Got this from Lou Pro.
What if there were scores of left research projects concretely charting and
naming the webs of connections among the richest people and their property,
the companies ,governments, institutions etc that they control ? Instead of
only GINI indices and GDP summary figures
Carl Remick wrote:
Amid all the pointless paper shuffling of leveraged buyouts and hostile
takeovers during the 1980s, US CEOs somehow pulled off an amazing sleight of
hand that transformed them in the public eye from timeserving hacks into
heroic visionaries for whom no amount of compensation
The public may resent high CEO pay, but it makes CEOs part of the celebrity
culture.
Why would anyone take an interest in Donald Trump. Jack Welch was a rock star
of
business -- until the aftermath of his divorce. Remember Lee Iaccoca?
Carrol writes:
A) Does the public as a whole see CEOs
Floyd Norris: Has capital lost clout in world?
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/03/24/business/norris25.html
This analysis in the International Herald Tribune, is in my opinion
fully compatible with a marxist analysis.
He correctly points out
Why is there too much capital? One answer is that
From: Chris Burford [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Floyd Norris: Has capital lost clout in world?
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/03/24/business/norris25.html
This analysis in the International Herald Tribune, is in my opinion
fully compatible with a marxist analysis.
I do not understand the following comment
Carl Remick wrote:
I do not understand the following comment of Norris at all: With capital
in a weakening position, returns that would once have gone to owners of
capital now are redirected. That is one way to explain the surge in
management compensation over the past two decades. In the early
Carl Remick wrote:
Amid all the pointless paper shuffling of leveraged buyouts and hostile
takeovers during the 1980s, US CEOs somehow pulled off an amazing sleight of
hand that transformed them in the public eye from timeserving hacks into
heroic visionaries for whom no amount of
