>SNIP
>>
>>Good points. Only those stock holders that have large concentrations of ownership can mandate change. Rarely do grass-roots efforts work...
>>
>Summarizing...
>
>We've evolved capitalism to where:
>
>1) A basic tenet - shareholders mandate change - is now "some shareholders mandate change" (or prevent it, as the case may be);
>
>2) THE basis of the system - to make profit for it's owners - is becoming twisted by more and more corporate leaders. It used to be implicit that this was qualified by something like 'by delivering useful products/services through legal and moral means' and now there is nothing implicit.
>
>Something has to be breaking in the current system when, on getting a Federal report that UNemployment is rising, the stock market instantly rises because that is considered GOOD NEWS.
>
>And look at the situation over the last couple of quarters... economists all agree that the economy is only staying palatable because of consumer spending. I view this as "code" aimed at the listener - you'd better keep spending or you will be responsible for tanking the economy.
>I haven't heard a single analyst say what s/he should be saying: the way the economy is going right now you are well advised to hang on to your money and you certainly must stop racking up more debt.
>
>Yes, I've enjoyed the discussion too.
>
>JimN

Jim;

I am sure if the stock market goes down tomorrow it will be blamed on unemployment raising. The stock market is the ultimate means to determine how greed affects investors and the inability to determine cause and effect. The neurotic behavior of the stock market and its investors is most repulsive.

Can anyone explain if a stock looses say $100 million dollars in a day, what happened to that money? It just went up in smoke? Or is there some clown standing there with $100 million in his pocket that the investors just lost? Remember buy low sell high.

Tom