From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Sun Sep 01 2002 - 15:01:01 MDT
On Sun, 1 Sep 2002 Spudboy100@aol.com wrote:
> Ron, I am not sure that historically the unemployed were ever viewed in this
> country as "valuable assets" except, perhaps in the political rhetoric of the
> Democratic Party. The actual political-economic choices made by both
> democrats and republicans, as far as I can tell, has been to defer to the
> interests of corporations, which lobby both parties. Maybe in the 1950's and
> 60's the Labor Unions attempted some measures toward that stated end, but
> again, the reality was to provide greater benefits for those workers who were
> member of the Union.,
The real culprit, IMO is that you don't have accounting methods that
can allow you evaluate whether the company is being managed in a way
that will provide the greatest 5 or 10 year growth. You also don't
really have investment vehicles, other than perhaps convertable bonds,
that allow you to earn a decent return and still profit from a company
that is managed well. I wonder why the convertable bond market isn't
much larger than the stock or the bond markets individually?
So long as Wall St. and investors are focused on the quarterly and
annual numbers you are not going to have managers doing the long term
planning that would allow them to internally retrain workers so
they are doing high value added work close to home (e.g. building
ultra high efficiency power plants) when the steel industry goes
offshore. So the net result is when the manufacturing relocates
elsewhere people with narrow job skills get laid off.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:37 MST