Americans need to see the Corporate Fingerprints Behind our Division

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Is this a PC vs MAC argument?

No it is more of a left hand puppet vrs right hand puppet argument.

I find it interesting that so many Americans owe their livelihoods to corporations yet the term (which is only one type of legal commercial enterprise) is universally regarded as a pejorative term.

Apparently, all corporations are evil unless they're the one for which you work.

Corporations aren't evil, but neither are they good. They are just a legal entity used to produce profit. The evil part comes in when we don't make laws to force corporations to treat people fairly. They will do exactly what the laws allow them to do. Nothing more, and nothing less.

WTH is wrong with profit? That’s why businesses even exist.

Who said profit was bad? Unchecked profit at the expense of fairness to people is bad.

You said it was bad. You said corporations are not good and that they only exist for profit.

 

[BULLDOG]

No it is more of a left hand puppet vrs right hand puppet argument.

I find it interesting that so many Americans owe their livelihoods to corporations yet the term (which is only one type of legal commercial enterprise) is universally regarded as a pejorative term.

Apparently, all corporations are evil unless they're the one for which you work.

Corporations aren't evil, but neither are they good. They are just a legal entity used to produce profit. The evil part comes in when we don't make laws to force corporations to treat people fairly. They will do exactly what the laws allow them to do. Nothing more, and nothing less.

WTH is wrong with profit? That’s why businesses even exist.

Who said profit was bad? Unchecked profit at the expense of fairness to people is bad.

You said it was bad. You said corporations are not good and that they only exist for profit.

You should reread what I wrote. Corporations aren't capable of being good or bad. They are just a financial instrument whose only purpose is to produce profit. You can't call a corporation good or bad any more than you can call a can opener good or bad. It is what it is, and the laws governing what is allowed are what matters.

 

[fncceo]

The evil part comes in when we don't make laws to force corporations to treat people fairly.

The evil part comes when someone arbitrarily decides what, and what is not, fair. For a long time, politicians worked hard on the part of taxi drivers to keep Uber out of the market place. Politicians gained from huge payments collected for the required purchase of taxi medallions (basically a payment made to government for the right to ply your trade). Politicians were unwilling to give up that revenue for a better, more fair, form of hired transport with which taxi companies could not compete.

We already have a system for dealing with disputes of 'fairness' between businesses and their customers in tort legislation. Where the decision is made by a judge who has nothing to profit from choosing one side over the other. Where evidence of unfairness must be presented. Where the decisions and the reasoning behind the are part of the public record and not back door handshake deals.

 

[fncceo]

You can't call a corporation good or bad any more than you can call a can opener good or bad.

A what?

 

[BULLDOG]

The evil part comes in when we don't make laws to force corporations to treat people fairly.

The evil part comes when someone arbitrarily decides what, and what is not, fair. For a long time, politicians worked hard on the part of taxi drivers to keep Uber out of the market place. Politicians gained from huge payments collected for the required purchase of taxi medallions (basically a payment made to government for the right to ply your trade). Politicians were unwilling to give up that revenue for a better, more fair, form of hired transport with which taxi companies could not compete.

We already have a system for dealing with disputes of 'fairness' between businesses and their customers in tort legislation. Where the decision is made by a judge who has nothing to profit from choosing one side over the other. Where evidence of unfairness must be presented. Where the decisions and the reasoning behind the are part of the public record and not back door handshake deals.

Fairness can be subjective, but most times, a reasonable person can recognize it.

 

[fncceo]

The evil part comes in when we don't make laws to force corporations to treat people fairly.

The evil part comes when someone arbitrarily decides what, and what is not, fair. For a long time, politicians worked hard on the part of taxi drivers to keep Uber out of the market place. Politicians gained from huge payments collected for the required purchase of taxi medallions (basically a payment made to government for the right to ply your trade). Politicians were unwilling to give up that revenue for a better, more fair, form of hired transport with which taxi companies could not compete.

We already have a system for dealing with disputes of 'fairness' between businesses and their customers in tort legislation. Where the decision is made by a judge who has nothing to profit from choosing one side over the other. Where evidence of unfairness must be presented. Where the decisions and the reasoning behind the are part of the public record and not back door handshake deals.

