Jump to content

The Leopards Eating Faces and Unlubed Dildo of Consequences Thread


Recommended Posts

Posted
38 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

So how does that contradict what @BrickHorn said?

I agree.  When I helped take a company public there were all kinds of "how do you look in stripes" warnings, but I certainly don't ever recall being informed about any legal requirement to place shareholder value above all else.  

I don't think it does, we're in agreement.

I didn't tag Captainant to antagonize him, but the quote was a perfect example of an executive using fiduciary duty as an excuse for layoffs.  Friedman Doctrine might require such a thing, fiduciary duty does not.

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Friedman Doctrine might require such a thing, fiduciary duty does not.

Neither requires it. However, that executive from the article *may* have a fiduciary duty to reduce costs. Or not. It depends on their situation.

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Never mind the possiblity of the wrong people getting laid off.  (Ahem.)

I’ve had to figure out who got laid off twice in my career. It’s unpleasant work. I would love to say the exercise involves matching the skills the company needs to the go-forward strategy, but it’s usually just determined by where people wind up on a spreadsheet. 

 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Posted
1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

How does it necessarily satisfy fiduciary responsibility to let people leave and their training and institutional knowledge leave with them, not to mention any compensation paid out?  
 

especially if you think you will need to rehire after things turn around.  Seems like it could be the opposite some occasions. 
 

a place known for not laying off as a matter of course also will probably get a better candidate pool when they do hire. 

In short, it doesn't.  The fiduciary duty of corporate officers and directors has existed as long as corporations have existed.

The fiduciary duty permits consideration of interests other than the immediate share price/book value/earnings-profit of the corporation.

That little bastard Milton Friedman proposed in 1970 that corporate governance should consider nothing other than profit and return to shareholders.  That's never been the law, but it has been a canon of business ethics for a good long while, to our great detriment.  This is known as the Friedman Doctrine, or shareholder doctrine, as opposed to the broader "stakeholder doctrine," which explicitly considers the interests of others as part of the broader interests of the corporation.

Also, regarding Wisconsin Aluminum Foundry:

And, in 2019, Sachin Shivaram brings his vision for growth to WAF as the first non-family CEO of the family-owned company.

Likely all Trump voters, wildcat's petit bourgeouisie.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
29 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I’ve had to figure out who got laid off twice in my career. It’s unpleasant work. I would love to say the exercise involves matching the skills the company needs to the go-forward strategy, but it’s usually just determined by where people wind up on a spreadsheet. 

 

In this particular case its simple.  You wore Trump gear when I brought President Biden to the plant, you are first to get fired when Trump’s policies warrant layoffs.  Easy peasy.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Neither requires it. However, that executive from the article *may* have a fiduciary duty to reduce costs. Or not. It depends on their situation.

 

absent something where the cost is paying a bunch of your family members who don't work there exorbitant salaries, which no one would call "reducing cost", no, that's not how fiduciary duties work.

Edited by elfenix
Posted
7 hours ago, elfenix said:

 

absent something where the cost is paying a bunch of your family members who don't work there exorbitant salaries, which no one would call "reducing cost", no, that's not how fiduciary duties work.

Yeah, there's a great deal of confusion between the business "ethic" (ha) of shareholder primacy and fiduciary duty.  

So much so that greedhead corporate lawyers like Marty Lipton and Skadden have to write articles reminding people that Friedman Doctrine isn't the law and that even "public benefit" corporations don't need a special statute (although there is one in Delaware and elsewhere).  https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2019/08/putting-to-rest-the-debate https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2024/05/07/stakeholder-governance-and-the-eclipse-of-shareholder-primacy/

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, there's a great deal of confusion between the business "ethic" (ha) of shareholder primacy and fiduciary duty.  

So much so that greedhead corporate lawyers like Marty Lipton and Skadden have to write articles reminding people that Friedman Doctrine isn't the law and that even "public benefit" corporations don't need a special statute (although there is one in Delaware and elsewhere).  https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2019/08/putting-to-rest-the-debate https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2024/05/07/stakeholder-governance-and-the-eclipse-of-shareholder-primacy/

It's what's being taught in MBA courses around the country, and has been for decades. Shareholders and investors are more important than anything else, and if you disagree then fuck you you're fired. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Captainant said:

It's what's being taught in MBA courses around the country, and has been for decades. Shareholders and investors are more important than anything else, and if you disagree then fuck you you're fired. 

Everything is so financially engineered it's impossible to figure out wtf a good business even is anymore 

Posted
1 hour ago, Captainant said:

It's what's being taught in MBA courses around the country, and has been for decades. Shareholders and investors are more important than anything else, and if you disagree then fuck you you're fired. 

Still not fiduciary duty.

Posted
23 hours ago, Captainant said:

Lol, you try telling a board of directors that you won't cut costs or lay anyone off when your business model is suddenly too expensive. You can pick a legal nit about it, but functionally it's 100% the duty and responsibility of management to protect investors and their money. That means layoffs and cost cutting.

Which was always the end result of capitalism that bases its worth on the stock market and shareholder's money.  The product or service the company produces DOES NOT MATTER.  It is the perceived value, factual or not, that is the focus and becomes the product or service instead.

