On Wed, 6 May 2009 15:42:06 -0400, "webster72n" <webster72n@xxxxxx>
wrote:
Quote:
>
>
>"Steve McGarrett" <smcgarret@xxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:egl305dincroe26vclt1rb2tb9qm2191j2@xxxxxx Quote:
>> On Wed, 6 May 2009 14:16:11 -0400, "webster72n" <webster72n@xxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> Quote:
>>>It's all a question of how to make the most money, peoples interests are
>>>secondary at best, IMHO.
>>><H>.
>>
>> In the long run, a company cannot maximize profits UNLESS people's
>> interests are satisfied.
>>
>> You are implying that people's interests don't have to be attended to,
>> which is clearly not the case. >
>That is not an implication but an indication with all the proof at hand. No. You have chosen the info you call "proof" and have made your
implications based on that selection. Might make you feel good, but
it's bad practice.
Quote:
>Surely there have to be considerations, but they are clearly not primary,
>that is my contention, or we wouldn't have these overwhelming problems.
Your contention is wrong. You are clearly looking at matters from a
jaundiced viewpoint. I'll leave it at that.
I'm outta here.