Vegetarian, usually drink unsweetened iced tea, not that being vegetarian has anything to do with the items you listed, I drink a DP now and again though, not a candy bar dude. I am impressed with you though you have likened candy and sugary items to meth and alcohol, nicely done, you're getting more liberal every day.
I liken candy and sugary items to smoking pot. You are missing out on a major benefit of weed smoking if you can't stuff your face with goodies
You know that represents a blended number of private and public sectors. The public sector jobs have changed very little in that time. What happened was the high union wages in areas like manufacturing and UAW drove production overseas and nearly destroyed those industries in the US. The private sector is making a limited comeback because they are NOT hiring union workers. Still, the US lost an incalculable amount of money and contracts to foreign workers. One of the current sectors that have been wholesaled overseas is call center reps. Minimum wage and the CWA literally drove the work to places like India, Pakistan, China. I don't advocate isolationism. My point was to counter the concept that somehow American corporation should be loyal to America when in fact, America is not loyal to American corporations. Why the hell did we not use a US company to implement the rollout of ACA? We used a Canadian company for God's sake. We seem to be in surrender mode. Right, Left....I really don't give a shit. I live the business disaster that is California. I know too many people who have tried to start and run legit businesses and most can't sustain long enough to comply with all the forms, regulations, certifications, taxes, etc. It is the most bassackwards state in terms of being business friendly. 254 companies left CA in 2011. http://www.ocregister.com/articles/moved-342887-companies-texas.html I think you make an awful lot of assertions that have no historic basis. It seems that you are confusing as well. How can American companies be both "global/multinational" competing for work and yet remain strictly "American"? One of Walgreen's stated considerations for Switzerland was the lower tax rate. Bottom line for me....I don't like the idea of inversion although I understand why it's being done. Changes have to be made. Tax codes have to be simplified. We need to focus on increased innovation in certain sectors. Public education totally blows in terms of preparing future generations of Americans to compete for global jobs. Stop with all the touchy feely classes, training kids to be "nice" to everyone and just focus on STEM courses.
Corporations are not people, they are entities that are owned by the shareholders. Corporations are bound by law to serve primary interest to the shareholder. If a shareholder is to benefit from a corporate decision, the corporation is bound by law to do so. In 1919 (I believe) Dodge sued Ford Motor Company because Henry Ford wanted to make the corporation for the worker. Everything he wanted to do for the company was for the primary benefit of the worker. He believed this was how his company would remain relevant and strong into the future. Dodge said the primary interest was to it's share holders and WON it's case. That result made precedent and has been used by corporations since as an excuse for being irresponsible and shitty companies. Shareholder Primacy has it's many flaws. If you were a significant shareholder of Walgreen's, how would you then view this decision?
I would say that corporate greed was what did that. Minimum wage is cheap and it is certainly not unionized. In fact, much of the business that went overseas was not unionized. Well, NAFTA allows Canadian companies a level playing field to compete with American companies, the flip side being that American companies also have been getting a lot of Canadian bushiness. Canada isn't an economic enemy, it is an ally. And CGI, the Canadian holding company, has grown by buying an number of American companies, they have 11,000 employees in America. They are only the 29th largest IT contractor employed by the government, so its not like they own the lions share of business. I ain't seeing this at all. Examples? California is a good example of why we need tax reform. But tax reform can't consist of just reducing and eliminating taxes. Codes must be simplified, numerous complicated tax credits, rebates, holidays, and formulae must be eliminated. Bloated programs must be curtailed above all. We can't just cut the income, we must cut the spending and it must be across all classes, not just to benefit corporate America, which is very profitable despite their complaints. Like what? Exactly. They fund Switzerlands government instead of our own. A company can be trade internationally without becoming a multi-national corporation. Multi-nationals make sense when they sell products all over the globe and have manufacturing facilities in numerous countries. But CVS sell the vast bulk of its products and services in the USA. Their move to Switzerland is an overt tax dodge. They take advantage of the security, free market, and resources of the United States but evade taxes and pay them to Switzerland! Can you not see the difference? On this we can agree. Yet you oppose raising educational standards through Common Core?
I bet if their freight is hijacked or their patents are stolen they will expect the American military and American courts to intervene.
Not exactly. They held that closely held corporations met the statutory definition of a person in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. They even narrowed the definition of closely held corporation. This is such a narrow and minor ruling that it effects next to nobody.
Yah! Let's help the govt. take more money they didn't earn and then turn around and give it overseas in the name of "foreign relations".
