contractor rights - bullying

[hyperD]

OK, but how are you going to break up large corporates?
You'll need a set of laws that prevent companies from being too big - i.e. after a point, they have to break up. This kind of thing is already applied when companies buy each other - sometimes they can buy another company on the condition they sell some of its operations. Both the US and the EU already look into positions of dominance and act if it gets too much (Microsoft has already been the target of the EU for this)
I still think what we are debating is a point of detail as opposed to my interpretation of your general statement "shareholding is bad"

Interesting points Jabber and Becs...

Even the MMC seems powerless to prevent Terry Leahy's advance in the growth of Tesco in the grocery market. Twice he's managed to avoid the complaints by others of monopolistic aggression in the market and standing at 30% at Sep 05 there's nothing stopping him. Complaints about him controlling suppliers and other small businesses are rampant but his lobbying allows him to continue in this way.

What happens when they exceed the 50% mark? Probably nothing.

It's fair enough under a "free" market for companies to grow and generate bigger profits, but what happens when they start applying "bully boy" tactics to smaller independents?

Those that fight tend to start moving their products to the ever popular farmers markets and online stores. Those that are clever are now marketing their products as "tasty" and "wholesome", compared to the often higher priced bland supermarket food.

This is an example of where a smaller independent can still survive in a market that has a bully boy, as long as the product is of perceived value to consumers.

I have seen this in action myself with one of my clients - while keeping below the radar of larger IT companies such as EDS - you just got to market your perceived added value to the client and develop a good reputation and relationship.

[Jabberwocky]

Are you cliches better? This one is priceless.

What utter bollocks DA - ulitimately wealth is generated through exploiting natural resources - oil, corn, livestock - anyone can do that - the corporate is a legal entity which gives the company the rights of an individual without the responsibilities. What we need to do is remove this concept entirely. Sure the corporates are good at exploiting natural resources, but they have no social responsibility.

[Fungus]

Easy - he doesn't hold such crude opinions.

Doh!

[Fungus]

cliche after cliche after cliche. For a start corporates are the main providers of wealth, secondly they are subject to far stricter financial and accounting rules than the public sector. Because the corporate sector is under the spotlight far more corruption goes on in the public services than in the private sector.

Although there are some perfectly legitimate arguments (which you dont bother to explore, presumably because you are too bigoted stupid or lazy) for the breakup of large corporates, you dont seem to be willing or able to argue these through. Tesco for example; where does it go? what is going to happen to small shopkeepers? does it matter? There are also things that large corporates do to make lives better; taking businesses for instance to higher levels, having the funds to research new drugs, new products etc etc.

another difference between the corporate and public sector is that because shareholders have stakes in businesses the markets have a habit of correcting themselves in the wake of Enron for example. Basel2 Sarbanes Oxley etc etc have sprung up in order to convince the likes of us all that investing in shares in corporates is to be encouraged.

You may resent the concept of free capitalism, but I think that you will find that the worst damage done to societies is by governments and not corporations.

Steady on DA. I'm in danger of developing respect for an agent. The prospect makes me feel a bit queasy.

[Fungus]

What utter bollocks DA - ulitimately wealth is generated through exploiting natural resources - oil, corn, livestock - anyone can do that - the corporate is a legal entity which gives the company the rights of an individual without the responsibilities. What we need to do is remove this concept entirely. Sure the corporates are good at exploiting natural resources, but they have no social responsibility.

The main profits come from processing and not extraction. That is why the third world is screwed, because we are doing our best to restrict them to extraction.

I wish I knew what you were on about. There are issues around corporates, but to blast them out of the water is nonsense. Oil companies take risk when prospecting for oil. For every site that contains oil, numerous sites turn out to be duff. That takes huge investment. Drugs require massive investment. Most drugs turn out to be no good and yet billions might be spent developing a drug that fails at the final hurdle to approval. Patents allow a company to get a return on the investment, and hence encourage companies to invest. That is what profit is about. It is an inducement to invest, with a reward. Why should I invest my time and effort to discover a new way of doing something if Joe Bloggs can subsequently amble along and steal my ideas with impunity? He gets the gain and none of the pain. Remember Rolls Royce? The development of a jet engine costs a fortune and can only be done by a large company, and not small timers like thee and me.

Oh Jeez this stuff is all so incredibly obvious and basic to anyone over the age of 16. You really must be a wind up merchant.

Come to think of it, do you knit your software?

Fungus

[threaded]

Please give a modern day example where an oil company has taken on any risk in oil exploration.

[Jabberwocky]

>The development of a jet engine costs a fortune and can only be done by a >large company, and not small timers like thee and me.

Let me talk your language geekboy

The development of a modern, robust operating system like Windows XP costs a fortune and can only be done by a large company, and not small timers like thee and me.

[OwlHoot]

the 'technical architect' as he so calls himself, has overstepped the mark in my opinon.

earlier, as i was seated, he stood over me and raised his hand in a gesture as to take a swipe at me.

i feel he invaded my space and threatend me in the office and am not happy about this.

Sounds like you have it pretty much sorted out but, assuming your apprehension was reasonable, technically the guy assaulted you:

the intentional application of force to the person of another without his consent, unless authorized by law, also amounts to the civil wrong of battery, entitling the victim to compensation. Even to touch a person without his consent or some other lawful reason is actionable. It is also probably a battery to project heat, light, noise or vapours onto another person in such manner as to cause physical injury or personal discomfort. The act of putting another person in reasonable fear or apprehension of an immediate battery by means of an act amounting to a threat to commit a battery amounts to an actionable assault. It is actionable conspiracy when two or more persons combine to commit an assault or battery upon another.

[Fungus]

>The development of a jet engine costs a fortune and can only be done by a >large company, and not small timers like thee and me.

Let me talk your language geekboy

The development of a modern, robust operating system like Windows XP costs a fortune and can only be done by a large company, and not small timers like thee and me.

The latest jet engine is based on the Linux model. Users develop components, and install them at the airport. When it crashes, they learn, and improve the next one. Through iterative development they create the perfect engine. But, oooh, they've killed all the potential passengers. Shucks.

Yeah, you're right Knobs.

Fungus

[Jabberwocky]

Fatarse - you don't seem to understand the concept of subcontracting - NASA do this and put men on the moon - whereas Jet engines are technology from the 1940s.

Who is telling you that the only way to develop sophisticated technology is through a large corporate. If you remove your head from your ar*e you might be able to see things more clearly.