resource cut or wage cut?

Aren't all the corporates chanting the mantra- 'people are the most important resource'? I guess that is the case when times are good. As Roosevelt said, "When the sea was calm, all ships alike showed mastership in floating."

So now that these big corporates are not doing good, probably because of their own bad decisions and policies, they start retrenching people. I guess the companies are in trouble because of fattening during good times and now that times, are bad and going to worse, they find retrenching the easiest way to limber up. All those at the helm of companies always throw jargon like innovation, collaboration, creativity, etc. So what happened to all that when it is badly needed? Why can't they stand up to what they say?

Wouldn't it be smarter and also more humane to pass a wage cut across the company rather than throwing employees out on to the street? Maybe the company can also ask employees who have leave stacked up to take leave at a lower wage with a possible recompense at a later time. Maybe it can ask departments to get their teams together to look for innovative ways to improve their in-house processes and procedures to beat the crisis. Companies can cut down costs by using natural light instead of artificial lighting, asking their employees to work from home, etc.

economic power

I couldn't stop thinking about the google video I had watched earlier. It struck me that for 200 years, the British ruled India and how?- they basically came to India to do commerce and slowly set up their base and looted India of its resources and most importantly, its freedom. Today, the picture does not seem to be much different. I get the feeling that super-rich and rich countries are doing the same to developing and poor countries.

I believe that even today economic power is more important than anything else and I bet some would go to great lengths to increase their power at the cost of many others. Isn't military aggression, under the guise of help, a way to control a region's economic resources?

financial crisis - voices

A good friend of sent me this google video link (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4343898391323537541) with a forewarning that it is an hour long. After listening for a couple of minutes, I got hooked.

Mr. Venkatesh seems to have hit the nail on the head. I could understand him well because of his simple examples using even simpler language strewn with interesting commonly used phrases and noticeable absence of financial jargon.

I have always believed that America always does what is in the best interests of its people. I think this is what every nation's/household's/individual's policy should be. Though this policy is very good, the policy needs to change and consider the other countries/households/individuals in the rest of the world/community/family because we are all living on one planet. Though it is obvious that each nation's/household's/individual's actions have impact on the remaining nations/households/individuals and also on the planet, most of us do not seem to want to acknowledge it. I can't seem to understand why. Mr. Venkatesh has subtly and succinctly put forth the stature and great contribution of the Indian housewife and the Indian familial tradition.

It felt good to see that I was not the only one with such thoughts- only after the standard of living of all citizens improves will a nation improve and Mr. Venkatesh's example of the different problems faced by people at different strata at Chennai is genuine. Improve the standard of living and the economic status of the citizen will have improved and thus will increase domestic consumption and efficient production of goods.

My gut feel is that the current financial crisis (though I do not understand it completely) will take a few years to be resolved but after listening to Mr. Venkatesh, I feel I am being optimistic though I would love to be wrong.