Sunoco: "Screw you peons, I want more money"

[Spexvet]

It's also the consumers and the investors.

in a capitalist system, the investors are at the top of the food chain.

And isn't it a shame that they use their power at the top of the food chain to screw the people who make money for them?

[obxeyeguy]

And isn't it a shame that they use their power at the top of the food chain to screw the people who make money for them?

From this it sounds like you despise anyone who makes more money than you do. If you're at the bottom of the chain and don't like it, get out and work somewhere than you can get to the top.

The people at the top didn't just miraculously appear there one day, they worked for it. No matter how many on top, someone always has to be on the bottom, and remember to duck a lot, because it always falls that way.

[Johns]

... especially the typically-conservative-repubican-executive types who profess to be morally superior yet screw the good folks who earn them their money.

I speak with a lot of folks like yourself, but it usually doens't take so long to get to their true agenda.

Have a great day!:cheers:

[Spexvet]

From this it sounds like you despise anyone who makes more money than you do. If you're at the bottom of the chain and don't like it, get out and work somewhere than you can get to the top.

Not true. I'm pretty happy with the amount that I make. I have compassion for the Sunoco employees that are being laid off. I believe that they wouldn't need to be laid off if the guys who make gigabucks would accept mere megabucks.

... No matter how many on top, someone always has to be on the bottom, and remember to duck a lot, because it always falls that way.

Are you saying that it's ok to throw things at front line workers?:finger:

[Spexvet]

I speak with a lot of folks like yourself, but it usually doens't take so long to get to their true agenda.

Have a great day!:cheers:

I accept your apology.;):p

[ksquared]

No, I don't want to be the "Fair Police". I want everyone involved to do the ethically right thing, especially the typically-conservative-repubican-executive types who profess to be morally superior yet screw the good folks who earn them their money....

You want everyone to do the “ethically right thing” as long as the right thing is in line with your morality. You then proceed to make judgment calls regarding the business practices of a company that you know nothing about except for some sensational news report you read on the internet.

The only one “professing to be morally superior” here it seems, is you.

Envy, wanting something that isn’t yours while playing in the sandbox as a kid or thinking it’s ok to take something that doesn’t belong to you as an adult is still a vice regardless the “spin” you try to give it.

And who are these “typically-conservative-repubican-executive types who profess to be morally superior yet screw the good folks who earn them their money” people you keep referencing.

You have access to voting records of the CEOs and Executives who run the companies and 1st hand insight into their moral make-up? And here I thought voting records were confidential and that only G*d is able to see into the heart of “man”.

I must say that I do enjoy your posts though. Where else would I be able to find so many fallacious arguments all in a single thread. So many that it would take too much time for me to lay them all out for you today.

[Spexvet]

So, are you all prepared to be laid off in commitment to your beliefs?

[obxeyeguy]

So, are you all prepared to be laid off in commitment to your beliefs?

Who do you think is at the top?:p

[Spexvet]

You want everyone to do the “ethically right thing” as long as the right thing is in line with your morality.

Yep. Because my morality is the best, most righteous rmorality!

You then proceed to make judgment calls regarding the business practices of a company that you know nothing about except for some sensational news report you read on the internet.

And you're so different, making judgement calls about my posts that you know so little about? You don't know what I know, do you?

The only one “professing to be morally superior” here it seems, is you.

I'm not just "professing". In this case, the side that wants to protect these workers from being laid off IS the morally superior side. Would I be “professing to be morally superior” if I were defending children from being underfed, poorly clothed, or not medically cared for.

Envy, wanting something that isn’t yours while playing in the sandbox as a kid or thinking it’s ok to take something that doesn’t belong to you as an adult is still a vice regardless the “spin” you try to give it.

You didn't read my posts, did you? Or didn't you understand it - ask Johns, I think he finally got it.

And who are these “typically-conservative-repubican-executive types who profess to be morally superior yet screw the good folks who earn them their money” people you keep referencing.

You have access to voting records of the CEOs and Executives who run the companies and 1st hand insight into their moral make-up? And here I thought voting records were confidential and that only G*d is able to see into the heart of “man”.

Please - a bleeding-heart liberal laying off workers so that he can maintain his already high standard of living? A liberal? I don't think so. BTW, I also can see into the heart of man, just like George Bush saw into Putin. ;)

I must say that I do enjoy your posts though. Where else would I be able to find so many fallacious arguments all in a single thread. So many that it would take too much time for me to lay them all out for you today.

I enjoyed your post, too, self-righteousness, poor logic and all. And you really expressed your opinion about the topic of the thread, didn't you? Oh, you actually didn't, you only criticized. That is soooo difficult.

[obxeyeguy]

[/font][/color]
Yep. Because my morality is the best, most righteous morality!

ask Johns, I think he finally got it.

Oh yeah, Johns got it, as we all do. Hope you don't get too many nosebleeds up that high on your golden horse.

That top statement pretty much sums it up..

PS I corrected the spelling on morality for you.:hammer:

[Spexvet]

Oh yeah, Johns got it, as we all do. Hope you don't get too many nosebleeds up that high on your golden horse.

That top statement pretty much sums it up..

PS I corrected the spelling on morality for you.:hammer:

Thanks.

[Johns]

So, are you all prepared to be laid off in commitment to your beliefs?

Of course! I go to work everyday and face the prospect of being laid off for my beliefs.

