War officially starts tommorow

[Fogdog]

He'll care when all his supporters in the agriculture sector get hit with a 35% surcharge for overseas exports too ALL their major markets.
And in order to make up the difference, which they will have too or go broke, who do they make up the difference with?
Take a guess?
Americans?
Ha ha ha
Be careful who you vote for, motherfuckers

NPR did a segment on Cattle industry and the tariffs.

Just in time for that Fourth of July burger, tariffs are hitting U.S. beef exports this week. And tariffs mean lots of prime cuts could get dumped back on the domestic market, lowering prices. Symons, and other ranchers across the West, are bracing to lose money — but many still proudly support President Donald Trump.

Symons doesn't regret her vote, but she has started to worry. "We're at the mercy of overseas and at the mercy of the bigger players in the game," she says.

Kent Bacus, who heads trade for the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, says, "We're hopeful that the administration is going to be successful, but we need them to be successful very soon."

"we need them to be successful very soon". These folks are sssssoooooo fucked. They are talking as if the "war" will be over by November. More like their ranch will be some celebrity's hobby purchased at fire sale prices by the time Trump leaves office in disgrace at the end of 2020.

 

[Unclebaldrick]

NPR did a segment on Cattle industry and the tariffs.

Just in time for that Fourth of July burger, tariffs are hitting U.S. beef exports this week. And tariffs mean lots of prime cuts could get dumped back on the domestic market, lowering prices. Symons, and other ranchers across the West, are bracing to lose money — but many still proudly support President Donald Trump.

Symons doesn't regret her vote, but she has started to worry. "We're at the mercy of overseas and at the mercy of the bigger players in the game," she says.

Kent Bacus, who heads trade for the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, says, "We're hopeful that the administration is going to be successful, but we need them to be successful very soon."

"we need them to be successful very soon". These folks are sssssoooooo fucked. They are talking as if the "war" will be over by November. More like their ranch will be some celebrity's hobby purchased at fire sale prices by the time Trump leaves office in disgrace at the end of 2020.

Take Our Cheese, Please: American Cheese Makers Suffer Under New Tariffs

https://www.wsj.com/articles/take-our-cheese-please-american-cheese-makers-suffer-under-new-tariffs-1530783005

 

[Fogdog]

Not all CEOs are Warren Buffet, dude. Lol.

Not any CEOs are like Buffet.

The kind of CEO that Baldric is talking about is far more common. Plenty of studies show that CEO pay rarely matches their performance. All of the big money ones have a nice golden parachute packed and will be just fine after making "hard choices" about employee lay offs.

 

[SneekyNinja]

no, but they fucking want to be

Nothing wrong with that either.

Shit-loads of tech CEO's are doing excellent work in Africa and other underdeveloped places.

Extreme poverty in Africa has gone down 50% in the last 15 years, some wealthy people are obviously doing some good.

Even, get this, Akon is putting solar panels in Africa.

Some rich people are assholes too, look at the Senate Turtle-Majority Leader for example. It's not an issue of SE class.

 

[Fogdog]

Nothing wrong with that either.

Shit-loads of tech CEO's are doing excellent work in Africa and other underdeveloped places.

Extreme poverty in Africa has gone down 50% in the last 15 years, some wealthy people are obviously doing some good.

Even, get this, Akon is putting solar panels in Africa.

Some rich people are assholes too, look at the Senate Turtle-Majority Leader for example. It's not an issue of SE class.

Sorry for not understanding your point of view here.

A career in tech should have taught you about what happens when a Wall-Street type of CEO takes charge of a tech company. The list of failed companies in the wake of CEO's who made big bucks while taking the company into bankruptcy is very long. If they accept the money and fame, then they should also be given the blame.

If you are talking about founder-CEO's the story is different.

 

[SneekyNinja]

Sorry for not understanding your point of view here.

A career in tech should have taught you about what happens when a Wall-Street type of CEO takes charge of a tech company. The list of failed companies in the wake of CEO's who made big bucks while taking the company into bankruptcy is very long. If they accept the money and fame, then they should also be given the blame.

