The Coming Renationalization of Petrobras.

You can not have it both ways. If you are talking about taking over a public company by the government because its making alot of money and suggesting to use that money for social purposes, it is not capitalism.

NATIONALIZATION OF A COMPANY HELPS THE FEW AT THE EXPENSE OF THE MANY.

THE FEW BEING THE CORRUPT ELITE THAT DECIDE WHERE THE MONEY GOES.

Most Arab countries that have national oil companies have more poor people while the few in power have all of the money. These end up being dictatorships and monarchies. Power and money corrupt. Without laws there are no justice. A government that chooses to do whatever it wants in the name of social purposes ends up enriching the few against the many.

"In Brazil we have capitalism in the US we have socialism – and regarding social welfare the area that is growing the fastest is welfare to Wall Street other wise their business model would collapse and have a major meltdown."
 
http://www.247wallst.com/2008/07/the-price-of-oi.html


The current strike announced by the labor of Petrobas is one whereby the labor does not think that it is being rewarded properly.

This issue can easily be solved by issuing common stock on a loyalty/work/innovation basis.

This is the major fault in the US. Just 1% of the wealthiest control over 80% of the wealth in the US.

If a person goes to work for a company, knowing that if they work hard and contribute their lives, it is only fitting that they are rewarded company stock, not cash.

Stock ownership can promote efficiency, loyalty, and hard work.
And can properly distribute wealth.

The US has it dead wrong in this regard. The US Stock game has become an incestual pool of corporate and government employees, police policing the police system, whereby at this very moment is capitalizing gains and socializing losses, because of the garnered greed of the few. Purebred incestual "join the country club" fraternity type idiocy.....very much like the "Good Ole Boy System" of a New Orleans days gone by......
 
.

Oraclewizard77: Power and money corrupt. Without laws there are no justice. A government that chooses to do whatever it wants in the name of social purposes ends up enriching the few against the many.


*******


July 14, 2008

SouthAmerica: I don’t agree with you. Here is an actual example that contradicts what you said.

The Generals had the power in Brazil during the 1970’s and they did create the tools and the foundations for the ethanol industry to develop in Brazil and make Brazil 100 percent independent of imported oil today.

The people who got rich were the people who invested in sugar cane plantations and ethanol refineries – and the Brazilian population were also great beneficiaries of that system that have insulated them from the current international oil crisis and massive mess.

.
 
I know you don't agree with me, however that is because you can't stick to your original point which suggests an inflexible mind that does not wish to admit that is wrong.

Did Brazil nationalize their sugar company, or not? From what you are writing, it sounds like private investors put their money into the project and made profit. This is capitalism.

What you are originally stating, is Brazil take over a public company by force and use the money for social projects.

Two different ideas. The 1st is capitalism, the 2nd is communism. The 2nd can only be compared to the 1st is that if private investors put their money into the sugar project, and instead of giving them profit, the government took over by force the project and used the proceeds for social needs.
 
Quote from southamerica:

.

Crgarcia: Only losers believe in nationalizations. Nationalizations are robbery.

Even if they pay the fair value to stockholders, governments are too ineffective to run ANY companies.


********


July 13, 2008

SouthAmerica: Do you mean losers such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Norway, and others?

I guess you don’t approve what these governments have been doing with their windfall oil revenues such as build magnificent cities of the future with state of the art technologies that open all kinds of opportunities for the population on these countries on the coming years.

In your view efficient corporations are companies such Exxon Mobil – in the middle of a major oil supply crisis in 2007 the best investment that they could come up with was to use billions of US dollars to buy back their own stock.

In my view, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are doing the right thing and not Exxon Mobil, and other US oil companies.

In my opinion your thinking is frozen in the past and the real world has changed since then – the companies that you think are doing a great job such as the 7 sisters, today they belong to the second tier of global oil companies – Today the first tier belongs to mostly nationalized oil companies such as Petrobras, the Russian company, the Chinese state oil company, Aramco, and so on….

At the end of the day the truth is companies such as Exxon Mobil are becoming just dinosaurs from another age.

.
More...
Saudi Arabia is completely run and rules by americans.
Norway is first world, not the third world (Brazil)

Exxon pays only 1.90% dividend
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=XOM
the rest is reinvested.
State companies want to take 30%+ of the profits to waste it in "social programs" and similar nonsense.

Ever tried to fill a barrell with an hole?, a barrell with no bottom?
 
1) In the area of technology: In Switzerland the Swiss are able to make watches.

2) In the area of food: Swiss cheese, and Swiss chocolate is one of the best around the world.

3) In the area of International Finance and Banking: Switzerland is a safe haven for laundering money for any mafia, drug dealers, corrupt officials from any country, from crooks, dictators, terrorist groups, and any other type of money from any criminal activities from around the world.