[Johns]

[/font][/color]

You didn't read my posts, did you? Or didn't you understand it - ask Johns, I think he finally got it.

Yes, for a time there, I wasn't sure which end of the horse I was speaking to, but after your "true colors" post, I realized it wasn't the end with the teeth.

[DocInChina]

Yeah screw the big corporations!!!! Screw them all!! Who needs 'em? Screw 'em all, so we can all work for the government, which is able to pay their employees by taxing all the folks on welfare!

What? People on welfare aren't paying taxes? Then we'll get the tax money from the employees of...oh yeah, they work for large companies also.

Well, we'll just get the taxes from the small business owners. Oh, that's right, we're in the process of screwing them (as usual) w/ higher taxes to the point they won't worry about having employees any more.

And this quote takes the cake for the "Spoken Like Someone That's Totally Clueless Award": "Wasn't the philanthropy merely marketing, paid for by the lost salaries of the laid off workers? Now that makes A LOT of sense!

I hope that if you are ever the recipient of such philanthropy, that the source reconsiders the gift, and instead buy a billboard.

:cheers:

Here is to you and rinselberg. I decided to stay out of the fray and keep my blood pressure down tonight.

[Spexvet]

You folks can gang up on me, insult me, make false accusations, criticize me all you want. It's ok bcause on this issue, I'm both right and righteous. When it comes to a lower-paid worker not being laid off or a fat-cat executive maintaining a luxurious lifestyle, I'll always come down on the side of the worker. And I'll have the moral high ground. If you, your spouse, your child, parent, or sibling were laid off, I guess you'd just shrug your shoulders and say "well, I guess that's capitalism for ya". And then none of you would go on the government dole, woodja?

[Spexvet]

Yes, for a time there, I wasn't sure which end of the horse I was speaking to, but after your "true colors" post, I realized it wasn't the end with the teeth.

You kissed that post, didn't you? :p

[Spexvet]

BTW, the snowballing effect of layoffs will bring down our economy and world standing more quickly than any other action.

[Johns]

BTW, the snowballing effect of layoffs will bring down our economy and world standing more quickly than any other action.

Yes, and the layoffs will be caused by taxes, regulations, and forced labor unions on business.

See...I knew we'd find something to agree on!:cheers:

[bob_f_aboc]

Steve, we really need that popcorn smiley!

[Spexvet]

Yes, and the layoffs will be caused by taxes, regulations, and forced labor unions on business. ....

That's the stupidest thing I've ever read. Get a clue.

[Johns]

That's the stupidest thing I've ever read. Get a clue.

Oh thank you Miss Sunshine!! :p:p:p:p

I meant to say "increasing taxes, and increasing regulations". Yes, taxes are necessary, but the rate at which they are incresasing, and the overburdensome regualtions are not.

Now I'll sign off before the thread is closed...:cheers:

[rinselberg]

Hey Spexvet,

You might be able to back up your "peons" thesis by digging out whatever data is publicly available on compensation of Sunoco's top level executive officers. Are their compensation packages going up at the same time as the workers are being laid off? And how much? Are their compensation packages grossly out of line with their counterparts at Chevron, Exxon, etc.?

They're being paid to make hard decisions, such as deciding that part of the workforce needs to be reduced.

Just a couple of thoughts that came to the top of my head this morning.

[Spexvet]

That's the stupidest thing I've ever read. Get a clue.

Oh thank you Miss Sunshine!! :p:p:p:p

I meant to say "increasing taxes, and increasing regulations". Yes, taxes are necessary, but the rate at which they are incresasing, and the overburdensome regualtions are not....

See? Even you agree how that sounded. :cheers:

Hey Spexvet,

You might be able to back up your "peons" thesis by digging out whatever data is publicly available on compensation of Sunoco's top level executive officers. Are their compensation packages going up at the same time as the workers are being laid off? And how much? Are their compensation packages grossly out of line with their counterparts at Chevron, Exxon, etc.?

They're being paid to make hard decisions, such as deciding that part of the workforce needs to be reduced.

Just a couple of thoughts that came to the top of my head this morning.

Doesn't matter, Rinnsey. Before workers are laid off, executive compensation should be reduced to no more than double the average non-executive compensation (or there about). Look at some of the high profile executives who have voluntarily reduced their salaries to $1.00 per year. Now, that's something that you have to respect!

[obxeyeguy]

Before workers are laid off, executive compensation should be reduced to no more than double the average non-executive compensation (or there about).

What an idea there Robin Hood. To be fair though, why not a 40% cut evenly across the board. Oh, that's right, those who make money should support those that don't. Go to work at Ben and Jerry's if you like that compensation program, I believe they used it.

Look at some of the high profile executives who have voluntarily reduced their salaries to $1.00 per year. Now, that's something that you have to respect!

To me that's not to be respected, its just plain stupid. I wouldn't work for a buck a year, would you?

[Spexvet]

To me that's not to be respected, its just plain stupid. I wouldn't work for a buck a year, would you?

Sure. It's the honorable thing to do. I guess that's why you wouldn't - or are you just too selfish and greedy? These guys have been getting rich while business was good and the market was increasing. I'm sure they can survive on previous earnings or scale back alittle in their lifestyle. You know - trade in the Ferrari for a Buick.

Another thing: these workers getting laid off are your patients and customers. They won't be in to pay you for a long while.