[TUC]

I believe the latin reads: One hand washes the other...which is fairly direct way to put it. I help you and you help me if every one would do that the world would be such a pleasant place.

Case Study 1 (Reality):
S. Fox and I have the tendancy to go for coffe/coke/bear/lunch in university. Fox buys me coffe....then I buy him coffe...then he buys me coffe....I buy him coffe. This way only one of us has to go to get the coffe which saves us both walking time and when ever one of us feels we are taking advantage of the other then we buy the other a sandwhich and so noone spends more then we would if we bought every thing ourselves. This is generaly excepted. This accounts to roughly Fox spending 4$ on me and me spending 4$ on him per day.

Case Study 2 (totaly fiction):
So why would it be fround upon if Fox would be the CEO of one Company and I the CEO of the other. If Fox decides to give an order to my company then I might whish to invite him to my holiday place.....but that is said to be coruption and bad. True it might be bigger sums but it still accounts to a fair deal. Fox spends 2m$ on my behalf and I spend 2m$ on his behalf....

So why do so many people disagree with this sort of behaviour? I look forward to some great discussion.

[Proctor]

Wow, that is a really good point! I certainly don't have an explanation.

[Adrien]

Yep, very true!

To me, the difference is, as you said, the sum. When you lend a few bucks to a friend, it doesn't have any big consequence, the temporary loss of these bucks won't cause you any trouble, otherwise you wouldn't have given them.

But when they (companies directors) play with loads of money (which aren't theirs, that's important), there can be consequences on their market competitors for example, and it may put some compagnies down, which implies losses of jobs. Plus, if these transactions are discovered, the company may also be put down by justice, which would cause other losses of job.

[Ymir]

"If Fox decides to give an order to my company"
I assume this means his company would buy something from yours?

In a purchase, you would sell your goods for money. But in this they are not paying for it? They will just give you a vacation?

This would be bad for a company, if the CEO was the only one who recieved pay for work. And if you are dealing in the millions, the corrupt CEO's company would probably go bankrupt.

[Proctor]

No, Fox still pays for the goods. But seeing as him and TUC are such nice pals and Fox gave the order to TUC rather than Joe Bloggs, TUC lets Fox stay in his mansion as thanks.

[sokath]

The issue is that Fox is doing something for you, using his company's resources and people to do something for you... thus costing his company and his creditors, shareholders, etc somewhere in the neighbourhood of $2m, however, when you pay him back by inviting him to your holiday home and spend somewhere in the neighbourhood of $2m on him... you're doing just that, spending 2 million dollars on Fox alone. His company doesn't see any of this money, his workers don't see any of this money and his shareholders/creditors CERTAINLY don't see any of this money... thus, while in the long run, you both come out even, only Fox would really see the benefits... an even bigger problem arises if you are paying Fox's vacation out of company funds, and not your own... because then they call that embezzling.. or some shit like that... corporate business sucks

I think...

S./

[TUC]

I need to get case studie 2 sorted out straight:

I have a company makeing weird and wonderfull eletronic bits costing 5000$ each I sell them to fox's company for 6500$ instead of the 6000$ me and joe blogs have coluded to charge.

I am the owner of my company and get to keep all profits (or invest them)

Fox is the guy buying bits and pieces for some weird company.

Fox could have bought similar bits from joe blogs for 6000$ (as joe blogs only charges the price that keeps him in busines and allows for some compensation for the knowledge we have.

So for every bit fox orders I make 500$ extra......so now fox orders 1000 of the things from me.....and I buy him a porsche which he gets for Christmas....

I gain, fox gains...fox's company makes alil less profit but what does he care....and as they still make good profits no shareholder will ever ask.

[grinner]

I see nothing wrong with eaither case study. It can be called being polit or scratching each others back. It's all good either way.
Everything I do at work is a result of a bigger company outsourcing. I outsource some things from my company when overloaded by their outsourcing. Supply and demand will always be the actual law on this no matter what is printed.