There are many cases in American history where multiple businesses were owned by the same owner and profitable businesses 'carried' those that only showed losses. Many times the owners kept the businesses running simply to keep their employees working. It was especially true of small factories. That is until the entire structure was bought out when the children took over and the original owner passed on...

>I don't seem to 'get' it Tracy... are you saying that businesses in "the old days" could continue to operate while they continually lost money? If so, you are wrong. Never happened and never will. At 'best' some branches of companies lost money while, overall, that company stayed profitable. And I would accept that in the "old days" lots of companies had such situations and continued to operate (the losers) out of respect for their customers.
>
>What are you getting at?
>
>Jim
>
>PS Taken at face value your suggestion to *me* is the equivalent saying I could rob banks to finance (my idea of) a "good company". Robbing banks is widely accepted as immoral and illegal. What corporations do these days is **IN MY MIND** immoral too (and should be illegal), but since it's not illegal they do it anyway.
>
>
>
>>You could always reap the profits until you can afford to start your own business that will employ local workers, provide a safe working environment and good benefits and can afford to stay in business while it loses money...oh that's right, that was in the 'old days.'
>>
>>
>>>Sadly, Chris, I don't have a solution.
>>>
>>>I've been waiting for some bright people to suggest something so that I could jump onto the bandwagon.
>>>
>>>Some people say that the solution is to buy stocks so that I can benefit from this high-handed low-handed under-handed trend. I'm not in the habit, myself, of reaping profit from the mis-fortune of others. And it pretty much IS what any corporation does these days - add to their profits mainly by exploiting people.
>>>
>>>If you've got a solution I'm more than anxious to her it.
>>>
>>>Jim
>>>
>>>>Jim,
>>>>
>>>>What is your solution to this?
>>>>
>>>>>Yup. And what was Wall Street's reaction when they abandoned the "buy American" policy... high praise for higher profits!
>>>>>That textile plants and clothing plants and shoe making plants and < you name it > plants all shut down or moved offshore was just 'the natural cycle' and all was/is good with the world (of economics).
>>>>>
>>>>>Maytag is leaving its roots and moving out of country. Hundreds of jobs lost and thousands of workers (in related companies (as suppliers) or furnishing goods and services to Maytag and related workers) are in jeopardy. All for profit (or not enough of it) and all because competitors moved away first giving them lower prices than Maytag. This is a good thing? Especially when that off-shore washer is NOT priced at cost of production + reasonable profit but rather at just low enough to kill Maytag. It STINKS!!!