If you are talking about founder-CEO's the story is different.

You're talking about a tiny % of the overall CEOs.

Targeted outrage is better than smearing everyone together like the Dog Kennel people do.

 

[Grandpapy]

If "Corps are People too”, can I buy my neighbors wife's? then put them to work making those delicious Cinnamon Rolls, sell their kids to cut overhead then set the whole thing up for a takeover by the jilted husbands?
..and how many can I own?

This guy’s got moxie,

Meet Roman Abramovich
After helping launch Putin’s presidency in Russia, Abramovich also was instrumental in the vetting and picking of Putin’s cabinet, according to Midgley and Hutchins in their book. They also reveal that Abramovich was instrumental in the creation of Putin’s political party, Unity.

While TransCanada has paid for the pipe already produced by Evraz, according to TransCanada spokesperson Terry Cunha, the continued construction of the Keystone XL pipeline could lead to even more profits for Abramovich's company, whether it manufactures the steel in its Canadian or U.S. factories.
https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/02/13/abramovitch-putin-keystone-xl-steel

he laughs at tariffs while his stock rebounds.

 

[zeddd]

Yeah, I almost added that in - he is still fully supportive of Trump. My guess is that about 450 of our employees are out of 500. He will likely retire in a couple of years with a very good retirement.

It is truly amazing to hear the workers talk. Most of them have seldom, if ever, traveled beyond a couple of counties contiguous to us and have no awareness of the global marketplace. So when China puts tariffs on soybeans, their response is "fine, then they will starve" as if no other market for soybeans exists in the world. Brazil? Argentina? It is if they don't exist to most of these guys - so when Trump says "we hold all the cards", they believe him.

We have tried to replace Canadian steel with domestic steel and it has gone poorly and cost us a fortune. All the nearby suppliers have given us steel that does not pass quality tests - so we have put in all the man and machine hours working it, just to have it sent back or scrapped. We had millions of dollars in useless steel sitting on our factory floor last month but have managed to get most of it returned. Our search for good US suppliers continues but now we are having to find suppliers hundreds of miles away which jacks up the transportation costs whereas the Canadian steel just comes in from right across the lake via ship and never fails QA tests.

Hey

 

[Fogdog]

You're talking about a tiny % of the overall CEOs.

Targeted outrage is better than smearing everyone together like the Dog Kennel people do.

Not my in my experience. The only good CEO is the founder. The first or second CEOs after them are hand picked by the founder and usually pretty good. Once the board selects the CEO, the corporation might as well be put on deathwatch. Not always, though. Sometimes the founder loses control and the company is DOA on the very next CEO. DEC for example. HP lost it when they hired Fiorina. Apple was nearly bankrupted by a CEO hired away from Pepsi. Wall Street is completely inept when it comes to managing tech. IBM hasn't had a good CEO since the last one with ties to Watson jr retired in 1981. Every goddamn one of them after then was a POS.

Then there are the many studies that show CEO performance is not predicted by pay. The opposite might be said to be true. Out-sized pay packages for CEO almost never give a good return.

A new report suggests a fundamental idea behind CEO pay could be ‘broken’ <<(embedded link)
Ric Marshall, executive director of the research team at MSCI that focuses on environmental, social and governance issues, said in an interview that the 10-year time period is critical for studying whether CEO pay is really tied well to company performance. “Over the short term they may be well-aligned, but over the long term it’s so evenly distributed that it’s almost a random sampling,” he said, pointing to a chart in the report that shows a scattershot relationship between total shareholder return and cumulative take-home pay over a 10-year period. “It looks a lot like you threw paint on the wall.”

This paper found high paying execs and low paying execs don't perform according to the size of their pay packages. I lay this at the feet of the people doing the hiring. Still, the people doing the hiring -- board members -- are all from the same elite club of 1%'ers. They don't seem to take any ownership for CEO performance and clearly have no clue about how to hire a good one much less pay them appropriately.

This is not outrage so much as perhaps showing my disgust at big-ego CEO's who have, in my experience over-promised and under delivered at least half the time if not more.

