Okay, let's speak about profits, and earnings.  I have been quite vociferous on this subject of late.  Here's what P&E should not mean:  How many cut backs can be accomplished to bring about positive numbers.  What it should mean:  How great the customer base has increased.  As the customer base increases, the business literally increases naturally requiring a greater employee base rather than cut-backs.  Most CEOs can lose customers, bring about a smaller customer base, and succeed with 8th grade arithmetic by continually decreasing the employee base.  Time for Wall Street to make greater demands of CEOs.  If they're not taking on more employees, and paying them reasonably well to survive, they're customer base must be decreasing.  That being the case, they are doing a poor job.  As it is now, investors will pay millions, and accept little in return compared to what they should, and could receive.

Off topic, but have you seen THIS? http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20061013/news_7m13bread.html  plus today's msnbc article : http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15337932/          More proof that Republicans are as anti-military as it gets. Tax cuts for millionaires so our troops can starve

That was my next guess.

 

I think that was kind of why he had us read it.  Everyone is ignorant of the details of the story.  No one except for the people in that room, and those like them, actually knows what drives international politics.  Political and economic policy isn't always hammered out in diplomatic meetings betweens foreign affairs ministers.  Quite often the third world is simply told what to say and how to act so that the IMF or the World Bank will agree to prop up some two-bit dictator, simply because they know that he will be able to at least secure the copper mine.  Damn the "collateral damage" he may cause in his own country.  There appears to be no such thing as genocide to the global financiers.  And with Paul Wolfowitz at the helm of the world bank, I'm sure not much has changed since that book was written.

 

Since you live in Canada, I think you can still get a copy of "Inside the Third World" by Harrison.  It's been out of print in America for a while, and my teacher had to special order it from the publisher.  But I understand that it is still in print in Canada and Britain.  I guess it wasn't selling well in the US.  It's an eye-opener.

 

I know you meant nothing offensive by your earlier comment.  I guess I was just making sure we were on the same page.

dale said "It looks like a story of misinformation, but I'll try to take a better look"

 

I'm not sure what you mean by this, so I will not assume.  However, if you want to know where I came by it, you could have asked.  First, the link of the PDF is from filelodge because that is my copy that I put on filelodge.  Second, the story was required reading in my political science class at the University.  I doubt my teacher would give us a story of misinformation, seeing as how he is a very respected professor of international politics (Ph.D., International Relations, American University).  I hope that helps you.

I'm not at all familiar the story behind the content of the PDF you sent.  It looks like a story of misinformation, but I'll try to take a better look; or find the book.  Reading scanned books on a monitor makes my eyes mad at me.

 

I don't think 'stagflation' was a term covered in economics class.  Looking up the term, it is used to describe what happened in the seventies when oil prices were doing dramatic things with the fears of shortage.  I think there are very strong parallels to be drawn.

 

Jobs going overseas, shake-ups, and the rise of the service industry is not just an American problem of course.  People's ways of lifes - a lot of dramatic shifts have been taking place, probably in many countries.  Its those market forces people put their trust in, without much probing.

 

I was watching a documentary (no a great one) about American presense in areas of the middle east with the greatest reserves, talking about how 'America' was trying to secure the reserves for itself.  People think this way, but really, the oil will be sold on an open market to the highest bidders.  If the resource is being secured by military, its not for the American people; its for American or multinational corporations.  The little guy doesn't get a check in the mail he might be naively expecting. 

 

Well, Like concerning the Iraq War, Wehlia, Americans don't seem to have ANY Foresight whatsoever  any more. Like Corporate CEOS whose job security relies on the Immediate Quarters' returns and nothing else- they obsess over the moment's profiteering, without any deep thought for the future. The Corporate Robber Baron mentality has infected all of America. While CNBC (that unfortunately I am forced to watch all day at work) chant "the Economy is Great! The economy is Great!" to keep normal Americans throwing their money into the Stock Market and keep the volume up even while the Dow, while up- still languishes- its "Record High" is still, as we speak- Only 200 points higher than six years ago. What is supposed to help the economy going? The Dollar, barely being held afloat by the Chinese? Our Nation being bankrupted by the Most Anti-Conservative spending President EVER? 

Until more of our nation hits rock bottom- The market makers will still suck out every penny they can from every available source, all the while blowing sunshine up the American public's ass. Those of us paying attention KNEW the truth about the Iraq War and its ramifications. Now We Can see the looming Depression that will result in staying the course of Worshipping the Church of Corporate Trickledown. The Myth that keeps on stealing from Middle America.

That was one of the things I liked best about my last Poli Sci professor.  He made every effort to teach the economic language that business people use to communicate with each other, so that the financial pages of the news paper wouldn't be over our heads.  He justified this because so many international political decisions are financially motivated.  For instance, read this story, if you haven't already. 

 

 

For some context, see if you can find the documentary that played on Sundance some months ago, "Mobutu, King of Zaire" to see the kind of country and the kind of ruler this article is talking about.

 

Of course corporations and their leaders are going to discuss economic strength and progress in a different way than you and I do.  In most corporations, the biggest infringement on profit margins is labor and benefits.  In fact, in the new service industry based economy, after the initial infrastructure costs of building a call center or buying the equipment necessary to do a service related job, labor is about the ONLY cost infringing on profit margins.  Since most economists and all corporate owners and share holders are solely (or at least primarily) concerned with profitability, it stands to reason that they would tend to feel threatened by things like organized labor arguing for higher wages and benefits or Congress talking about raising the minimum wage.  The resistance to these measures is not one born out of concern that the business will fail or go bankrupt, it is largely born out of a concern that profitability may decrease by a few percentage points, the shareholders won't see the level of instant gratification through dividends they were once accustomed to, and sell all of your stock and move to some company that shifted their manufacturing facilities from South Carolina to Cambodia, where labor costs are approximately zero.  This move put the other company in the lead when it comes to profitability, and that money comes back to America, making our economy look stronger because our companies are more profitable and the stock market is booming.  GDP just went up overnight because of that move, but so did the trade deficit, by about the same amount.

 

However, this move also cost 300 families in South Carolina their primary source of income.  Now, something like 1 out of 11 people in South Carolina are unemployed becasue the textile industry here is dead.  A father who spent his whole life learning how to do a job well and working hard at it his whole life suddenly finds himself forced into a career change.  Now instead of 40 hours a week with health insurance and a 401K, the government suggests he might be better suited for a job in a phone bank in a cubicle where they aren't required to give you a lunch break if the call volume is too high and your hours vary from week to week and you've got no dental plan for your family and your kids need braces and while you were looking for another job, you had to cash out your 401K at the huge tax penalty and blow your retirement on the mortgage, and the call center doesn't have a 401K plan, so you'll have to work there till you die, which may be sooner rather than later now that your HMO stopped covering preventive care.

 

But you watch Fox news and see the president talking about how strong the economy is, so you figure it must just be your fault because everyone else in the country is doing so well, and you keep voting Republican.