Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The ugly face of capitalism

For $500 you have more voting power in the company than an American citizen has in deciding who is president.

Lets take CocaCola (US)

Outstanding shares 4.3 billion

Share price $51.31

A $500 investment gets you 10 shares (rounded) = 10/4.3 billion = 2.33 * 10^-9 votes.

There are about 158 million registered voters in the US, so that is 1/158,000,000 = 6.32 * 10^-9 votes or about 3 times the voting power of your investment in CocaCola.
 
What is so crazy about that idea?

The crazy thing is that the ridiculous superannuation provisions set a minimum percentage pension amount in retirement but not a maximum percentage withdrawal.

Anyway, my left field view is that people that piss all their money up against the wall actually keep the economy ticking over while the "savers" are just producing and not consuming.
Why is that crazy? If you want to take it out of a tax free environment and put it in a taxed environment, that is your choice.
But putting it back in may be a problem, so who is crazy?
What is crazy is people who don't take responsibility for their choices.IMO
 
Why is that crazy? If you want to take it out of a tax free environment and put it in a taxed environment, that is your choice.
But putting it back in may be a problem, so who is crazy?
What is crazy is people who don't take responsibility for their choices.IMO
I think you are missing my point. I am talking about taking money out of super and blowing it all, not taking it out and purchasing means tested assets.
 
I think you are missing my point. I am talking about taking money out of super and blowing it all, not taking it out and purchasing means tested assets.
It is still your money, and it will be deemed for a period of time, or are you indicating that the pension should only be there for people who don't save?
 
Lets take CocaCola (US)

Outstanding shares 4.3 billion

Share price $51.31

A $500 investment gets you 10 shares (rounded) = 10/4.3 billion = 2.33 * 10^-9 votes.

There are about 158 million registered voters in the US, so that is 1/158,000,000 = 6.32 * 10^-9 votes or about 3 times the voting power of your investment in CocaCola.

I must have made a rounding error some where, lol.

But either way, the point stands, for a relatively small amount of money, you get voting power in a company similar to what you would in a democratic nation.

———
But voting power wasn’t my main point, my point is you can take an ownership interest in and share in the profits of these big companies.
 
I must have made a rounding error some where, lol.

But either way, the point stands, for a relatively small amount of money, you get voting power in a company similar to what you would in a democratic nation.

———
But voting power wasn’t my main point, my point is you can take an ownership interest in and share in the profits of these big companies.

If you have some of that hooch left over please pass it on VC..:) It is certainly great stuff.

A bit of reality about "ownership" and "sharing" in the profits of these big companies. Individuals with minuscule share holdings have zilch/zero/FA effective ownership of any company. You can't do nuthin.
Major shareholders, often start up owners, wield effective control and veto over operations and every other aspect of the company.

In terms of sharing profits... For a start the CEO's and top staff start with 7 and 8 figure salaries plus bonuses. And of course they usually have multiple millions of shares either issued at IPO or offered as part of remuneration packages. So after they get their cut there may be dividends - which of course are also part of the multi million share portfolios that come with the position.
But don't take my word for it. Check out what one of the wealthiest men in the US ($18Billion) has to say about the distribution of income.

____________________
Contrary to what populists of the left and populists of the right are saying, these unacceptable outcomes aren’t due to either a) evil rich people doing bad things to poor people or b) lazy poor people and bureaucratic inefficiencies, as much as they are due to how the capitalist system is now working.

I believe that all good things taken to an extreme become self-destructive and everything must evolve or die, and that these principles now apply to capitalism. While the pursuit of profit is usually an effective motivator and resource allocator for creating productivity and for providing those who are productive with buying power, it is now producing a self-reinforcing feedback loop that widens the income/wealth/opportunity gap to the point that capitalism and the American Dream are in jeopardy. That is because capitalism is now working in a way in which people and companies find it profitable to have policies and make technologies that lessen their people costs, which lessens a large percentage of the population’s share of society’s resources. Those companies and people who are richer have greater buying power, which motivates those who seek profit to shift their resources to produce what the haves want relative to what the have-nots want, which includes fundamentally required things like good care and education for the have-not children. We just saw this exemplified in the college admissions cheating scandal.

