Re: The Vacant Chief Executive - United States for America Enforcement Position Dear Division, This is a follow up is to confirm my qualifying experience for the above position. For summary context, my submitted covers 1-6 are incorporated herein. At present there is a dark void in price economic enforcement. This reality is illustrated by reference to a long list of omissions in papers signed by men like William Baer, this firm and firms like his, both domestically and over seas. A critical aspect of this problem is found in the reality that that the law of price has been removed from enforcement of contracts price of labor, which is a property concern – as observed by Benjamin Franklin and many others of like thinking: Time (Contracts) Trade is the exchange of labor for labor, the value of all things is ... most justly measured by labor. “Hard labor-power is the lone commodity that created, creates and will create all. Absent it, all petrifies. “Hard labor done alone transforms into income, money, worth, wealth….” “Certain things are not for rent by contract. There is no ownership of oil and gases in the land before bodies bring it to the surface by drilling…; nor of stream-ocean-bodies. Chief among … contracts is that of personal employment, by which labor and other services are exchanged for money or other forms of property. Measures Some truisms about economic productivity, the word “value” and the body service contracts involved in this equation core to the law of measures, include: “As values, all that is produced is merely defined masses of congealed labor time.” “That which determines the magnitude of the value is the amount of labor socially necessary, or the labor time socially necessary for its production.” “The labor time socially necessary is that required to produce under the normal, unrestrained trade conditions of production, and with the average degree of skill and intensity prevalent at the time.” Quantified value or productivity is determined by various circumstances, including, e.g., the average amount of skill, the state of science, and the degree of its practical application, the social organization of production, the extent and capabilities of the means of production, and by physical conditions. The point is simply one of identifying and knowing costs, which is a function of time. Form their one merely needs to learn of the markup over shown costs to arrive at an arms-length like negotiated (and therefore enforceable and unrigged up) number for a reasonable compensation for body time services. It is a numbers question routinely conducted by all business shot callers. It is a constant subject of court dispute. See, e.g., Garrett, Collins, Feldman, & Beasley, e.g. This showing provides a road map to aid those who have expressed deep confusion over this numbers question, including, e.g., Sheppard Mullins: Mr. Bonas: I have no idea why I am on this list. I surmise because I am an Advisor to the Executive Committee of the State Bar’s Antitrust Law Section. I have no [markup law] involvement whatsoever, other than the prurient interest of being a long time antitrust commentator and author. I have no relationship, real or imagined, with … parties, or their counsel, nor does my law firm. Thank you for your support in my drive for this long vacant de jure position. Kind regards, The works of B. Franklin, edited by Sparks. Boston, 1836, Vol. II., p. 267, citing by Karl Marx, Capital, Part 1 Commodities & Money. Part II: The Transformation Of Money Into Capital: Ch. VI: The Buying & Selling of Labor-Power. Eisner, 252 U.S. 189 , at page 207 (1920) (“labor severed”) (gain derives from labor) (labor conversion ). (Real Property, Section 736) (Real Property, Section 756.) (On clouds-rain, real property, Section 755) Adkins v. Children’s Hospital of District of Columbia, 261 U.S. 525, at pages 545-46 (1923). Capital Volume One Part I: Commodities and Money Chapter One: Commodities (1867, first English Edition 1887). Garrett v. Coast & Southern Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn., 9 Cal.3d 731, 738-739 (1973). Collins v. City of Los Angeles, Cal.App.4th (2012). Feldman v. Sacramento Bd. of Realtors, Inc., 119 Cal.App.3d 739 at pp. 742-743 (1981). Beasley v. Wells Fargo Bank, 235 Cal.App.3d 1383 , 1 Cal.Rptr.2d 446 (1991). From: DHibner@sheppardmullin, To: Boneslaw@live, Subject: RE: Lysine (Alioto), Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 18:07:31 +0000
Posted on: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 23:07:57 +0000