Switzerland is the money haven for all kinds of dirty money and that kind of illegal activity places Switzerland among the most profitable banking centers in the world.

When money laundering is the Bread and Butter of your economy no wonder it is so profitable.

SA "objectivity" at its finest. Money laundering the bread and butter of Swiss standard of living. Swiss financial services are 14% of GDP. How much of it is laundered money?? I bet it's tiny amount of the total.
Interesting with just click of the mouse you can get detail info about Switzerland yet you only came up with watches and cheese.
If you truly believe what you write I have one question for you. Tell me what's the color of the sky in your world???

P.S. By the way if Brazilians nationalize Petrobras, lot of money will indeed end up in Switzerland. It's OK though, stupidity should always be punished.
 
.

Oraclewizard77: You can not have it both ways. If you are talking about taking over a public company by the government because its making a lot of money and suggesting to use that money for social purposes, it is not capitalism.


****


July 17, 2008

SouthAmerica: I don’t care what you call it. As I mentioned before here on this forum and in the comments after the article on Brazzil magazine – I needed a source of funding for my economic development plan for Brazil – and Petrobras would be a perfect source of funding for my plan.

Nothing more and nothing less and you can go to Brazzil magazine and read everything that I wrote about how to keep the people honest and make sure that the plan is actually implemented.


*****


Oraclewizard77: NATIONALIZATION OF A COMPANY HELPS THE FEW AT THE EXPENSE OF THE MANY.

THE FEW BEING THE CORRUPT ELITE THAT DECIDE WHERE THE MONEY GOES.


****


SouthAmerica: Not in this case if they implement the plan and pass the laws to guaranty its implementation of the plan as I suggested.


*****


Oraclewizard77: Most Arab countries that have national oil companies have more poor people while the few in power have all of the money.


*****


SouthAmerica: Some Arab countries are doing a superb job in the investment of their oil revenues and they are building great cities of the future which will create millions of jobs and would improve the standard of living for their populations. Saudi Arabia and the UAE are examples of this type of investment in the future of their country.


******


Oraclewizard77: I know you don't agree with me, however that is because you can't stick to your original point which suggests an inflexible mind that does not wish to admit that is wrong.


******


SouthAmerica: I know I am not wrong on that one. I spent months working and refining my economic development plan.


******


Oraclewizard77: Did Brazil nationalize their sugar company, or not? From what you are writing, it sounds like private investors put their money into the project and made profit. This is capitalism.


******


SouthAmerica: The Generals came up with the plan designed the strategy and the private sector just followed the rules and they made money in the process and because they followed the rules laid down by the Generals today Brazil has an independent energy industry and most automobiles are powered by ethanol made from sugar cane. And today they are operating with zero in subsidies from the Brazilian government.

Let’s contrast that with the inferior system that we have in the US under your supposed free market rules. Keep in mind that the ethanol industry that were developed here in the US was keeping tabs on what was going on in Brazil during the entire time.

Today the ethanol in the US is made from corn which yields 1/10th of the ethanol that you can get from sugar cane from the same amount of efforts and resources. Ethanol from corn required last year US$ 16 billion dollars in subsidies from the US government to be a viable product in the US. Ethanol from corn took 30 percent of the corn production to make fuel to be used as fuel for cars reducing the amount of corn available for the food chain of the United States in turn having a major impact in the cost of food production - and creating a major source of inflation for the American people since corn is used in all kinds of way in the food production of this country.

One more time the free market, or capitalism, or whatever you want to call it – made all the wrong decisions and the American people are going to pay a very high price for their mistakes. A system that is driven only by the profit motive, greed, and lack of common sense produces a disaster after another as the American system has been going through one scandal after another at a cost of trillions and trillions of US dollars – and the US economic and financial system has the track record to back this massive failure down.


*****


Oraclewizard77: What you are originally stating, is Brazil take over a public company by force and use the money for social projects.


*****


SouthAmerica: Yes by force like Imbev did with Budweiser and Americans do all the time to its corporations.

You take the shareholders of a target corporation – by force open their mouths and shove enough US dollars down their throat until they turn in the shares that they own in that corporation. The battle for America’s beer king turned nasty at one point with brewer Inbev escalating its offer for Anheuser-Busch into a hostile bid, but after some negotiating they arrived to a mutual agreement that ended the hostile take over.

American companies do this type of hostile take over all the time – then they pillage the new corporation of all its assets, lay off their employees, raid their pension plans, and then they turn around and put the carcass back into the market and try to find some fools to invest in the sick poppy.

I guess in your opinion that is the efficient and good form of capitalism the kind that is based on pillage and destruction of people lives and creating nothing useful for society other than the large profits for a hand full of people who had participated on the raid.


******


Oraclewizard77: Two different ideas. The 1st is capitalism, the 2nd is communism. The 2nd can only be compared to the 1st is that if private investors put their money into the sugar project, and instead of giving them profit, the government took over by force the project and used the proceeds for social needs.


