Many people have reported this as a fake tweet. I don't have time to be the tweet police. What is everyone's thoughts about having a link to the actual tweet or other social media link?
Edit: Please stop reporting this. They may have re-posted this from somewhere else and didn't know or it might not be fake. I'm not going to x to find out. From now on, please provide an archived link to all politicians and major figures.
I'm not the mod you're talking to, but I assume they aren't deleting it because OP posted it before providing a link was a rule, and it might not be a fake tweet. I mean it is fake, but I can't prove that.
Personally I'm in favor of mods erring on the side of not removing content if there's any uncertainty, even if it's a bit annoying seeing this fake tweet
If this was true....Nd I wouldn't be surprised that he would sya such a thing as... Making profit for the share holders. Is justified even if ruthlessly done....
I remember watching a documentary, it may have been Robert Reich that was explaining how businesses in the 1970's made profits but the difference between the owner and the employee was high but still within a certain logic.
Companies still had the philosophy that you should keep your employees for 30 years and treat them with a certain respect whereas today... A lot of big business are there for the shareholder and screw the employee. They are selfish anyway.... Wanting more than minimal salary 🙄
I've heard that phrase my whole life and only looked it up now because of your comment. For anyone else that's curious:
"Let them eat cake" is the traditional translation of the French phrase "Qu'ils mangent de la brioche",[1] said to have been spoken in the 18th century by "a great princess" upon being told that the peasants had no bread.
...
The quote is taken to reflect either the princess's frivolous disregard for the starving peasants or her poor understanding of their plight.
I would disagree that that is an example of generational warfare.
The older people get, the less of their money tends to be in actual stocks, and the shares managed by retirement funds are inevitably non-voting, so they can't even voice what tiny bit of opinion their fraction of ownership would theoretically get them.
The "shareholders" being performed for are the managers of those investment funds.
Making obscene wealth on stock investing is relatively rare, but making obscene wealth investing other people's money and then paying yourself an obscene salary out of the proceeds is far more common.
Those are the people who control the massive amounts of money that companies perform for to drive up share prices.
Why own when you can get paid to control? Then your money isn't on the line and you don't need to be lucky to get rich.
Market linked retirement funds, imo rank among one of the worst regressions in American governance/society.
It broke the employer:employee relationship where your work provides a pension, and you are secured in your old age for loyalty and time worked.
It directly enabled an emboldened a new group of parasites, who run hedge funds to gamble with other people’s money whilst skimming fees up and down the transaction flows. You win, I win - you loose, I win.
And those ‘smart people’ crash the economy every 10-15 years due to their collective greed and over leveraging in order to take the maximum profit they can - or society as a whole “lands softy” due to central banks fiscal policy via inflation, and we all see where that’s landed us.
In addition to what [email protected] said, this would be generational warfare against…themselves. Old people are exponentially more likely to need healthcare than young people are.
Did he just condemn people for celebrating the killer and shitting on the killed and then went on providing the exact reason why people are celebrating? He forget to take his meth this morning or something?
And this is a lie. There is no law about this there is no duty for it. I mean your company is tock might not be the greatest but that is another thing.
Unfortunately, that's not true. Dodge vs Ford Motor Co established the precedent of shareholder primacy when Henry Ford was successfully sued for attempting to reduce dividends in favor of reinvesting profits.
Right, this is at your government needs regulations to ensure companies are working in our best interests. Libertarians are incapable of understanding this kind of logic.
Public healthcare sounds better now. Purdue Pharma did some shady stuff to addict people to opium. Surely we should stop being upset at them maximizing their wealth too (they didn't quite have shareholder, afaik. Just an oligarch family bribing doctors)
It's a fiduciary duty, not a legal one. It's an expected act, but no law says they must maximize profits at any cost.
Its an expectation that can be changed and tempered like any other, but the rich class doesn't want to own up to deciding to destroy people's lives for their profit, so they hand wave and pretend like someone made them do it.
Maybe a few more bullets will debase them of this clearly reckless belief.