Fairness can be subjective, but most times, a reasonable person can recognize it.

There are certain sorts of societal unfairness that can be addressed through legislation. For example, equal access to services. The removal of barriers to markets because of racial, ethnic, or gender reasons is fair.

However, when legislators can arbitrarily decide which businesses they favor and can tax and cripple those businesses that they don't like, that is patently unfair.

When legislators can limit competition or create hurdles to introducing new products, that is patently unfair.

 

[BULLDOG]

The evil part comes in when we don't make laws to force corporations to treat people fairly.

The evil part comes when someone arbitrarily decides what, and what is not, fair. For a long time, politicians worked hard on the part of taxi drivers to keep Uber out of the market place. Politicians gained from huge payments collected for the required purchase of taxi medallions (basically a payment made to government for the right to ply your trade). Politicians were unwilling to give up that revenue for a better, more fair, form of hired transport with which taxi companies could not compete.

We already have a system for dealing with disputes of 'fairness' between businesses and their customers in tort legislation. Where the decision is made by a judge who has nothing to profit from choosing one side over the other. Where evidence of unfairness must be presented. Where the decisions and the reasoning behind the are part of the public record and not back door handshake deals.

Fairness can be subjective, but most times, a reasonable person can recognize it.

There are certain sorts of societal unfairness that can be addressed through legislation. For example, equal access to services. The removal of barriers to markets because of racial, ethnic, or gender reasons is fair.

However, when legislators can arbitrarily decide which businesses they favor and can tax and cripple those businesses that they don't like, that is patently unfair.

When legislators can limit competition or create hurdles to introducing new products, that is patently unfair.

Example?

 

[sparky]

The real enemy are the multinational corporations that cant wait to auction off our country one piece at a time.

Creating self serving legislation for foriegn policy, domestic policy ,national defense, evironment, health care, retirements, annuities, investments , etc....

The Corporate Crony Network is the 45,000+ lobbyists that descend on capitol hill every week to twist arms for their collective interests.

the end result being>>>>

You can hardly blame any business (small or large) for taking advantage of rules set up by our own politicians (that are sent to government by us).

"When buys and selling are legislated, the first thing to be bought and sold are legislators" --- P.J. O'Rourke

this fits here>


literally a fundamental taxation/representation constitutional conundrum....

We need to lock out all corporate donations of any kind to our political process

That's been quite the fight.....$$$ wins elections .....big corps have the $$$....so
https://www.history.com/topics/united-states-constitution/citizens-united
&&&
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission - SCOTUSblog
&&&
McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission - Ballotpedia

Business should never have more influence on government than the people have.

yet they do....

~S~

 

[Mac1958]

Corporate America is the sole beneficiary when we divide ourselves and dehumize each other.

Having our leadership composed of either radical ideologues or corporate cronies simply seals our fate.

We can beat this by just being honest with each other and reminding ourselves of the presence of good people in both sides of these issues.

The real enemy are the multinational corporations that cant wait to auction off our country one piece at a time.

Well, it's right in front of us. There are people on both ends of the political spectrum, in the media, who have a vested professional interest in dividing us into tribes and keeping us angry. The angrier we are, the higher their ratings, the higher the click counts, the higher the viewership. We become addicted to it, and they benefit.

And we follow along like obedient little bunnies, letting them think for us.

But Jim, we're choosing to do this. So ultimately it's our own fault.
.

 

[mudwhistle]

There are no good Democrats.

Yes, there are as I know many of them.

There are a lot less of them because most of the good ones don't want to be called Democrats anymore.

 

[Darkwind]

It's still amazing to me how easily people are led into blaming one group of people for their ills when the real culprits operated in the open.

Every time gas prices go up, we blame the evil oil companies and ignore that a good portion of what we pay for gas contains both state and federal taxes (gas remains one of the highest taxed commodities in America).

Similarly, we are quick to blame any company (especially those evil companies that make things we actually need instead of iPods and hacky sacks) for playing the game according to rules made up by the very men and women we elect to government.

You can hardly blame any business (small or large) for taking advantage of rules set up by our own politicians (that are sent to government by us).

