• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

The Official Paracast Political Thread!

Free episodes:

Status
Not open for further replies.
And you have to wonder the fascination for corporate raiders, such as Mitt Romney. He does what the Richard Gere character did in the movie, "Pretty Woman," which is to acquire companies, friendly or otherwise, split them up and sell off the parts.
And how about the Melanie Griffith character in the film 'Working Girl' (was that the title?) ? She was in 'acquisitions'.

Decades ago - probably in the 1980's - there was a company outside of Boston that was a major employer in a small New England town. It was a book binding company, but not just any old book binding company. The company had been in existence for over 100 years - generations of townfolk worked at the book binding company. journeymen and women in the beautiful art of classical book binding. It employed those proficient in the arts of paper making, calligraphy, and all the other attendent skills required to produce a beautiful hand-made bound book. The company did business world-wide. In every sense it was a flourishing company.

One day it became the object of a hostile take-over - an 'acquisition' - by a larger company that had no interest whatsoever in the art of book binding. Within a year of the take-over the book binding company was closed down, it's assets sold off, and it was placed in the take-over company's ledgers as a 'loss' and tax write off (the sole purpose of the take-over).

The small town's livelihood was shattered. Familes had to move. Artists could no longer make a living plying their exquisite and unique artistic skills. All too familiar take-over scenario that would be repeated across the ensuing decades with other companies. And all for what? Profits. Shareholders' dividend checks. The cost? A beautiful, rare thing of artistry and grace in the world. And people's livelihoods.

It's why I am an advocate of 'democracy in the workplace'. (a la Richard Wolff - Marxist). With other laws in place, the employees of that book binding company would have had the right of first refusal. They could have bought the company and made it into a collaborative - livelihoods (and a town) saved, as well as a beautiful art enduring into the future.

Our laws are skewed in favor of corporate power. We need to change the laws to enable workers' rights to their livelihood.
 
Last edited:
And if I worked in middle management at AT&T or Time Warner right now, I'd be shaking in my boots wondering if I'll have a job if/when that merger is completed. Corporate synergy = fire lots of people to make more money.
 
Tyger, it may not be worth your time. It's like arguing with Pixelsmith over global warming.
I know what you mean. But I don't usually do this with a view to changing anyone's mind. I do it only when I am interested in the topic and find I have things to share. The part of this that is concerning is the glibness around 'violence'. Nothing I have ever seen in political debate in the US. Have you?
 
Take a look at Germany, for one. Denmark?
Actually most of Europe has settled on a socialist approach to caring for the health of their communities. Families have three years off when a new baby arrives in some countries with the father having to take at least one of those years off. All jobs are protected and their quality of life is quite high. Compare that to America's approach where women have to choose between raising a child or her job. What Europe has come to understand is that a compassionate approach to developing community means you have to pay less later for social disfunction, crime, health, addiction etc. There's a lot to be learned from societies that place a premium on the social safety net and the redistribution of wealth....I know I know....some will cry foul and insanity but I would look to their levels of crime and murder and overall health and education before you do so.
 
And how about the Melanie Griffith character in the film 'Working Girl' (was that the title?) ? She was in 'acquisitions'.

Decades ago - probably in the 1980's - there was a company outside of Boston that was a major employer in a small New England town. It was a book binding company, but not just any old book binding company. The company had been in existence for over 100 years - generations of townfolk worked at the book binding company. journeymen and women in the beautiful art of classical book binding. It employed those proficient in the arts of paper making, calligraphy, and all the other attendent skills required to produce a beautiful hand-made bound book. The company did business world-wide. In every sense it was a flourishing company.

One day it became the object of a hostile take-over - an 'acquisition' - by a larger company that had no interest whatsoever in the art of book binding. Within a year of the take-over the book binding company was closed down, it's assets sold off, and it was placed in the take-over company's ledgers as a 'loss' and tax write off (the sole purpose of the take-over).

The small town's livelihood was shattered. Familes had to move. Artists could no longer make a living plying their exquisite and unique artistic skills. All too familiar take-over scenario that would be repeated across the ensuing decades with other companies. And all for what? Profits. Shareholders' dividend checks. The cost? A beautiful, rare thing of artistry and grace in the world. And people's livelihoods.

It's why I am an advocate of 'democracy in the workplace'. (a la Richard Wolff - Marxist). With other laws in place, the employees of that book binding company would have had the right of first refusal. They could have bought the company and made it into a collaborative - livelihoods (and a town) saved, as well as a beautiful art enduring into the future.

Our laws are skewed in favor of corporate power. We need to change the laws to enable workers' rights to their livelihood.
Wouldn't work. I'm involved in M&A activity for a very large company.

If you don't want to risk getting bought, it's simple: don't go public to begin with.

You go public for one reason: to use the public's capital. That's why it becomes all about the shareholders - because you just sold your company to them.
 
