29 Dec 2021 6:20 pm
First, UL certification is NOT required. When someone or some company seeks to insure a product against injury liability (unfortunately our society is quite litigious) many insurance companies require it pass UL certification. Although there are many such competing certification laboratories. In fact UL is nothing more than a group of independent laboratories who each specialize in the testing of various consumer products who operate and are advertised under the name UL. Hence the term United Laboratories. Companies are free to find different insurance and many forego insurance and the associated certifications it would require. Not all insurers require certification though the costs are normally higher. Major auto producers do just that. They perform their own testing and handle their own litigation. It's up to all parties involved what the services of each is worth and whether to enter into a contract at all.Cannonpointer » 29 Dec 2021, 6:51 pm » wrote: ↑ Your understanding of the term exploit seems limited to connotations. I used it for denotative purpose.
According to your own post, the owner of the bulls ABSOLUTELY exploited the labor and talents of his star player - as well he ought.
And yes, Jordan exploited the Bulls. As well he ought. No harm no foul on either side.
It just wasn't **** capitalism, is all.
It is "nothing more" than that, ya say?
You clearly do NOT understand the stock market.
At all. It is so much more than that reductionist twaddle.
Here, take a look at this OP from some years back:
Now, you tell me what is off about the OP above, or you cannot continue to blithely assert that capitalism is "nothing more" than "bla bla bla.
As for the stock market, stock is just the shared ownership of a company. Owning a portion of the stock allows you to share in any profits (or losses it incurs). The company enters into agreements (as I described) which may or may not result in profits. The company may rent out their capital equipment to skilled workers who then produce goods for market. Free and fair contracts where all are benefited. They may also desired to instead pay wages to these same workers and keep the product themselves. If they sell the product for more than they agreed to pay in wages good for them. Whatever agreements they come to as long as it is free of undue coercion everyone involved must believe they benefit.
As a stockholder I have entered into a different agreement in which I exchange my wealth for a share of the proceeds generated by the company resulting from whatever contracts the company decides to enter into in exchange for what the property owned by the company brings to the table.