Kodak CEO Antonio M. Perez puts himself first

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

Do we want more? Possibly.

I used "more" in this context to mean more fairness, more personal security, more freedom from want and more chance to develop with and for our society.

:angel:

 

[Roger Hicks]

I used "more" in this context to mean more fairness, more personal security, more freedom from want and more chance to develop with and for our society.

:angel:

Ah: my apologies. The thing is, I've been working on a political treatise lately, dealing with consumption. All too many people, I fear, take "more fairness, more personal security, more freedom from want and more chance to develop with and for our society" for granted, and forget the infrastructure that makes it possible. Thus, those who are against the European Union tend to ignore the fact that despite all its acknowledged and well-known shortcomings, it's a lot better than another European war.

Drive down a street near the Croatian border, and see modern semi-detached houses empty, rendered uninhabitable by tank fire, and by the very ordinariness of the suburban houses, everything is all the more immediate than the bomb-damaged houses of my childhood. It's very much THIS COULD BE YOU.

Once again, sorry for misreading you. But I fear that all too many people are asking only for more material goods.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Michael Markey]

Thus, those who are against the European Union tend to ignore the fact that despite all its acknowledged and well-known shortcomings, it's a lot better than another European war.

Dear Roger

I know that this is the line oft trotted out by the liberal /left to justify the continuance of the legislative gravy train.

However I don`t see how a largely undemocratic institution like the EU could possibly stop a European war.

It was ineffective in Yugoslavia.

Indeed there is an equal chance, I would have thought , that it may actually start one if it continues to trample on peoples democratic rights and sovereignty.

Best
Michael

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Roger

I know that this is the line oft trotted out by the liberal /left to justify the continuance of the legislative gravy train.

However I don`t see how a largely undemocratic institution like the EU could possibly stop a European war.

It was ineffective in Yugoslavia.

Indeed there is an equal chance, I would have thought , that it may actually start one if it continues to trample on peoples democratic rights and sovereignty.

Best
Michael

Dear Michael,

Look closely.

They weren't in the EU.

I rest my case.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Bob Michaels]

Randy:

The phrase:

Important is that we must not punish businesses and management for making bad decisions. Doing so stops them from trying to make any decisions. Then the entire economic system stops and we all lose.

was my own words and was carefully worded to reflect my thinking as succinctly as possible.

The majority here seem to express the thought in situations like Kodak that the workers lose, the shareholders lose but the management walks away with big dollars, career untarnished, and immediately into some other company offering them an equivalent position with equivalent compensation. It does not work that way in the real world. Management looses big time in their credibility and future earning potential. Everyone has skin in the game. But to try to get more out of management than the skin they put into the game would certainly stop anyone from wanting to try.

Bob, that highlighted quote is from you or someone else?

We live in a world where the people at the top demand "accountability" of every employee. They are assessed, evaluated, measured, treated like machines. And you can actually produce that quote, apparently with no irony?

The employees do indeed have a "choice" and can leave. Perhaps when enough people understand the nightmare that is developing, the whole f-cking house of cards will come down.

Randy

 

[tbhv55]

Do we want more? Possibly. But equally possibly, craving security (which is what most sane people crave -- no bankruptcy, a roof over our heads, food on the table...) and seeing a society hell-bent on destroying security, we go for MORE at all times, to provide a cushion. As do the greedy and corrupt, who, in their quest for MORE, are destroying security. What else is praise for 'a flexible labour market' if not praise for job insecurity? It doesn't affect people like Perez, who walk away with millions and never have to worry about heath care. In affects Kodak workers and pensioners.

Roger, you absolutely "nailed it" in these few sentences. Well said.

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

Management looses big time in their credibility and future earning potential

I'm very much afraid that the facts just do not support that thesis. As Randy points out, the losers are the people who do the work, not the thieves that grab the big bucks.

 

[valdas]

Randy:

Management looses big time in their credibility and future earning potential.

and that's why they have those golden parachutes (or just nice bonuses) - after loosing big time they can "retire" and write "memoirs" without worrying about future earning potential.

I loved this movie:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_Job_(film)

Financial industry, but the same disease (greed)...

 

[Merumeni]

It is quite remarkable that this article started as a general call to draw, hang and quarter the known CEO for not having done his job, which is, at least in this forum, serving the interests of the stake-holding, film-depending photogs.
In the meantime it has developed into a kind of lament about the human condition and the general weaknesses of the human character such as greed and self-interest, consumption and all too many people asking only for more material goods.

It is funny that the difference between the concept of citoyen and bourgeois is only found in the French language – for the rest of us there is the citizen, Buerger, cittadino or ciudadano: so no difference between the political involved, responsible participant and the consuming, maybe share-holding beneficiary of any stable, political building.

In times of crisis it has always been helpful to install a certain transparency: you need an aim, the knowledge of the helpful means and the will to use them. The rest is common sense and a bit of luck. With other words: I can not see any operational targets and nowhere means to reach them. I hear a lot of noise. Who cares about the CEO? With an unemployment rate of plus 40 per cent between young academics in some countries I start to lose interest in the incapacities of certain CEOs. And I fear that all the rest I might say from here on would be somehow illegal.

 

[Michael Markey]

Dear Michael,

Look closely.

They weren't in the EU.

I rest my case.

Cheers,

R.

Dear Roger

Touche.
I hope that your aspirations are realised.

Best Michael

 

[Bob Michaels]

I'm very much afraid that the facts just do not support that thesis. As Randy points out, the losers are the people who do the work, not the thieves that grab the big bucks.

I must disagree with your conclusion having been in the positions of employee, management, and/or investor in both successful and unsuccessful companies.

 

[Retrotech68]

Dear Roger

However I don`t see how a largely undemocratic institution like the EU could possibly stop a European war.

Michael,

Indeed. While I agree that at its origins the EU (then EEC) was created with the best intentions, today European peoples have very little or virtually no influence on the way major decisions are being made at the top, inside a well-protected bureaucratic maze, by people more interested in protecting their own agenda and that of his close associates (namely a highly irresponsible and increasingly unaccounted for financial sector). This is a recipe for serious trouble in a not too far future.
Alex

 

[Bob Michaels]

and that's why they have those golden parachutes (or just nice bonuses) - after loosing big time they can "retire" and write "memoirs" without worrying about future earning potential. ............

You will never comprehend how much I wish you were right.

 

[Roger Hicks]

It is quite remarkable that this article started as a general call to draw, hang and quarter the known CEO for not having done his job, which is, at least in this forum, serving the interests of the stake-holding, film-depending photogs.
In the meantime it has developed into a kind of lament about the human condition and the general weaknesses of the human character such as greed and self-interest, consumption and all too many people asking only for more material goods.

It is funny that the difference between the concept of citoyen and bourgeois is only found in the French language – for the rest of us there is the citizen, Buerger, cittadino or ciudadano: so no difference between the political involved, responsible participant and the consuming, maybe share-holding beneficiary of any stable, political building.

In times of crisis it has always been helpful to install a certain transparency: you need an aim, the knowledge of the helpful means and the will to use them. The rest is common sense and a bit of luck. With other words: I can not see any operational targets and nowhere means to reach them. I hear a lot of noise. Who cares about the CEO? With an unemployment rate of plus 40 per cent between young academics in some countries I start to lose interest in the incapacities of certain CEOs. And I fear that all the rest I might say from here on would be somehow illegal.

Highlight 1: Why the sudden call for clemency? Where are the red-hot pincers, for example?

Highlight 2: Interesting question. 'Burghers' does have a different connotation in English from 'loyal subjects of our most sovereign lady the Queen'

Highlight 3: Perhaps this suggests that there are too many young academics?

As for the general lament, yes: when this sort of lament is popular, revolution is in the air (cf. 'Occupy...') Will it happen? If so, when? Can such a revolution be achieved without too much bloodletting, and without a Terror of its own?

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Roger

Touche.
I hope that your aspirations are realised.

