The owner, usualy/always is a rich selfish bastard who doesn't care if other people are dying from hunger or haven't got clean drinking water etc.. but cares more about how many family buissness he/she closed down today. So many millions of lives could have be/ could be saved if these people wern't so damn greedy. The main aim of corperations is to drive down the cost of making the product so they get make a better profit, this includes moving factories to countries like india where the minimum wage is many times lower than in the 1st world, in places such as these, child labour is often used. I'm not saying that they should move out and create unemployment for countries they have their factories, but they should increase their wages to at least the american minimum wage.
T
They exploit loopholes in taxes to save money meaning we pay higher taxes to make up the difference or less money goes into the public sector which means the rich get richer and standards for poorer families go right down either way, 44 of 82 of america's top companies did not pay the standard corperation tax, but lower. 17% of these payed no taxes at all . Forbes magazine estimated this costs us $10 Billion year.
This is done by moving their headquaters to other countries, this being just one department.
The irs used to chase up these loopholes but have since given up. Instead, taxes on corperations have gone down by %26 while the average american tax went up by AT LEAST %13
T
They exploit loopholes in taxes to save money meaning we pay higher taxes to make up the difference or less money goes into the public sector which means the rich get richer and standards for poorer families go right down either way, 44 of 82 of america's top companies did not pay the standard corperation tax, but lower. 17% of these payed no taxes at all . Forbes magazine estimated this costs us $10 Billion year.
This is done by moving their headquaters to other countries, this being just one department.
The irs used to chase up these loopholes but have since given up. Instead, taxes on corperations have gone down by %26 while the average american tax went up by AT LEAST %13
Nike
Mcdonalds
Reebok
Quicksilver
all have factories in countries where the minimum wage is substantualy less than america and where child labour is used.
Mcdonalds
Reebok
Quicksilver
all have factories in countries where the minimum wage is substantualy less than america and where child labour is used.
by Nick August 15, 2003
Corporations in 3rd world countries pay on average 500-800% of the income people are making there. These companies build factories there because they can pay less for labor than they would in America, meaning they in turn can charge lower prices, and sell more. By the same token, the workers who work in them don't do so to help the company, but because it's 5-8 times the money they would make at the next best alternative.
Voluntarily entered agreement to mutual benefit...the alternative is to take the Susan Sarandon approach (that is, legislate the jobs there out of existence..."better they starve"). The entire reason a company would go halfway across the world is because it's cheaper...using government Force to Coerce people into paying American wages will not mean the people there will be making more money...the companies simply won't build plants there (how could they afford to pay more for wages and for shipping? and why would any person do that?)
Bottom line, companies do not exist to provide jobs and wages. Wal-Mart does not sell bread to me for $X because I want it for that price...they offer it because the $X is more valuable to them than the bread. By the same token, I don't exist to provide income to Wal-Mart. I don't shop at Wal-Mart because it needs my money...I buy the bread because I value the bread more than my $X. But at the end of the day, each of us can only OFFER the other our property...neither can coerce the other; we each have the power to refuse the deal and walk away.
The situation is no different in India. A company can show up and build a factory, open the doors, and OFFER to pay people X. If X is worth more than their labor (which it surely will be if it's 5-8 times more than they're making now), they may choose to accept the deal. Just as the company has no right to Force people to work for them (or to order them to work under certain conditions), the individuals have no right to Force the company to hire them or employ them under certain conditions.
(As a side note, whenever a company opens a new factory over there, people typically beat down the doors to get such "low paying" jobs...they offer bribes to the employers, offer to pay their first month's salary in return for securing a job for a family member, etc. What we consider low paying here is actually an opportunity few of them would ever see, as it is more than any other place there pays them.)
Voluntarily entered agreement to mutual benefit...the alternative is to take the Susan Sarandon approach (that is, legislate the jobs there out of existence..."better they starve"). The entire reason a company would go halfway across the world is because it's cheaper...using government Force to Coerce people into paying American wages will not mean the people there will be making more money...the companies simply won't build plants there (how could they afford to pay more for wages and for shipping? and why would any person do that?)
Bottom line, companies do not exist to provide jobs and wages. Wal-Mart does not sell bread to me for $X because I want it for that price...they offer it because the $X is more valuable to them than the bread. By the same token, I don't exist to provide income to Wal-Mart. I don't shop at Wal-Mart because it needs my money...I buy the bread because I value the bread more than my $X. But at the end of the day, each of us can only OFFER the other our property...neither can coerce the other; we each have the power to refuse the deal and walk away.
The situation is no different in India. A company can show up and build a factory, open the doors, and OFFER to pay people X. If X is worth more than their labor (which it surely will be if it's 5-8 times more than they're making now), they may choose to accept the deal. Just as the company has no right to Force people to work for them (or to order them to work under certain conditions), the individuals have no right to Force the company to hire them or employ them under certain conditions.
(As a side note, whenever a company opens a new factory over there, people typically beat down the doors to get such "low paying" jobs...they offer bribes to the employers, offer to pay their first month's salary in return for securing a job for a family member, etc. What we consider low paying here is actually an opportunity few of them would ever see, as it is more than any other place there pays them.)
The fact that even the "poor" in America on average own clothes, radios, TVs, at least 1 CAR, phones, air conditioning, a dishwasher, and a multitude of other conveniences that the "better off" in countries can only dream of owning is the result of (semi) Free, unCoerced interaction with one another...and corporations are an incredibly efficient way for entrepreneurs to team together and invest capital to create more products, wealth, and job opportunities than anything else in all of history.
www.capmag.com if you want to learn about Freedom and Individual Rights (which go hand in hand)
www.capmag.com if you want to learn about Freedom and Individual Rights (which go hand in hand)
by tb11 April 22, 2004
He's a fucking idiot.
by gopackeiaf September 28, 2020