As a result of this dynamic, the system is producing self-reinforcing spirals up for the haves and down for the have-nots, which are leading to harmful excesses at the top and harmful deprivations at the bottom. More specifically, I believe that:

  1. The pursuit of profit and greater efficiencies has led to the invention of new technologies that replace people, which has made companies run more efficiently, rewarded those who invented these technologies, and hurt those who were replaced by them. This force will accelerate over the next several years, and there is no plan to deal with it well.
  2. The pursuit of greater profits and greater company efficiencies has also led companies to produce in other countries and to replace American workers with cost-effective foreign workers, which was good for these companies’ profits and efficiencies but bad for the American workers’ incomes. Of course, this globalization also allowed less expensive and perhaps better quality foreign goods to come into the US, which has been good for both the foreign sellers and the American buyers of them and bad for the American companies and workers who compete with them.
Because of these two forces, the share of revenue that has gone to profits has increased relative to the share that has gone to the worker. The charts below show the percentage of corporate revenue that has gone to profits and the percentage that has gone to employee compensation since 1929.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-how-capitalism-needs-reformed-parts-1-2-ray-dalio/
 
If you have some of that hooch left over please pass it on VC..:) It is certainly great stuff.

A bit of reality about "ownership" and "sharing" in the profits of these big companies. Individuals with minuscule share holdings have zilch/zero/FA effective ownership of any company. You can't do nuthin.
Major shareholders, often start up owners, wield effective control and veto over operations and every other aspect of the company.

In terms of sharing profits... For a start the CEO's and top staff start with 7 and 8 figure salaries plus bonuses. And of course they usually have multiple millions of shares either issued at IPO or offered as part of remuneration packages. So after they get their cut there may be dividends - which of course are also part of the multi million share portfolios that come with the position.
But don't take my word for it. Check out what one of the wealthiest men in the US ($18Billion) has to say about the distribution of income.

____________________
Contrary to what populists of the left and populists of the right are saying, these unacceptable outcomes aren’t due to either a) evil rich people doing bad things to poor people or b) lazy poor people and bureaucratic inefficiencies, as much as they are due to how the capitalist system is now working.

I believe that all good things taken to an extreme become self-destructive and everything must evolve or die, and that these principles now apply to capitalism. While the pursuit of profit is usually an effective motivator and resource allocator for creating productivity and for providing those who are productive with buying power, it is now producing a self-reinforcing feedback loop that widens the income/wealth/opportunity gap to the point that capitalism and the American Dream are in jeopardy. That is because capitalism is now working in a way in which people and companies find it profitable to have policies and make technologies that lessen their people costs, which lessens a large percentage of the population’s share of society’s resources. Those companies and people who are richer have greater buying power, which motivates those who seek profit to shift their resources to produce what the haves want relative to what the have-nots want, which includes fundamentally required things like good care and education for the have-not children. We just saw this exemplified in the college admissions cheating scandal.

As a result of this dynamic, the system is producing self-reinforcing spirals up for the haves and down for the have-nots, which are leading to harmful excesses at the top and harmful deprivations at the bottom. More specifically, I believe that:

  1. The pursuit of profit and greater efficiencies has led to the invention of new technologies that replace people, which has made companies run more efficiently, rewarded those who invented these technologies, and hurt those who were replaced by them. This force will accelerate over the next several years, and there is no plan to deal with it well.
  2. The pursuit of greater profits and greater company efficiencies has also led companies to produce in other countries and to replace American workers with cost-effective foreign workers, which was good for these companies’ profits and efficiencies but bad for the American workers’ incomes. Of course, this globalization also allowed less expensive and perhaps better quality foreign goods to come into the US, which has been good for both the foreign sellers and the American buyers of them and bad for the American companies and workers who compete with them.
Because of these two forces, the share of revenue that has gone to profits has increased relative to the share that has gone to the worker. The charts below show the percentage of corporate revenue that has gone to profits and the percentage that has gone to employee compensation since 1929.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-how-capitalism-needs-reformed-parts-1-2-ray-dalio/

Simple fact is, you can take ownership in these giant companies and start earning dividends for as little as $500.

