Friday, December 18, 2009

Pepsico CEO should be fired

I had the misfortune of watching the CEO of PepsiCo (NYSE: PEP), Indra K. Nooyi, on Cramer's Mad Money last night. She sounded like a stark-raving mad socialist. Here is my best effort at transcribing one of the most offensive statements with respect to PepsiCo's "Performance with Purpose" doctrine:

We believe that the new future is public/private partnerships – where companies feel responsible for society at large... If society has a problem with obesity, rather than say 'it is not my problem,' you work with the lawmakers, work with the regulators, legislators and NGO’s to say, “how can we address it?”

That all sounds real cheery and makes for great PR for the government-controlled media, but a company's job is to make money for its shareholders, not take responsibility for society at large. We don't need companys working with regulators to solve every perceived problem with mankind. One look at PepsiCo's website and you might think they are an environmental company instead of a food and beverage company. CEO's who lose sight of the mission of improving shareholder value should be fired. Boards who lose sight of the mission of improving shareholder value should be sued for breaching their fiduciary duties. Oh, I'm sure these folks would say that by doing these things, they are improving shareholder value, but that's doubtful. It appears to me that the board and the CEO are using shareholder money to advance their own left-wing radical agenda. American Family Association is already boycotting Pepsi for, among other things, donating money to causes that promote the radical homosexual agenda, including same sex "marriage." How, exactly does promoting the homosexual lifestyle build shareholder value?

Labels: , ,

Thursday, December 17, 2009

Distribute Camera Enforcement Revenue to Residents

That's a good idea if there ever was one. I still don't like the idea of having the cameras, but at least one can say that the primary purpose would be to improve safety rather than fill the local coffers. When revenue goes to the municipalities, it creates a perverse incentive to increase fines, increase "guilt," lower speed limits, cut yellow times and otherwise game the system.

For example, in Bluff City/Piney Flats, the new speed cameras are strategically placed in an area that is in a natural trough. In other words, the cameras are at the bottom of a hill, regardless of which direction you are travelling. They are also in an area that has an artifically low speed limit to begin with. There is very little congestion in the area where the cameras are placed, particularly compared with 1/4 mile further on the road where the shopping center is located. On top of that, if you dare challenge the ticket and lose, it transforms from a non-moving violation to a moving violation. That is the part of the ordinance that is most open to challenge under Tennessee law, in my opinion.

If it were truly about safety, the money would not fill the coffers of politicians to spend however they like.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Bernanke is Time's Person of the Year

Because if King Barry was billed as being in charge of the economy by the media, things might start looking even worse for him.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Draw Jesus and Get Sent Home

That's what happened to a Mass. 2nd-grader. Not only that, he was sent for a psychological evaluation. Cuz', you know, anyone who draws Jesus on the cross as a reminder of the importance is considered a NUT nowadays. Whatever happened to common sense?

Labels: ,

Friday, December 11, 2009

Poor Results for Traffic Cameras in Clarkesville, TN

So says this article. Of course, they are referencing the lack of a decrease in accidents. I'm sure the financial results for the government is anything but poor.

Labels: , ,

Bank of Tennessee Puts out Welcome Mat for Bank Robbers

It appears as though Bank of Tennessee wants to let bank robbers know that its buildings are gun free. I suppose the bank's management believes that would-be robbers or others who are bent on doing harm with weapons will see that sign and walk away. Yeah, right. The more likely scenario is that it will simply embolden those types of people. If these people had any regard for the law, they wouldn't be robbing banks. Now, they know they can enter what is more likely to be a gun-free zone and know there is less chance they will be stopped from achieving their ultimate goal.

I'm just doing my part to help them get the word out that permit holders are not welcome. I've already closed a business account and a personal account. I will close my final personal account after the first of the year, as it is too late for me to change some of my automatic withdrawals. I have no desire to visit places where criminals are made to feel safe.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, December 09, 2009

Negative Tax Liability

For the unitiated, "negative tax liability" refers to individuals who receive a "refund" even though they owe no tax. In other words, it is welfare by another name. The Enterprise Blog has an interesting graph that shows this and the dramatic increase in the number of people who pay no tax or get welfare in the form of a "tax" refund. (via Instapundit).

Labels: , ,