Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable

1919 Dodge Vs. Ford

Recommended Posts

Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable

At the turn of the century, the implicit assumption underlying state corporate law was that the corporation existed to make money for its shareholders. This consensus was rarely challenged. The first important legal test of the responsibilities of corporate directors came in the influential 1919 case of Dodge v. Ford. Despite its name, the case had nothing to do with competition between automakers. Instead, it had to do with the intended largess of Henry Ford, president and controlling shareholder of the Ford Motor Company. In August 1916 Ford owned 58 percent of company stock. John and Horace Dodge owned 10 percent. Rather than pay regular and special dividends, as the company had done in previous years, Ford announced that only regular dividends would be paid. The remaining profits would be used to expand production capacity, increase wages, and offset losses expected from his cutting the price of cars.

Many analysts have interpreted Henry Ford’s strategy as an astute business decision calculated to increase profits in the longer run. But that wasn’t his stated purpose. Ford proclaimed broader social goals: “to employ still more men, to spread the benefits of this industrial system to the greatest possible number, to help them build up their lives and their homes.†The Dodge brothers sued, claiming that Ford was using shareholder equity to pursue his own personal philanthropic goals. The Michigan Supreme Court, while professing to respect Ford’s business judgment, agreed with the Dodges. It stated that a corporation exists to benefit its stockholders and that corporate directors have discretion only in the means to achieve that goal. It may not use profits for “other purposes.â€

Edited by DissipatedYouthIsValuable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a shame that the city banks and corporations didn't exist to benefit their shareholders. Somehow the boardroom execs were allowed to hijack the companies for their own benefit.

Coporate gorvernance needs looking at. The pension funds and other major financial institutions which hold the majority of most companies stock have failed to protect their own investors interests. They allowed employed staff to act as if they were the beneficial owners of the companies they were running.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
Isn't philanthropy the role of Government? ;)

Once workers have been reduced to earning next-to-nothing and seduced into large debt as they dream of escaping their chains, you mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Once workers have been reduced to earning next-to-nothing and seduced into large debt as they dream of escaping their chains, you mean?

Are you really seduced into large debt if it is the only means that you can get a roof over your head. You have very few other options. Likewise for low wages, people would prefer their natural right to equitable employment. These things are made impossible by the State.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
Are you really seduced into large debt if it is the only means that you can get a roof over your head. You have very few other options. Likewise for low wages, people would prefer their natural right to equitable employment. These things are made impossible by the State.

Would you rather see a society with a very wide GINI index, running on the best pretence of Stateless free market principles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would you rather see a society with a very wide GINI index, running on the best pretence of Stateless free market principles?

Anarchy destroys the GINI index because it makes everyone the same, there would be no way to discern objective wealth. Anarchy doesn't mean chaos or plutocracy, it means no one gets to f*ck over your life unless it is at their own risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
Anarchy destroys the GINI index because it makes everyone the same, there would be no way to discern objective wealth. Anarchy doesn't mean chaos or plutocracy, it means no one gets to f*ck over your life unless it is at their own risk.

How would an anarchy co-ordinate and implement clearing blocked sewers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's possessed you to start this Injin magnet?

Hai!

How would an anarchy co-ordinate and implement clearing blocked sewers?

Which blocked sewer, where, who owns it and who cares?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
This philanthropy thing sounds good - does it cost much?

Apparently if you outsource all of your operations, other than distribution and retailing, to countries with low value currencies, you can use a proportion of your increased margins to provide philanthropic donations to the unemployed.

Or you could keep it and invest it all in some sure thing, like mortgage backed securities, helping people borrow and fuelling house price inflation to make them rich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
Hai!

How would an anarchy co-ordinate and implement clearing blocked sewers?

Which blocked sewer, where, who owns it and who cares?

I presume you're suggesting we'd live in a loose knit anarcho agrarian collective doing appendicectomies with flint tools on patients off their tits on fly agaric and apple vodka?

And shitting directly onto the carrot patch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hai!

How would an anarchy co-ordinate and implement clearing blocked sewers?

Which blocked sewer, where, who owns it and who cares?

As if by magic. I wouldn't envisage shared services like sewers, everyone would have their own composting toilet or something even less hygenic.

Apparently if you outsource all of your operations, other than distribution and retailing, to countries with low value currencies, you can use a proportion of your increased margins to provide philanthropic donations to the unemployed.

Or you could keep it and invest it all in some sure thing, like mortgage backed securities, helping people borrow and fuelling house price inflation to make them rich.

Actually, I think I'II just buy a new car TBH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I presume you're suggesting we'd live in a loose knit anarcho agrarian collective doing appendicectomies with flint tools on patients off their tits on fly agaric and apple vodka?

And shitting directly onto the carrot patch?

I take it you've seen the direction the 'Future of Food Production' thread has taken. It started off that Kurt Barlow has taught his horse to do a poo in a plastic tub and got much worse.

Edited by Soon Not a Chain Retailer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As if by magic. I wouldn't envisage shared services like sewers, everyone would have their own composting toilet or something even less hygenic.

Sewers do not exist.

Prove that you exist.

Existence is evil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
Do you care if they are blocked?

Not until the cholera gets to my house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I presume you're suggesting we'd live in a loose knit anarcho agrarian collective doing appendicectomies with flint tools on patients off their tits on fly agaric and apple vodka?

And shitting directly onto the carrot patch?

Since you wouldn't like that, you might change it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I presume you're suggesting we'd live in a loose knit anarcho agrarian collective doing appendicectomies with flint tools on patients off their tits on fly agaric and apple vodka?

And shitting directly onto the carrot patch?

Rabbi questions as answers not allowed!

It's lent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
Are you impotent to do something about the cholera without the say-so of the State?

No, it's just that I've grown this great weed, I live on a hill upwind of the sewer, I reckon the neighbour down the hill has been shagging my bird, so I don't really give a ****** yet. I might leave this house anyway, there's no tinned food left and the bog's blocked up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   288 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.