The rest goes back into innovation, exploration, mutual funds, and other things that do precisely the opposite of concentrate wealth. A series of laws, including the Townshend Acts and the Tea Act of 1773-which essentially granted the East India Company a tax-free tea monopoly in the American colonies-helped incite the colonists to revolt against England and form a new republic in which the role of corporations was significantly constrained. When Walmart puts out and Albertson's and 60-150 people who have the opportunity to make 14-16 per hour and replace it with 9 dollar per hour jobs that is raising a living standard? Didn't want to leave you hanging though; it'd be cruel to withhold fresh meat from a starving dog. It is a government of corporations, by corporations, and for corporations. Because of the wealth concentration effects of corporations we see a complete shift of power away from lower and middle-class people and towards the rich who own the corporations as well as the corporations themselves. They package about 6 billion pounds of pork annually, which means they need a lot of pigs. Propeller Soda Pop is a locally run business and, in my opinion, they taste better too.
My sources are scholarly and empirical. As I said, ultimately the consumer decides, and they in the mass, always decide toward the company that gives the best quality and quantity for the least cost which is usually the larger businesses. Where is your logical consumer? It Is Not Fair To The Good, Responsible Leaders Not To Let's say you are running Wal-Mart and you want to pay people more and want to provide good benefits. Why are they bad choices? Big businesses have other advantages that small businesses in their industry cannot compete with. You mean like Russia, or China, or North Korea, or Cuba, or Venezuela, or Briton, or Norway, or, pardon me, the United States of America? This is because we let the them get away with being the worst, so they rise to the top. Niche markets remain open unabated.
This is because big box and large corporations have internal systems for services such as accounting, legal, supply and maintenance that are not necessarily based within the county or state, the research said. Well, there is a reason for it, which you will discover as we progress through the responses. That why I don't do any drugs myself, and take medication only as a last resort. Most people, of course, go to familiar places. Critics resent the billions spent by corporations and their trade associations in trying to influence the political process, especially since the amounts they spend dwarf the lobbying expenditures of everyone else.
A truly worker-run economy, an economy of small businesses, family businesses and farms, non-profits, and cooperatives can completely replace our current system and probably improve it. For many years I worked at the World Bank, where I held many management positions, including director of knowledge management 1996-2000. In combination, they get about 10% earnings. The corporation isn't a person. And it hasn't aided it either.
Big profits and continuous growth leads the corporate world to seek whatever advantage is available. Since that time government has only grown bigger and bigger, with devastating effects. It is unfair to the working people in this society to have these businesses exploiting the cheap labor and resources in another country and reselling them in our country. Our standard of living has risen dramatically since the introduction of welfare, stock market controls, regulation, pollution controls, social security. Inward investment by multinationals creates much needed foreign currency for developing economies.
You have to prove that it is feasible that they will lie when the law prohibits it. Once they had a monopoly on the market, they would raise prices to regain their profit. This is particularly important in industries with very high fixed costs, such as car manufacture and airlines. The success of multinationals is often because consumers like to buy goods and services where they can rely on minimum standards. This, again, must be a factor of your endemic tunnel-vision. Big Corporations don't care if you have fast internet or cable tv. Also, the domination of a few media conglomerates; the control of all of our major sources of information and communication, is also worrisome in a democracy.
Here are some links backing up my claims on innovative stagnation in larger companies: From Forbes: Portfolio: Not exactly anti-business organizations, yet they both talk about how large corporations tend to stagnate when it comes to innovation. First of all, a small government would give even greater power to corporations; without a strong government most decisions would be left up, directly, to those with the most economic power; not indirectly through bribes, lobbying, and campaign funding. In my personal opinion, I believe we should tax the rich. That I can agree with. Corporate leaders must have the fortitude to resist having their performance reduced to a single measure. In fact, the presence of large firms that employ more than 500 workers and that are headquartered in other states was associated with slower economic growth, according Goetz.
Your other link from portfolio doesn't seem to contradict this either. If the corporations do a bad job with their work, and are challenged they will not accept that they failed, they will fight in court until their is a victor, and usually that is the corporation, be it corruption or just vast cash reserves and good lawyers. It leads to behaviors that are counter-productive to the health of the organization. Not only is it well established that logic and reason have little to do with the bulk of purchases if it did we'd see the entire advertising industry bankrupted ; you are leaving out values beyond simple price vis a vis quantity. It was an explicit decision by Big Business. In other words, there are plenty of honest politicians or people who want to be honest politicians.
Another problem comes with innovation; big corporations are essentially economic bureaucracies. A buyback reassures investors that the company has confidence in itself and is determined to work towards creating value for shareholders. In the end, income and productivity did move together, but that result took several years to reach. The problem is that the system rewards the dishonest. Or the societal host, infuriated by looming ecological collapse-not to mention the many ongoing abuses of workers, consumers, and communities-could revolt and purge the corporate parasites from its body. I don't feel like talking in circles with you. Our standard of living has risen dramatically since the introduction of welfare Has it? That was my whole bloody point.