Re: a consistent position?

["John O'Donnell" <jackodonnell@xxxxxxxx>]

"Henry C.K. Liu" wrote:
>
> John O'Donnell wrote:

<<SNIP>>

> > This just presents an excuse to furnish offices with
> > expensive fine art and other necessary adornments to
> > increase the "capital" subject to the 15% return.
>
> You are been watching too many movies.  Even old time insurance companies
> have been moving away from that. You will not see a single painting in any
> GE Capital offices.  It is computer screens and fax machines.  Read Jack
> Welch's book.

When did Jack Welch get a guaranteed 15% return on capital?

> > Placing
> > the legitimacy of superfluous expenses that earn such
> > returns can, of course, be subject to "approval" by an
> > oversight committee but that just expands the field for
> > corruption.
> >
> > Let markets determine profit and LOSS and such foolishness
> > becomes mot.
> >
>
> The market does not determine profit or loss. Management strategy and
> corporate accounting do.   But few economists understand that.  Even the SEC
> raised the issue a couple of years ago.

Really? Why do companies ever go under, all they have to do
to succeed is have management and accountants decide what
level of profit they want.

> Many government put ceiling profit on foreign jt. venture projects on
> energy, infrastructure. communication. Even in the US many utilities has
> profit ceiling tied into the monopoly status.

Ceilings, yes, floors rarely. And whenever it becomes
necessary to define legitimate investment the friendliness
between regulator and regulated rules.

> Talking about being simplistic.

Yep.

--
			-- jbod

		Tax Privilege, Not People
___________________________________________________
Come visit and see a new economic perspective --
       http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1067
           Comments/arguments welcome.
.