Modest savings over time, combined with compounded growth from dividends will eventually lead to a decent nest egg for you and your family.

Ofcourse $500 won’t give you the ear of the CEO, but who cares, what I am saying is every can buy a piece of the global economy, no point in complaining about the system when you can buy into it.

But some people just prefer to play the victim and complain I guess.
 
I believe that all good things taken to an extreme become self-destructive
Very true and applies to everything.

A good idea, taken too far, ends up being a bad thing always.

Trouble is that those on the inside almost never perceive that they are going too far. That is only visible to those looking at the situation from the outside with no personal vested interest in it.:2twocents
 
Capitalism embraces the spirit of nature - survival (or prosper) of the fittest. But where you have that natural system you also need strong controls otherwise the best predators/sociopaths ie. Trump, rein and its just law of the jungle. The strong prosper the weak perish.

Our controls rest in the hands of Government and our legal system. I think we all agree our legal system is broken and favours the rich and our Government oversight bodies are overwhelmed as Conservatives continually try to cut back their funding.
 
Capitalism embraces the spirit of nature - survival (or prosper) of the fittest. But where you have that natural system you also need strong controls otherwise the best predators/sociopaths ie. Trump, rein and its just law of the jungle. The strong prosper the weak perish.

Our controls rest in the hands of Government and our legal system. I think we all agree our legal system is broken and favours the rich and our Government oversight bodies are overwhelmed as Conservatives continually try to cut back their funding.

Why are Conservatives obsessed with a surplus ?

It's more important to them than economic growth apparently.

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/po...espite-weakening-economy-20190614-p51xw9.html
 
Why are Conservatives obsessed with a surplus ?

It's more important to them than economic growth apparently.

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/po...espite-weakening-economy-20190614-p51xw9.html

A surplus is seen as economic strength, eg I surplus means you can pay down debt etc.

But in my opinion, I don’t mind the government having debt, as long as it’s for the right reasons.

It’s not much different to a household or family.

Imagine if your grandparents if you inherited some debt from your parents, but that debt was caused by them buying farms, shares and houses etc, you probably wouldn’t mind the debt, because you get the benefit of the long term assets they give you.

But if it was credit card debt, caused from them eating out and holidaying you inherited, you would be pissed off.

It’s the same with our national family, if we spend more than we earn now, to build multi generational assets, then debt is ok, people should not mind inherited debt used for that.

But if we are borrowing just to spend for consumption today, the next generation are getting ripped off.
 
A surplus is seen as economic strength, eg I surplus means you can pay down debt etc.

But in my opinion, I don’t mind the government having debt, as long as it’s for the right reasons.

It’s not much different to a household or family.

Imagine if your grandparents if you inherited some debt from your parents, but that debt was caused by them buying farms, shares and houses etc, you probably wouldn’t mind the debt, because you get the benefit of the long term assets they give you.

But if it was credit card debt, caused from them eating out and holidaying you inherited, you would be pissed off.

It’s the same with our national family, if we spend more than we earn now, to build multi generational assets, then debt is ok, people should not mind inherited debt used for that.

But if we are borrowing just to spend for consumption today, the next generation are getting ripped off.

Very well summed up, I generally agree.

One side of politics seems to get that, the other just keeps cutting spending in the name of a surplus and will run the economy into the ground for their ideology.

Government spending is one of the few things that is keeping the economy going at the moment. As long as the infrastructure is income earning then that is good spending.
 
An obsession in avoiding an unavoidable recession will doom us potentially a fatal blow, better get budget cut and save money when we will really need it after a reboot
And government spending in infrastructure will have not only a maintenance cost only justified by endless migration increases but also mean that money will only put put in moving dirt again and buying foreign mafe technology.forget about innovation or business like the future csl or energy saving device

China does infrastructure spending to its peril, but at least china has startup and it benefits its population
Right now we should help a careful slow down economically and harden our economy, definitely not free spending
 
Funny how the socialists love Keynsianism when the shxt hits the fan, but effectively disregard it things are going okay.

Hmmm

The Libs are effectively trying to build the proverbial Keynesian war chest, while the purported Keynesians are practising heresy.
 
