so the shareholders are bribers? this doesn't make much sense to me. it looks like bribing but they just calling it shareholding instead. maybe i misunderstood it,
i think most of the competitive market strugglers. the economy is ruled by the anticompetitive sectors, and all the competitive sectors actually can't compete against anticompetitive sectors, and it's a trickle down effect. the target workers won't earn enough to buy things, and all the anticompetitive sector employees will buy enough stuff to keep the prices high. so continuous crappy cycle for companies like target. they may stay afload but they will be hurting suffering the whole time. if or when they go down the next big face name companies will be similar situations.
so the shareholders are bribers? this doesn't make much sense to me. it looks like bribing but they just calling it shareholding instead. maybe i misunderstood it,
Target is the only company you named there that did a 180 in terms of struggling.
i think most of the competitive market strugglers. the economy is ruled by the anticompetitive sectors, and all the competitive sectors actually can't compete against anticompetitive sectors, and it's a trickle down effect. the target workers won't earn enough to buy things, and all the anticompetitive sector employees will buy enough stuff to keep the prices high. so continuous crappy cycle for companies like target. they may stay afload but they will be hurting suffering the whole time. if or when they go down the next big face name companies will be similar situations.
How is this bullshit legal?