Founders are a different breed of leader and I have great respect for them. Usually they are masters of the art and science of whatever they are producing. Also the ones who can sustain performance when the company gets large are amazingly good at motivating people.

Europe has a tradition of family staying involved with the company through the generations and generally European companies don't experience leadership crises like we have in US companies after the Founder leaves. Just saying there is something about keeping the family name and ownership attached to a firm.

 

[SneekyNinja]

Not my in my experience. The only good CEO is the founder. The first or second CEOs after them are hand picked by the founder and usually pretty good. Once the board selects the CEO, the corporation might as well be put on deathwatch. Not always, though. Sometimes the founder loses control and the company is DOA on the very next CEO. DEC for example. HP lost it when they hired Fiorina. Apple was nearly bankrupted by a CEO hired away from Pepsi. Wall Street is completely inept when it comes to managing tech. IBM hasn't had a good CEO since the last one with ties to Watson jr retired in 1981. Every goddamn one of them after then was a POS.

Then there are the many studies that show CEO performance is not predicted by pay. The opposite might be said to be true. Out-sized pay packages for CEO almost never give a good return.

A new report suggests a fundamental idea behind CEO pay could be ‘broken’ <<(embedded link)
Ric Marshall, executive director of the research team at MSCI that focuses on environmental, social and governance issues, said in an interview that the 10-year time period is critical for studying whether CEO pay is really tied well to company performance. “Over the short term they may be well-aligned, but over the long term it’s so evenly distributed that it’s almost a random sampling,” he said, pointing to a chart in the report that shows a scattershot relationship between total shareholder return and cumulative take-home pay over a 10-year period. “It looks a lot like you threw paint on the wall.”

This paper found high paying execs and low paying execs don't perform according to the size of their pay packages. I lay this at the feet of the people doing the hiring. Still, the people doing the hiring -- board members -- are all from the same elite club of 1%'ers. They don't seem to take any ownership for CEO performance and clearly have no clue about how to hire a good one much less pay them appropriately.

This is not outrage so much as perhaps showing my disgust at big-ego CEO's who have, in my experience over-promised and under delivered at least half the time if not more.

Founders are a different breed of leader and I have great respect for them. Usually they are masters of the art and science of whatever they are producing. Also the ones who can sustain performance when the company gets large are amazingly good at motivating people.

Europe has a tradition of family staying involved with the company through the generations and generally European companies don't experience leadership crises like we have in US companies after the Founder leaves. Just saying there is something about keeping the family name and ownership attached to a firm.

Listen, all I'm saying is don't throw out the baby with the bath water.

 

[Fogdog]

Listen, all I'm saying is don't throw out the baby with the bath water.

CEO's are not babies. Good CEO's are rare. Considering how much they are paid, I'm offended by how many bad CEO's I've known. It is one of the tenets of good governance that we hold the people who made the decisions accountable and responsible. That doesn't seem to happen with the fat cats.

 

[ttystikk]

Apparently they think they're a step up from the Kennedy's.

View attachment 4160474

That tie proves beyond all doubt that even unlimited access to capital can't buy an ounce of class.

 

[ttystikk]

Not any CEOs are like Buffet.

The kind of CEO that Baldric is talking about is far more common. Plenty of studies show that CEO pay rarely matches their performance. All of the big money ones have a nice golden parachute packed and will be just fine after making "hard choices" about employee lay offs.

And yet you loudly wonder why I scream so much about income wealth inequality.

 

[Unclebaldrick]

And yet you loudly wonder why I scream so much about income wealth inequality.

You scream louly about a lot of shit that makes no sense too. Wealth inequality is a well known issue. You screaming about it doesn't give you authorship or ownership. Start a fucking podcast, loser.

 

[ttystikk]

Not my in my experience. The only good CEO is the founder. The first or second CEOs after them are hand picked by the founder and usually pretty good. Once the board selects the CEO, the corporation might as well be put on deathwatch. Not always, though. Sometimes the founder loses control and the company is DOA on the very next CEO. DEC for example. HP lost it when they hired Fiorina. Apple was nearly bankrupted by a CEO hired away from Pepsi. Wall Street is completely inept when it comes to managing tech. IBM hasn't had a good CEO since the last one with ties to Watson jr retired in 1981. Every goddamn one of them after then was a POS.

