2017 02:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | RooshV.com | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication