These CEOs who are "Going Galt" and threatening their own employees in the process.....

[Tommy_Carcetti]

.....Seriously, seriously immoral shit.

How these people can be looked at as somehow being moral or admirable or people you want to respect?

These are not self-made men. The notion of the "self-made man" is a degrading myth. And using your own employees as a pawn in a temper tantrum? Unreal. Simply fucking unreal.

Not to mention this is being done as a gut reaction to a political election in the middle of an economic recovery. This is nothing more than an attempt at sabotage of the American economy.

[bemildred]

1. Pompous fools with delusions of grandeur. nt

[Fawke Em]

2. I'd like to know from whom they think they make

their money? Do they not realize their actions have consequences?

Do these greedy bastards think only wealthy, pro-Republicans buy pizza or endless salads or whatever? Do they think they can alienate more than half the population and still make money?

I'm guessing most of these people either started out wealthy or had enough breaks and/or connections to move up the economic chain rather quickly and don't have one wit of actual business sense. If they do have any sense, they certainly wouldn't be alienating any paying customer on the basis of what amounts to a political hissy fit.

[seabeyond]

3. seriously immoral. i am getting more and more pissed about this. little children having a tantrum

effecting fellow americans, and all of our economy. fuck them. they can pay the price of their tantrum.

[Kber]

4. It's bad business, on top of everything else.

If I were a shareholder and my CEO was making bad business decisions because of some political bullshit, I'd question his competence and ability to do his job.

And if the business is rocky and, instead of doing an objective analysis regardign the reasons and, therefore the best solutions (which sometimes DO involve cutting jobs), he runs around pointing to the Obama boogy man instead of manning, up, well same thing.

Democratic elections aren't exactly earth shattering events. If your business is too weak to withstand the "shock" of another 4 years of what is, let's face facts, a center-left administration, then you aren't going to make it anyway.

Just saying.

[Sheldon Cooper]

14. You are so right.

It's bad for business, and anyone who claims that they're reducing employees over this election was planning to reduce employees all along. They've just found a convenient scapegoat.

[Tansy_Gold]

5. None of them has "gone Galt." Not. One.

For one thing, Galt never owned a business. He was an engineer at 20th Century Motors who got pissed off when the original owners turned it into an employee-owned business. What he did whine and quit his job, and then he went after the other company owners -- not CEOs of publically held corporations but owners of businesses -- and talked them into walking away. I don't see any of these real life bozos packing up a single suitcase and walking out.

People need to actually fucking read the damn book and understand what Rand actually wrote before they go pretending they know what they're talking about.

[quinnox]

6. yikes

Just a little grumpy this morning?

[Tansy_Gold]

9. No, not grumpy at all

It's just that too many people -- on both sides -- really don't know what "going Galt" means. Threatening to reduce employee's pay if a certain person is elected to office isn't anywhere near "going Galt." CEOs are not owners of businesses; they are employees themselves.

If people actually read and understood what Rand was trying to say in Atlas Shrugged and how poorly constructed her logic is -- and "logic" was ironically one of the main themes of her philosophy -- they'd know that the phrase is absurd when applied to the owner of an Applebee's franchise or the founder of the Papa John's franchise.

Rand wrote the book in the late 1940s and early 1950s, and she had to manipulate even that reality (among others) to make the story work. That's why it's often categorized as "science fiction" -- she had to invent new forms of energy and new technological devices to hold the story together.

I've read it, and I've read it more than once. And what's appalling to me is that so few on our side have, because Rand's version of "objectivism" is easily debunked if you know what you're talking about.

[quinnox]

10. alrighty, but reading anything by this

Supposed philosopher would be near the bottom of my reading list. Seeing some of her interview on you tube told me everything I want to know about this creep Rand and her philosophy.

[Paladin]

12. Sounds like You've Read It Too Much.

Once was damned sure enough for me. Mea culpa---I was a clueless college freshman at the time.

And I like the "Going Galt" terminology. If it doesn't precisely fit what passes for Rand's dramatic structure, who gives a shit? Certainly the worship of money over the welfare of people is what Rand's "novels" and Pappa John's actions amount to......

[Tommy_Carcetti]

8. It's all the same, "I'm taking my ball and going home" mindset, though.

All too prevelant with Rand. See "The Fountainhead" as well.

Not a perfect analogy, but still apt nonetheless.

And yes, Ayn Rand was a nut and a shitty writer.

[WinkyDink]

15. It's an expression the meaning of which we can glean. So being literal about it is like

admonishing, "It can't rain cats and dogs, so stop saying it!"

[Tansy_Gold]

17. The point is

"They" don't know what they're talking about. "They" don't know what "going Galt" really means.

On the other hand, if "you" know what it means, "you" can challenge "them" on it and show "them" how fucking stupid "they" are.

One of the reasons the left has so much difficulty dealing with the right -- and especially the extreme right -- is that the left too often dismisses the things the right believes in without trying to understand them. "They" do not really see the world the same way we do, and understanding the difference in worldview can make dealing with them easier. . . . . and more productive. Sometimes, at best, it helps you simply give up and leave them the fuck alone because some of them are really beyond help.

[Egalitarian Thug]

18. Thank you for writing this.

That some people feel they have to reenforce the mistakes and misperceptions of what are likely the dimmest bulbs in our national marquee is irritating, and you seem to have particularly irritated by this instance.

[Tansy_Gold]

19. Thanks, and LOL

After almost 12 years here, I'm used to it.

[Ikonoklast]

7. The Free Market that they profess to love so much will BITE THEM IN THE ASS.

Lemme see here...

Get rid of employees at the very bottom, you know, the people that actually do the stuff that makes money for the corporation, and the result will be:


Less products being made, shipped, and sold.

Less employees to provide customer service, longer wait times for product.

Loss of customer base as they flee to your competitors who still have short lead times, better customer service, and are willing to accomodate your needs.



Recipe to destroy your own business. There will always be someone else more than happy to steal all of your customers and take their money by providing better service.

All one has to do is tarnish your own brand, and it is very, very difficult to repair or recover from that.

[DinahMoeHum]

11. The key here is: Buy from or work for the COMPETITION.

Meanness in business is no longer an asset in a world that is increasingly interdependent and where reputations can be destroyed through the internet and social media faster than a fart.

[closeupready]

13. Remember what happened at Circuit City?

They treated the sales staff abominably, and partially as a result, went that much faster into the dust heap.

[stevenleser]

16. Very simple solution. Employees get together and file to put the companies in receivership

If the CEOs/corporate owners are abandoning a going concern, I think most states make provisions for this in law regarding receivership.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Receivership#United_States_process