|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 21 2012 @ 11:10 PM EDT |
Norweigian playwriteer Henrik Ibsen has a character in one of his plays ask the
question: Which are the most: dumb people or smart people? Since everyone agrees
there are more dumb people, isn't it then dumb to let that dumb majority
decide?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 22 2012 @ 12:59 PM EDT |
Prior to Microsoft's Bubble Burst Popping when they were in
Anti-Trust with the DoJ, their Market Cap had also been headed
for $600 Billion. If their market cap was real, where did it
go? When that bubble burst overnight?
Does Value give a human, let alone an inanimate, air filled
non-entity more of a right to exist or vote? This country was
built by people in a time when there was nothing like a
corporation and the only thing close was East India Company.
Yet only humans had the right to vote. Inanimate hot air
filled balloons that could pop didn't. But humans did, because
rich or poor we the people of this country had equal rights.
To base the value of a human on wealth is like printing money.
You can make it look like a thing is worth anything you want
with it. So the reality is that $600 Billion is NOT REAL....
because it can change moment to moment and in today's second
to second.
Apple doesn't even calculate Market Cap properly in the first
place. To say that a trinket maker who primarily doesn't make
own products, that don't exist (software only) outside itself
and only buys it's own value, is somehow worth more than any
human being is asinine at best. Beyond ludicrous when you put
it in nuts and bolts terms rather than over hyped imaginations
that can look at a room filled with stacks and stacks of
printed money and say that makes it worth $600 Billion
Dollars!
Market Cap in reality is a guestimation by analysts on what
future projections of Revenue will be over time. That's it!
....it's not worth more real than placing a bet on tortoise
and hare race. Where winner takes all and every possible
method is used to determine the outcome is exhausted. It's all
like blowing into the wind and predicting the wind speed on
the other side of the earth if you happen to get the wrong
tortoise and hare. Yes you can be right most of the time, but
what happens when you're wrong?
In the real world... Apple's "Total Net Assets" at the end of
the day is how Real Value is calculated. What does it actually
contribute to the World. Do you actually think a company that
only designs and arranges for the manufacture of any real
products more value that the companies that actually design
and manufacture the pieces and parts that go into making that
product? That's about as absurd a statement as I've ever read
in my life and almost as bad as giving a corporation the right
to vote. It's verges on insanity.
Because by that assumption, when we wake up in the morning and
that non-entity's Market Cap is back down here on earth, are
they then no longer a citizen with the right to vote, when
they're worthless? Market Cap is as fleeting as fame. It can
be washed out in a flash if we found out that Apple had been
doing something illegal or suddenly it's products held no
value and we're talking about exactly that. Their products
have no real value. They are a software (hot air) circus gypsy
barker selling snake oil (as good as hot air)!
Net Tangible Assets figured on a daily basis is how you figure
real value. Because if a company or a person dies, Market Cap
or a person's future earnings is gone the moment they die and
all that's left is their actual real value!
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=AAPL
Being citizens alone is a joke giving them the right to vote?
Well we might as well be giving these rights to our pets, who
also can't think and value freedom or have the ability to make
a decision. Because they are at least animate![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Sarcasm lost? - Authored by: stegu on Wednesday, August 22 2012 @ 03:09 PM EDT
- Sarcasm lost? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 22 2012 @ 04:35 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 23 2012 @ 05:03 AM EDT |
As an example, then, if Apple's worth is $600 billion,
they
should be allowed to cast 3 million votes.
Isn't that the effect
of campaign contributions?
-
Campaign contributions mean the candidate
can better advertise themselves...
-
Which means that more people are
wowed...
-
Which means more votes for them...
-
Which means they are going
to be elected.
-
[which means they can then do the ``bidding'' of their real
electors - the campaign contributors.]
[No assumption of accuracy of the
above should be made; it is only what an observations implies - but then again,
never judge a book by its cover...][ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