Funny how the socialists love Keynsianism when the shxt hits the fan, but effectively disregard it things are going okay.

Hmmm

The Libs are effectively trying to build the proverbial Keynesian war chest, while the purported Keynesians are practising heresy.

I just think we have so many opportunities to invest in good infrastructure in Australia, we should probably just keep investing through out the cycle, even if it means a slight deficit.

As I was trying to explain, multigenerational assets such as the Sydney harbor bridge, or the snowy river project etc etc, add value to the economy for many many years.

Long after the generation that built them has gone they still add value, so why should the generation that built them fork up all the expense.

Imagine inheriting the family farm worth $1million and then complaining that grandad still owed $300k on it.

That’s pretty much what some people are doing today.

In 1788, when the first fleet entered the harbor there was next to nothing here.

Now there are airports, national highways, hospitals, water systems etc etc etc, if a baby is born in 2019 into a country full of infrastructure, and is guaranteed healthcare and education up until they start earning, is it really such a bad thing they inherit a bit of government debt along with these vast benefits?
 
Let's never forget we paid every Month more than a billion in interest only for the debt we got after Howard
Just imagine the schools ad hospitals we could build for 1 billion a month...
 
Ever wondered how you could gets cans of tomatoes for SFA ? This story exposes the ruthlessness of a corrupt state and a sociopathic economic system.

Are your tinned tomatoes picked by slave labour?
Illustration: Christophe Gowans/Guardian Design
How the Italian mafia makes millions by exploiting migrants. By Tobias Jones and Ayo Awokoya

Thu 20 Jun 2019 06.00 BST Last modified on Thu 20 Jun 2019 16.50 BST

Shares
941

On 6 August last year, 14 immigrant farmhands in Foggia, on the ankle of the Italian boot, were coming home from a 12-hour shift picking tomatoes in 40C heat. The minibus carrying them was registered in Bulgaria; the driver didn’t have a licence or insurance. The seats inside were wooden planks, and it was so crowded that passengers couldn’t even see out. The vehicle was travelling at speed when it collided head-on with a truck loaded with tomatoes.

After the crash, you could see contorted limbs through the smashed windows. The entire front third of the vehicle was concertinaed and the roof was ripped open. Bags and clothing spilled out on to the road, and there were large patches of blood on the asphalt. Twelve of the 14 labourers died. Only two days before, also in Foggia, four labourers had died in a similar accident: 16 dead in 48 hours.

In the Italian south, the lives of foreign agricultural labourers are so cheap that many NGOs have described their conditions as a modern form of slavery. They live in isolated rural ruins or shanty towns. Some have Italian residency permits, but many don’t. A few have work contracts, although union organisers often find they are fake. Desperate for work, these labourers will accept any job in the fields even if the wages are far below, and the hours far above, union standards. The produce they pick regularly ends up on the shelves of Italian, and international, supermarkets, bought by consumers who have no idea of the suffering involved.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/20/tomatoes-italy-mafia-migrant-labour-modern-slavery
 
Yes it is really funny how the EU tells everyone what should be done, yet allow a situation like this to exist, they want a deal with Australia on their terms.
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...alia-but-there-s-a-catch-20180425-p4zbjf.html

This where it all gets fuzzy, we want everything green, clean and absolutely conscious free and we want it cheap. lol
We are the weird ones. IMO
We don't want to buy from Asia, because they exploit their workers, we don't want to buy from the EU because they exploit their workers, we don't want to buy U.S because it is too expensive, we don't buy Australian because it is too expensive.
But we do have a reason, because we are self righteous and we don't do the wrong thing, well not knowingly.
We really are a weird bunch, we seem to be doing ever decreasing circles and we all know where that ends up. lol
 
Last edited:
On this forum, I hear how our welfare system isn't brilliant and I keep getting shouted down when I say it is brilliant.
One of the frequent jibes is Norway's is better, well I would suggest people look into their tax system, it isynt' anything like ours.
I went to buy three pint of beer and a schooner of cider, sounds good, yeh $90Aus I nearly fainted, I thought I was in Sydney. lol
 
Top