FBI in Internal Feud Over Hillary Clinton Probe

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
I heard a different version, which is that the messages, on Anthony Weiner's gear, do not include messages from her server at all. If they did, it you it would be messages they'd already seen.

Remember, they already had her server, and they already recovered what they could recover from it. Well there were several servers used over the four-year period. Also remember that they just got a subpoena to look at them, since stories about what they allegedly contain are not true.
 
Wouldn't work. I'm involved in M&A activity for a very large company.

If you don't want to risk getting bought, it's simple: don't go public to begin with.

You go public for one reason: to use the public's capital. That's why it becomes all about the shareholders - because you just sold your company to them.
Exactly so, you are correct, under current laws, which can be changed.

It's interesting that there are companies now making the decision not to go public.
 
People seen this? Busy weekend. What an election this time round!

Harry Reid Just Accused FBI Of Hiding “Explosive Info” About Trump & Putin
LINK:
Harry Reid Just Accused FBI Of Hiding "Explosive Info" About Trump & Putin
TEXT: "Democratic Senate leader Harry Reid just sent a scathing open letter to FBI Director James Comey, calling him out for smearing Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton while hiding a sinister truth about Donald Trump that the public deserves to know. In it, he accuses the controversial FBI Director of sitting on secret “explosive” intelligence information about the Republican presidential campaign’s coordination with Russian strongman Vladimir Putin. Reid wrote:

The double standard established by your actions is clear.

In my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisors, and the Russian government – a foreign interest openly hostile to the United States, which Trump praises at every opportunity. The public has a right to know this information. I wrote to you months ago calling for this information to be released to the public. There is no danger to American interests from releasing it. And yet, you continue to resist calls to inform the public of this critical information.

By contrast, as soon as you came into possession of the slightest innuendo related to Secretary Clinton, you rushed to publicize it in the most negative light possible. Moreover, in tarring Secretary Clinton with thin innuendo, you overruled longstanding tradition and the explicit guidance of your own Department.

You rushed to take this step eleven days before a presidential election, despite the fact that for all you know, the information you possess could be entirely duplicative of the information you already examined which exonerated Secretary Clinton.

"Senator Reid continued by notifying Comey of violating the Hatch Act, whic forbids federal employees from engaging in partisan acts. Even further, Reid said that he regretted helping President Obama break a long Republican filibuster of his nomination to head the FBI just three short years ago.

"It’s not surprising that there is a tangible link between Putin and Trump, especially after aninterview of the Republican claiming he has a relationship with the Russian dictator was unearthed by the Democratic Coalition Against Trump and authenticated by MSNBC host Thomas A. Roberts this week.

"Which begs the question, what is the Republican Party’s standard bearer hiding regarding his dealings with Vladimir Putin?"


Trump Admits to Relationship with Putin in 2013
 
Gene, you might want to sit down, you are likely to get dizzy from all the spinning you're doing. I have posted article after article regarding voter fraud and you dismissed them time and time again... then you flaunt one losey time it occurred to the opposite party... Think of all the journalist whose hard work to provide the facts that you dismiss until the news suits your slanted view point?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

Gene is somewhat of an enigma. Smart enough to realize that the mainstream's belittlement of the UFO topic is undeserved, but somehow 100% drinks the mainstream kool-aid when it comes to love of Hillary. His Pavlovian defenses and ignoring of issues presented would make the crook-in-chief herself proud.

I have a friend sort of like that in the real world. This is about how every one of our convos goes lately when politics is brought up.

Me: Hey man, did you see this email where Hillary herself said X, Y and Z?
Friend: Doesn't matter Trump is horrible
Me: I'm not voting for Donald either, wasn't talking about him
Friend: Well go read it off of her website it says otherwise
Me: Her public position doesn't really matter as much when you can gather her private position in her own writing
Friend: Who cares it's just emails
Me: Well, I'm sure both of the big political parties are corrupted to the core, but some of the stuff that's come out is completely indefensible
Friend: I'm still voting for her, Trump will start WW3
 
Gene is somewhat of an enigma. Smart enough to realize that the mainstream's belittlement of the UFO topic is undeserved, but somehow 100% drinks the mainstream kool-aid when it comes to love of Hillary. His Pavlovian defenses and ignoring of issues presented would make the crook-in-chief herself proud.

I have a friend sort of like that in the real world. This is about how every one of our convos goes lately when politics is brought up.

Me: Hey man, did you see this email where Hillary herself said X, Y and Z?
Friend: Doesn't matter Trump is horrible
Me: I'm not voting for Donald either, wasn't talking about him
Friend: Well go read it off of her website it says otherwise
Me: Her public position doesn't really matter as much when you can gather her private position in her own writing
Friend: Who cares it's just emails
Me: Well, I'm sure both of the big political parties are corrupted to the core, but some of the stuff that's come out is completely indefensible
Friend: I'm still voting for her, Trump will start WW3
Well, no, your comments have just a passing connection with the facts or what I've said on the subject.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top