*******


SouthAmerica: It is very hard to discuss with someone when his thinking is frozen in the past – from long ago.

You must be a conservative Republican at least that is the way that they think as a group.

If you have been reading my articles then you would know that many countries that are moving into the future for example in Broadband technology are laying the foundations with government money as I suggested on my plan. I guess if you want to call all these countries communists it if fine with me you can call them anything you want; countries such as Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, France, and even China.

You can call them anything you want, even communists if that makes you happy. But these government investments are the ones that are laying the foundations for the future on these countries.

I rather follow the model of what is going on inside these countries than follow the American model that is becoming an example of how not to do almost anything.

The American model of capitalism is making the American economy obsolete as these countries invest in new infrastructure and new technologies for the future. The United States is becoming very fast a country of the past and not a country of the future. In the United States it is time to strip bare everything in sight and move on to better pastures somewhere else.


*****


Crgarcia: Saudi Arabia is completely run and rules by Americans. Norway is first world, not the third world (Brazil)

Exxon pays only 1.90% dividend http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=XOM
the rest is reinvested. State companies want to take 30%+ of the profits to waste it in "social programs" and similar nonsense.


*****


SouthAmerica: We will show you which country is third world.

Your statement shows your ignorance more than anything else.

I said on my posting that the best investments that Exxon Mobil could find last year was to reinvest the money in buy back their own stock.

I did not say anything about how much Exxon paid in dividends to their shareholders. These are two distinct subjects that we are talking about, and you still have not grasped what I said.


******


SouthAmerica: Reply to Cesko

I just have one comment for you.

Switzerland = RICOLLA…….


*****


Robbie380: Southamerica....what do you think about the potential strike at pbr? need some opinions! thanks in advance!


*****


SouthAmerica: I believe that the workers of Petrobras have the right to strike and negotiate a package that is a win win situation for both parties.

The employees of Petrobras have the right to participate and be rewarded accordingly to they should share in the new prosperity of this company. In my opinion a happy employee does a better job for its employer.

With an explosive period of growth ahead of Petrobras it is in everybody’s interest for Petrobras’ management to keep a happy and stable labor force in the coming years when Petrobras will be offering great opportunities for growth and prosperity to all its employees.

.
 
Excellent Commentary ....As Usual
.......................................................................................

Your points are coming clearer in the sense that every country must review the resources that they have, and thus create objectives to form the framework and infrastructure on which the government of their choice can form.

It does not matter what the type of government is, as all countries need....

Energy
Water
Agriculture
Mobility
Clothing
Medical
Education
Infrastructure.....roads,bridges,waste controls
Entertainment
Military, Police borders only
Labor
Innovation
Finance
Manufacturing
Regulation

The question is can you frame by name the approaches that best handle the forming and maintenance of a sovereign country.

There has been quite a bit of confusion as to what method is best whether it be capitalism, socialism, communism, fascism, kingdom, aristocracy, dictatorship, democracy,....etc....

What seems to be clear is that no country fits well into one category. They are all some of the above. Thus it is simply erroneous that a country be referred to as a single approach, for one reason.....the label is wrong.

There should be a new category......a label that represents the country that bests manages its affairs in the sense that it has a good balance, and its people seem to be fairing better than its peers.

It would be a simple ranking label...

Extremely well managed
Well managed
Managed
Not very well managed
Not managed

The above labels are more fitting.....and should replace the current labelling system.

This in turn would remove the labels from people who write about economic methods of a country's management capabilities.
 
Yes, I agree with you that investing in corn by using government money in the United States was stupid and all it accomplished was the increase in the price of food.

Our government is more stupid and wasteful than other governments on how to allocate resources. That is why they should not be in this business. However, if we let market forces alone determine if corn should be used, it would never have happened since its not a profitable business without subsidy.

You may be correct in that Brazil is able to use its government better for social projects, but you seem to have an overall anti-American attitude. Did someone make fun of you or something while you were here?

If Brazil buys out the public company at a higher price than it was trading, then you are right, there is nothing wrong with that option. The problem I have is with other countries just taking over assets and not giving current shareholders any compensation.

I would like to point out that while America has not yet innovated on energy companies, they have on Internet companies like GOOG and tech companies like Apple. Brazil did the best job on energy innovations, and it would have been much better if we duplicated it rather than went with corn.

I would also like to say that although America came out with the 1st electric car, they let Japan catch up and make an economically affordable hybrid car 1st which helped make Toyota the number 1 car company in the world. I think all countries have good and bad points.

Personally, I like most South American counties especially Argentina since I speak fluent Spanish but have not been to Brazil since I don't speak Portuguese.

I actually hope your plan works, but I hope if they implement it, they don't take out the company below the current share price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top