Then there are the many studies that show CEO performance is not predicted by pay. The opposite might be said to be true. Out-sized pay packages for CEO almost never give a good return.

A new report suggests a fundamental idea behind CEO pay could be ‘broken’ <<(embedded link)
Ric Marshall, executive director of the research team at MSCI that focuses on environmental, social and governance issues, said in an interview that the 10-year time period is critical for studying whether CEO pay is really tied well to company performance. “Over the short term they may be well-aligned, but over the long term it’s so evenly distributed that it’s almost a random sampling,” he said, pointing to a chart in the report that shows a scattershot relationship between total shareholder return and cumulative take-home pay over a 10-year period. “It looks a lot like you threw paint on the wall.”

This paper found high paying execs and low paying execs don't perform according to the size of their pay packages. I lay this at the feet of the people doing the hiring. Still, the people doing the hiring -- board members -- are all from the same elite club of 1%'ers. They don't seem to take any ownership for CEO performance and clearly have no clue about how to hire a good one much less pay them appropriately.

This is not outrage so much as perhaps showing my disgust at big-ego CEO's who have, in my experience over-promised and under delivered at least half the time if not more.

Founders are a different breed of leader and I have great respect for them. Usually they are masters of the art and science of whatever they are producing. Also the ones who can sustain performance when the company gets large are amazingly good at motivating people.

Europe has a tradition of family staying involved with the company through the generations and generally European companies don't experience leadership crises like we have in US companies after the Founder leaves. Just saying there is something about keeping the family name and ownership attached to a firm.

So you're suggesting this might be a systemic problem?

Glad to see you're finally coming round to what I've been saying for fucking YEARS now.

 

[ttystikk]

CEO's are not babies. Good CEO's are rare. Considering how much they are paid, I'm offended by how many bad CEO's I've known. It is one of the tenets of good governance that we hold the people who made the decisions accountable and responsible. That doesn't seem to happen with the fat cats.

The past 40 years in America have been one long experiment in decoupling accountability from power in government and business.

Yep, I've been screaming about this for years, too.

Might make a Progressive out of you yet!

 

[ttystikk]

You scream louly about a lot of shit that makes no sense too. Wealth inequality is a well known issue. You screaming about it doesn't give you authorship or ownership. Start a fucking podcast, loser.

And here you are, foaming at the mouth yet again- even on a subject about which we're on the same side.

Please seek professional help.

 

[Unclebaldrick]

So you're suggesting this might be a systemic problem?

Glad to see you're finally coming round to what I've been saying for fucking YEARS now.

Again, take credit for everything. Your ego is expanding fast than the US deficit.

Ok tty, you are the original progressive. It all comes from you and your homework. You have tried to crack open the door and we are not worthy. You have honed your skills to a razors edge and it is time.e you stop wasting your time here and start a podcast. Stop being so modest and don't hide your light from the world.

Please.

 

[Unclebaldrick]

And here you are, foaming at the mouth yet again- even on a subject about which we're on the same side.

Please seek professional help.

I love how quickly you appropriate anything I have accused you of and turn it on me. I am speaking of foaming at the mouth. You do the same with any other critic. Lol, tty, you're a fucking narcissist! Just like Trump.

You weren't commenting on the subject. You were commenting on yourself and you prescience. You were taking credit and elevating yourself - just the way Trump does.

 

[ttystikk]

Again, take credit for everything. Your ego is expanding fast than the US deficit.

Ok tty, you are the original progressive. It all comes from you and your homework. You have tried to crack open the door and we are not worthy. You have honed your skills to a razors edge and it is time.e you stop wasting your time here and start a podcast. Stop being so modest and don't hide your light from the world.

Please.

You and the rest of your merry band of establishment Democrat bullshit artists have been breaking my balls about this and related subjects for years.

So yeah, I'm going to take a victory lap since you're being so immature about it.

Now fucking grow up or update your meds. You're just embarrassing yourself at this point.