patrick.net

Most CEOs have little impact on the company.

The best companies are run by the people who started them. Some manage to do well financially after the founders leave, but generally only because of the legacy of the person that started it

And, yeah, most are chosen because of who they know rather than because of any real talent that they have.

And you guys invest in this market?

I'm just amazed that since Madoff, the Dow, Nasdaq, and S&P aren't at 0.00 "like he was a lone wolf working in secrecy, and the rest of the banks and wall street was clueless to what was going on"

He just got caught.

Anyone losing money in this market deserves it. Investing in these uber corporations, does nothing to build a Nation. Nations are built by private commerce, never by collective thievery.

I am actually short in part of the S&P 500 (18%) of my investments... but ouch so far for that part.

Before fascism set firmly in place, you had something of a meritocracy. Long before the mega-mergers and CEO's making a year of your salary just while taking a whizz. Now it's completely busted, all of the sociopaths running it could give a fig if it all burns down behind them as they leave. I used to own Home Depot like a good little "Motley Fool" I once believed in "buying a piece of a good company". Bob Nardelli let the stock and the company flounder as long as he got his huge payout. Showed up at shareholder meeting to read a prepared statement not respond to investors, eventually jumped out of the plane with his golden parachute. Did he wind up a recluse stained by his past? Heck no he was hired to run Chrysler despite having no experience in auto manufacturing. WTF?

Contrast this with Japanese system where often an executive rises to the top inside the same company and it's long-term success is their primary interest.

APOCALYPSEFUCK says

It is a pure meritocracy.

There's no such thing.

Where is the outrage? Misdirected at unions in the midwest and at teachers around the US...

American in Japan says

Where is the outrage? Misdirected at unions in the midwest and at teachers around the US…

unions are very very corrupt with entitlement to taxpayer money. Anger at them is not misdirected. It is well applied. It isn't an "or", it's an "and".

In CA (and probably most other states) unions practice pension spiking, which is a flat out fraud that costs taxpayers billions, they keep on getting insane raises every year and pensions that taxpayers can't afford. If you want to get hired, it helps knowing people (they like to keep it in the family).

Just consider the CA teachers union, they are sacrificing education standards, students, education itself just in order to keep on spiking their pensions and get huge salary increases. It is not a public service anymore, it is practically a private corporation (public service in name only) paid for by taxpayers. Union leaders like CEO's make insane money there.

There are plenty of teachers who live out in Encino, entitlements ahoy. It's disgusting.

ChrisLA says

unions are very very corrupt with entitlement to taxpayer money. Anger at them is not misdirected. It is well applied. It isn’t an “or”, it’s an “and”.

Nope, misdirected.

30 years of shrinking unions, thus their "entitlement" slice of the pie is shrinking. Even if you buy into this, it is clearly at most a trivial problem. Much like the recent Teahadist kerfluffle over "earmarks" which is practically noise in the budget.

30 years of rising wealth among the top 1% and stagnant or shrinking for middle and lower classes.

Clearly the population is falling for the propaganda and being misdirected towards targets that really don't matter.

Vicente, one of my neighbors is a teacher. She makes $50/hour, owns 3 houses, speaks broken English, can't pass an algebra exam, and has a great pension and healthcare that I frankly haven't seen anywhere else. This isn't free market, this is government picking winners and losers.

Many doctors don't make the kind of money that this, what I consider a prime example of a below average teacher makes. This is like Mexico, where working for the big G means you are set beyond most people in the private sector... a very corrupt, inefficient, and selective system.

Is the whole corporate system in need to reform…or revolution?

Sometimes I feel a large part of why corporation exist in their present form, is to protect people from liability who make harmful decisions (to the envirnment and to the health of other people, etc.)