Anyone notice how many big companies are buying smaller ones lately.. why?

[southernleftylady]

is there a new law that allows all this that i just dont know about.. this cant be good news for the consumers can it be?

[TomClash]

1. In a word

cash

[Dookus]

2. this isn't new

it's been going on for decades.

[Dr Ron]

3. To make more money

Of course not every corporate merger or buy out works, but making more money is their obvious goal.

It's not so much that there's a new law, but that there is a very "business-friendly" government. Even if we try to avoid attributing evil goals (and ignore who contributes heavily to them), to their mind set the country and economy do better when business does better, and to them business generally means big business. Anti-trust laws are not a big priority to them.

And yes, it is not good news for consumers.

[Wright Patman]

4. Jobs Creation Act of 2004

"Sadly, that’s not all, the so-called “Jobs Creation Act of 2004” passed last October in US Congress provides further incentive, by allowing preferential tax treatment of certain funds to be used as capital for acquisitions.

"But as everyone knows, mergers lead to job losses, often in the tens of thousands--such is the estimate for the AT&T/SBC merger. It follows then, that this provision of the “Jobs Creation Act’ is an utter legislative abomination, having the opposite effect of what its title suggests. .."

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0502/S00037.htm

[Lindacooks]

21. Fits in with all the totaly misnamed Repuke legislation:

"A Woman's Right to Know" which puts obstacles and waiting times, including lectures, in front of a woman's right to choose.

"Clear Skies Initiative" which increased pollution

"Healthy Forests Initiative" which let loggers into old growth forests.

"No Child Left Behind", which is a billion dollar underfunded mandate imposed on teachers and leaves many children behind

Oh, and then there's the:

"Class Action Fairness Act" which limits consumer's rights to sue corporations whose products injure them.

Could they BE any more hypocritical??

Any others??

[leftofthedial]

5. as capitalism get less regulated

it tends toward the most venal, aggressive and best-funded capitalist devouring everything else on the planet--resources, labor, other capital, means of productions--everything.

If neotheocon radical laissez faire capitalsts stay in power long enough, the world will either become a one-person "oligarchy" or will be destroyed by those who seek to own everything.

[earth mom]

6. In a word: MONOPOLY-they want to control EVERYTHING! nt

[ultraist]

7. Small business is up to 500 employees & revenue up to 30 million per year

That is the legal definition of small business. Many people assume small businesses are just those businesses where the net profit is under 200k per year. This is not the reality.

Small businesses that have revenues in the several millions and hundreds of employees are doing ok. It's the very small businesses that are tanking. Generally, those with under 50 employees and revenues under 2 million.

Bush has cut loans and grants to low income entrepreneurs. His "small business" policies support only the very wealthy small business owners.

The truly small business owners cannot compete don't receive corporate welfare. As was noted, the Bush economy drives out the little guys and is geared for bigger businesses (even if they are legally defined as small business).

[Jade Fox]

8. Yes, what's up with the oil companies all merging....

with each other. Weren't they big enough already?

[Coastie for Truth]

9. Cheaper to "buy" a business then to "grow" a business

Been there - done that - bought the t-shirt - been out in the street.

Especially in a knowledge intensive business -- it is cheaper to "buy" a business then to "grow" a business. You don't to pay "over paid" techies (like me), just download their brains and then do a "reduction in force" against them.

[thefloyd]

12. Another reason is there are no investments right now

in the economy. All of these tax cuts are turning into mergers. Why? Because the crappy bush economy does not contain any investments.

[Coastie for Truth]

15. Some real structural problems

1. Investment in biotech - relative to the rest of the industrial world - is stagnant because of the Bush Administration's position on stem cell research. Biotech investment is going to countries where stem cell research is permitted -- even if the investment is not directly stem cell dependent. Bush has spoken.

2. IT and electronics - mature industry like cars and steel and consumer electronics. Bush's buddies in the energy industry hastened that exit by manipulating the California energy market. Bush has spoken.

3. Alternative/Renewable/Green Energy - Everybody's at fault here: Cheney's Commission, the Soccer Moms and their Hummers, the Administration's hallucinations about Iraqi oil and ANWR oil solving our problems; the inconsistencies of the environmentalists on wind turbines (I am an environmentalist - and also an engineer in the Alternative/Renewable/Green Energy) and the lobbying and frivolous litigating power of Big Oil and the Big Three. This could use a govt shot in the arm -- but Bush won't do it.

[Bouncy Ball]

10. Well, we just went from having three drugstore chains aroud here to

two. CVS bought out Eckerds and changed all Eckerds to CVS stores.

So now all there is is CVS and Wal-greens.

That's it.

And no, we don't have independently owned drugstores here. We hardly have independently owned ANYTHING.

:cry:

[ultraist]

14. That's because the mom and pop drugstores cannot compete with the corps

like Eckerds.

Bush's remarks during the campaign about supporting small business owners were very deceitful because his programs only support the bigger "small" businesses. Businesses that have 400-500 employees and revenues of 20-30 million.

Even those businesses will eventually get swallowed up by the big corps since the Bush economic policies mostly favor big corps.

[whistle]

11. It's all part of the American dream, innovate, create a market...

...sell to a big company and retire rich! One in one million chance, because big companies have a way of stealing good ideas rather than paying for them!

[Sporadicus]

13. George Carlin Mentioned This in One of His Routines

Eventually there would be one gigantic, monolithic corporation...United Consumer Fuckers.

[independentchristian]

16. One, because the smaller companies are smart enough to realize

that once the oil crisis hits in full force, they will probably be screwed so they are trying to make their money "now" by being bought and two, what else would you expect in a fascist country that glorifies corporatism?

[Ready4Change]

17. Another reason, and one I've witnessed.

Big companies buy little companies before the little companies have a chance to grow and become competition. It's the business version of pre-emptively nuking a future competitor.

[sandnsea]

18. Control price and production

That was the primary purpose of trusts, that's the primary purpose of multinational corporations. It isn't free market at all, it's just commerce concentrated in the hands of a few hundred power elites.

[Cleita]

19. It seems we have no anti-trust laws anymore.

Sorry I have been too out of it lately to research it. Maybe someone else will weigh in with what's happened.

[erpowers]

20. Tax Cuts

The latest round of corporate tax cuts have freed up money that has allowed these companies to buy other companies.