Goal: Nut punch Goliath to death.

[Doktor Howl]

I've never really understood why a company has to continually grow.  I guess I think in a, what, "naturalistic" view, where a company grows to fill a niche, and then supplies product , makes profit, and pays employees at a constant rate. I know I'm missing something, because that sounds so naive I want to punch myself.

Because at that rate, the stock maintains value but doesn't grow.  This means that speculators have no interest in that stock, because the returns on dividends are not high enough to maintain their OWN profit margins.  Gross margin must be high enough, and continue rising, or the speculator side of the market - which is small in number but HUGE in value - drops out.

Given that they already have financial muscle, do you expect they'll allow that to happen?

This has, of course, happened before.  From 1865 to World War I, the market and working conditions were a very scary parallel to today.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I've never really understood why a company has to continually grow.  I guess I think in a, what, "naturalistic" view, where a company grows to fill a niche, and then supplies product , makes profit, and pays employees at a constant rate. I know I'm missing something, because that sounds so naive I want to punch myself.

Because of the stock market. Stocks are essentially speculation that a company is going to not merely turn a profit, but turn an increased profit. That's how they work. The only way to shut this madness down is to eliminate or severely curtail the domain of the stock market. Originally, it was heavily regulated to prevent exactly this type of outcome, but, um, Reagan and the Free Market. Real wages started to decline in 1973 (February, to be exact... the same month that the Senate voted to investigate Watergate, China and Japan reopened diplomatic relations, and the US and China agreed to open liaison offices) and corporations began to institute aggressively anti-worker policies and commenced a direct assault on unions, a trend that accelerated and was reinforced heavily by Reagan-era deregulation and the commensurate shift in government policies toward corporations and against workers. Clinton intensified the problem by administering the coup-de-grace to regulation of the stock market in 1999.

[I_Kicked_Kennedy]

Part of the push from growth increased around 1999 because of the expansion of electronic trading. I don't remember the name of the type of application, but there are hedge funds with software that buys when a stock's movement and beta changes in a certain fashion, and dumps it if it acts a certain way. It's called High Frequency Trading, or Algorithmic Trading, and it nearly caused the stock market to crash in 2010:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Flash_Crash

The answer, in my opinion, would be to have a tax on each trade, or a fee on each trade that is done within a certain period of time from when it was originally purchased.

But then I would be accused of hating capitalism and threatened with deportation.

If I knew anything about algorithms, I'd say this would be one way to knock WalMart down a peg or two, but I don't, so... Crap.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Look at this prophetic article from 1999: http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/1999/11/bank-n01.html

[LMNO]

Ah, the stock market. Forgot about that piece. Thanks, all.

[Pæs]

Exposing your company to the stock market should involve a more obvious CASH NOW FOR SOUL LATER exchange.

[Left]

I keep wondering how anyone thinks that a system based on infinite growth is rational when we happen to be sited on a finite sphere...

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

I keep wondering how anyone thinks that a system based on infinite growth is rational when we happen to be sited on a finite sphere...

Mars.

[Left]

I keep wondering how anyone thinks that a system based on infinite growth is rational when we happen to be sited on a finite sphere...

Mars.

That's right...Earth first, then we get to destroy the other planets...

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Walmart is now romulan empire

[rong]

if this thread is still about taking down wal-mart - would it be possible to buy enough shares of wal-mart stock to railroad shareholder's meetings and set wal-mart on a path to demise?  if so, could a large group of investors have a single voice at shareholder's meetings?

it seems that the internet could be a tool for large groups of investors to take over publicly traded companies

[Doktor Howl]

I keep wondering how anyone thinks that a system based on infinite growth is rational when we happen to be sited on a finite sphere...

Mars.

That's right...Earth first, then we get to destroy the other planets...

1.  Balls of rock.  People > rock.

2.  We would need to launch 200 people per minute to break even.  Not viable.

[Left]

2.  We would need to launch 200 people per minute to break even.  Not viable.

Provided one wants them to be alive before, during, and after launch.



...Wal-mart must be nuked from orbit.  It's the only way to be sure.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

if this thread is still about taking down wal-mart - would it be possible to buy enough shares of wal-mart stock to railroad shareholder's meetings and set wal-mart on a path to demise?  if so, could a large group of investors have a single voice at shareholder's meetings?

it seems that the internet could be a tool for large groups of investors to take over publicly traded companies

Hmmmmmm this idea has some serious potential, actually. Like, considerable monkey wrench in the works potential.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

To hold enough stock to be influential... I wonder how much stock that is, and how much it would torque their jammies.