Posted
19 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

It’s become painfully apparent that so many people we would call “farmers” are in fact just plantation owners. 

These dudes don’t work their farms and don’t want to. Just watch all these interviews with “farmers” belly-aching about needing to do their own farm work because of immigration crackdowns. They own the land and the equipment, exploit cheap labor from a captive workforce that has no rights, and collect the profits. 

I don’t know how much acreage a family can farm- especially since they no longer pop out a dozen kids to be their slave labor, but I could see where these farmers have way too much acreage to cover without labor, and too thin of margins to use anything but the cheapest of labor.  
 

so some of them probably cannot farm their full land themselves, and also can’t afford to only farm the portion they can cover themselves. 
 

probably shouldn’t have voted for the folks that wanted to take their cheap labor away. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
12 minutes ago, Foosters said:

lmao. hopefully someone gets angry enough about the "lies" and does something about it. Also, Pimphand in shambles

r/LeopardsAteMyFace - Florida passed a law to please Chemtrail conspiracy theorists and now they're mad planes are still leaving trails in the sky

 

MAGAGranny is a dumb, dumb 

 

r/LeopardsAteMyFace - MAGA Granny living on social security and 3x Trump voter realizes that she got played as it now affects her

this is the Epstein files but on a state-level scale.

it won't be the last one to bite them in the ass. peddling to conspiracy theorists is easily the dumbest strategy ever.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Posted
56 minutes ago, Foosters said:

lmao. hopefully someone gets angry enough about the "lies" and does something about it. Also, Pimphand in shambles

r/LeopardsAteMyFace - Florida passed a law to please Chemtrail conspiracy theorists and now they're mad planes are still leaving trails in the sky

 

MAGAGranny is a dumb, dumb 

 

r/LeopardsAteMyFace - MAGA Granny living on social security and 3x Trump voter realizes that she got played as it now affects her

Sounds like granny had a VERY rough August.

Good. I hope it gets worse.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted
36 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

I am amazed that facts started to matter. Just ten years too late.

That's the thing....the facts DON'T matter.  The facts just make them mad.

"you gotta stop all them chemtrails!"

Fact: "Those are chemtrails.  They're contrails.  They happen when planes fly through air under certain atmospheric conditions."

Law bans chemtrails.  The contrails still occur.

"Why haven't you stopped them chemtrails!  I still see em!"

Fact: "That's because they are what they always were -- just regular old contrails.  They've been happening as long as we had airplanes flying at good speed."

2-photos-contrails.jpg

"BULLSHIT!  LIAR!"

You can't fix criminally insane stupidity.  What you CAN do is co-opt it to make it your voting base, as the GQP has done.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

That's the thing....the facts DON'T matter.  The facts just make them mad.

"you gotta stop all them chemtrails!"

Fact: "Those are chemtrails.  They're contrails.  They happen when planes fly through air under certain atmospheric conditions."

Law bans chemtrails.  The contrails still occur.

"Why haven't you stopped them chemtrails!  I still see em!"

Fact: "That's because they are what they always were -- just regular old contrails.  They've been happening as long as we had airplanes flying at good speed."

2-photos-contrails.jpg

"BULLSHIT!  LIAR!"

You can't fix criminally insane stupidity.  What you CAN do is co-opt it to make it your voting base, as the GQP has done.

Meh, we know WW2 was a hoax. Never happened. Please take your logic and science to TexAgs. 

 

  • Haha 2
Posted
On 9/2/2025 at 10:46 AM, mchookem said:

ohhh i get to do one!

Screenshot_20250902_104242_Chrome.thumb.jpg.c51207e9a5b881de18ab696f6e75ec57.jpg

dun dun dunnnn...

Screenshot_20250902_104021_Chrome.thumb.jpg.d19037d71b60eccc5401eeb225db2fb1.jpg

 

As a Colorado resident, I am quite gruntled.  All these Springs MAGAts will certainly love the opportunity to move to Alabama.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, The Dog said:

image.thumb.png.5a530e1e5ffb7b6d3eba61a62a385d61.png

 

Dear Cletus:  the fact that Trump will consider you an enemy if you release the Epstein files means that Trump is totally innocent.   Because if Trump has nothing to hide, that is exactly why he will make you an enemy if you want to see the nothing in there.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

IMG_4942.jpeg.321eec9ff2b66049de01909d2fa43e50.jpeg

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

[YES YOU DID!] goes here.  For the millionth time.  This is him being exactly who he is, was, adn always has been.

To be fair, he did campaign on releasing the files. So he’s not doing what he (and every other GOP rep) said he’d do.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:


He's a dolt, but I'm not in favor of banning for just being a douche. Counter opinions are important.

Bro he went on a serious anti-trans rant. He needed a breather. No one actually gets perma-banned here; crypto bro out front should have told ya. 

Posted
13 hours ago, BrickHorn said:

It’s become painfully apparent that so many people we would call “farmers” are in fact just plantation owners hacendados. 

Probably secret Mexicans. If they are really white, most definitely Mexican Telenovela stars. DEPORT THEM ALL.

Except for her. And her. And maybe that one over there.



×
×
  • Create New...