Carly Fiorina Gives Us Good Reason To Boycott HP - Compaq Products.

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: sandorski

Wrong. Businesses exist to make A Profit. "Maximizing", especially at the cost of the community, is just pure Greed, not good business practice.

lol..how old are you and what do you do for a living, sir?

38 and I surf the net.

I realize that "Maximizing" is the trendy thing to do, but it not the purpose of business. Not if you want a future anyway.[/quote]

So I assume 1.) You don't own a business (or have a surf-the-net business) and 2.) Do not have a large portfolio of stocks in these greedy companies? "Trendy thing to do?" That is funny, man. What's trendy is the companies who fail to maximize profits...here today, gone tomorrow. Do you have money put aside for retirement? Do you own any stocks, or have investments in the myriad of funds out there? I, for one, have a nice chunk of my retirement money in various portfolios and I love companies who maximize profits...if they don't, I will move my money to companies who will...guess what happens when investors sell off these "we're not greedy and not going to maximize profits because we love Americans" companies? Your dad just lost his job.[/quote]

That's just the problem, these companies may as well have ceased to exist. What's the point for there existance if they take more from the economy than they give? Perhaps it is good for you or others, but it is useless for the whole. Ah well, let them eat cake then.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: sandorski


What's the point for there existance if they take more from the economy than they give? .

...to maximize profits?

 

[Jadow]

I'm conflicted on this issue. On one hand, an executive's most important goal is long term appreciation of the stock price. So, if axxing 1000 jobs and sending them to India does that, it is the right move.

However on a Macro level, if say 100 companies do this, then it will hurt the overall economy in such a way that it will eventually HURT the stock price.

It's kinda like the mathematical law they showed in "A Beautiful Mind" if each company only looks in a tunnel and looks at itself, it should ax those jobs, but if companies use a larger scope and look at the BIG picture, it is better to KEEP the jobs.

Interesting dilemma eh?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Jadow
I'm conflicted on this issue. On one hand, an executive's most important goal is long term appreciation of the stock price. So, if axxing 1000 jobs and sending them to India does that, it is the right move.

However on a Macro level, if say 100 companies do this, then it will hurt the overall economy in such a way that it will eventually HURT the stock price.

It's kinda like the mathematical law they showed in "A Beautiful Mind" if each company only looks in a tunnel and looks at itself, it should ax those jobs, but if companies use a larger scope and look at the BIG picture, it is better to KEEP the jobs.

Interesting dilemma eh?

A Beautiful Mind = Jadow