Best Michael

Dear Michael,

SO do I. Believe me, I am as much in favour of EU reform as just about anyone, except perhaps UKIP and the more slavering/drooling members of the Tory right. All I say is that the EU is like democracy: the least worst option on offer.

At lunch today I was talking to an old friend. Not someone I've known all that long (a few years). But definitely old: he's 92. He was 19 when WW2 started. He's anti-EU. But when I pointed out that the EU was better than war, he didn't hesitate to agree.

Cheers,

R.

 

[valdas]

You will never comprehend how much I wish you were right.

well, maybe I was exaggerating a bit (some will worry, some will not). but let's look at the facts - there is no fairness or balance in the remuneration of executives. short term focus on the share price drives the strategy. why do you think EU started regulating the remuneration of the bankers as an aftermath of the financial crises?

 

[Roger Hicks]

Randy:

The phrase:

Important is that we must not punish businesses and management for making bad decisions. Doing so stops them from trying to make any decisions. Then the entire economic system stops and we all lose.

was my own words and was carefully worded to reflect my thinking as succinctly as possible.

The majority here seem to express the thought in situations like Kodak that the workers lose, the shareholders lose but the management walks away with big dollars, career untarnished, and immediately into some other company offering them an equivalent position with equivalent compensation. It does not work that way in the real world. Management looses big time in their credibility and future earning potential. Everyone has skin in the game. But to try to get more out of management than the skin they put into the game would certainly stop anyone from wanting to try.

Dear Bob,

Who cares if the career is 'tarnished'? If you can't live quite comfortably on the money salted away (WITH pension benefits) at a time when you are 'earning' (of course, not earning: just being paid) as much per year as many are paid in a lifetime -- in that case, you can't even run your own life, let alone a major company.

I don't think I know any billionaires, but I do know a surprising number of multi-millionaires, including at least one (elderly and now knighted) Captain of Industry. And you know what? Few if any of the decent ones (yes, I know some rich arseholes too) have much time for people like Perez, or other professional 'managers', either.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Michael Markey]

Michael,

Indeed. While I agree that at its origins the EU (then EEC) was created with the best intentions, today European peoples have very little or virtually no influence on the way major decisions are being made at the top.
Alex

Dear Alex

I like many thought I was signing up to a trading agreement.
Seems that all the while others had a separate agenda of softly softly.

I`d not worry ...it will fail because its become essentially dishonest in so many ways I`m afraid.

I just hope that the much vaunted aspirations for peace are realised

Best

Michael

 

[denizg7]

You point up a big lie that is promulgated in our system - that "everyone" is greedy, and acts as a self-absorbed economic unit. They do not . Most people such as yourself want to live decently. Talented people want to use their talents, that is their prime motivation for working.

It is the class at the top which is different. They think the people "under" them are merely envious of them - they are not.

But they do have good reason to hate them.

Randy

there are people who work on wall st and make 250k-350k a year and they are not greedy

 

[denizg7]

Highlight: indeed. I almost added "As they have in my lifetime" after "..for the better."

I'm not sure that it is the corrupt who seek power. At least, not directly. The trouble is, it costs money to be elected, and we reward the corrupt and greedy with money, so they can afford to buy political office...

Do we want more? Possibly. But equally possibly, craving security (which is what most sane people crave -- no bankruptcy, a roof over our heads, food on the table...) and seeing a society hell-bent on destroying security, we go for MORE at all times, to provide a cushion. As do the greedy and corrupt, who, in their quest for MORE, are destroying security. What else is praise for 'a flexible labour market' if not praise for job insecurity? It doesn't affect people like Perez, who walk away with millions and never have to worry about heath care. In affects Kodak workers and pensioners.

Cheers,

R.

No sorry Roge and the guy who you quoted..

Some people just wanna get a decent pay check just enough for a car a middle class house.. and provide a better life for their children .. then how they grew up.. Everyone talks about the middle class in the news and such.. but working class is always left not discussed.. Not everyone wants to be super rich or have more than one car.. In fact I know people that do not want that or can relate to that in anyway.. they just want to get their pay check and live enough.