"When buys and selling are legislated, the first thing to be bought and sold are legislators" --- P.J. O'Rourke

If we want to make real change to the way business influences our government, the first step is to remove politicians that use that influence to their own advantage.

We need to lock out all corporate donations of any kind to our political process. We need to ban corporate gifts and after government corporate employment for anyone. Then we need to ban lobbying for any corporation that is a for profit corporation, especially banks like Morgan Stanley and Golden Sachs.

So, business has no right to petition the government for redress of grievances?

This is the Socialist wet dream. Business cannot take part in society, so they cannot stop us from raping them for our own pet projects.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Is this a PC vs MAC argument?

No it is more of a left hand puppet vrs right hand puppet argument.

I find it interesting that so many Americans owe their livelihoods to corporations yet the term (which is only one type of legal commercial enterprise) is universally regarded as a pejorative term.

Apparently, all corporations are evil unless they're the one for which you work.

As long as we can agree that all globalists are evil.....even tho they tend to be heads of corporations, but that's different...

 

[JimBowie1958]

We need to lock out all corporate donations of any kind to our political process.

Treating the symptom but allowing the disease to run rampant.

The solution isn't to limit the influence business has on government, but to severely limit the influence and favors that government can dole out to business.

There can be no graft if government can't provide benefit to those seeking it.

It is a two sided coin, but to get the government out of making favors for multinational corporation, I reall do think you have to start with cutting the power they have in DC first.

But it is fairly simultaneous.

 

[JimBowie1958]

So, business has no right to petition the government for redress of grievances?

Of course they do, but they need to do it like everyone else and not with armies of lobbyists or handing out tickets to $10k dinners, etc.

This is the Socialist wet dream. Business cannot take part in society, so they cannot stop us from raping them for our own pet projects.

Lol, socialists are partners with the multinational corporations in almost in every case.

Show me a Harvard CEO and I'll show you guys with twenty Che Guevara T-Shirts in his bedroom.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I find it interesting that so many Americans owe their livelihoods to corporations yet the term (which is only one type of legal commercial enterprise) is universally regarded as a pejorative term.

Apparently, all corporations are evil unless they're the one for which you work.

Corporations aren't evil, but neither are they good. They are just a legal entity used to produce profit. The evil part comes in when we don't make laws to force corporations to treat people fairly. They will do exactly what the laws allow them to do. Nothing more, and nothing less.

WTH is wrong with profit? That’s why businesses even exist.

Who said profit was bad? Unchecked profit at the expense of fairness to people is bad.

You said it was bad. You said corporations are not good and that they only exist for profit.

You should reread what I wrote. Corporations aren't capable of being good or bad. They are just a financial instrument whose only purpose is to produce profit. You can't call a corporation good or bad any more than you can call a can opener good or bad. It is what it is, and the laws governing what is allowed are what matters.

No misunderstanding. I think profit is good and is the sole purpose of a corporation as it should be.

 

[georgephillip]

Corporate America is the sole beneficiary when we divide ourselves and dehumize each other.

Having our leadership composed of either radical ideologues or corporate cronies simply seals our fate.

We can beat this by just being honest with each other and reminding ourselves of the presence of good people in both sides of these issues.

The real enemy are the multinational corporations that cant wait to auction off our country one piece at a time.

We should also remember how intelligence agencies especially the CIA work ceaselessly to advance corporate interests around the world. Allen Dulles was a Wall Street lawyer before becoming CIA director, and anyone interested in understanding where our current "Deep State" comes from should start by studying Dulles and his ilk:

The State, the Deep State, and the Wall Street Overworld - Global Research

 

[Darkwind]

So, business has no right to petition the government for redress of grievances?

Of course they do, but they need to do it like everyone else and not with armies of lobbyists or handing out tickets to $10k dinners, etc.

This is the Socialist wet dream. Business cannot take part in society, so they cannot stop us from raping them for our own pet projects.

Lol, socialists are partners with the multinational corporations in almost in every case.

Show me a Harvard CEO and I'll show you guys with twenty Che Guevara T-Shirts in his bedroom.

Maybe you should address what I said. If a business is not permitted to participate, they simply become a back card for socialists and government. They have legal responsibilities, they should be allowed to advocate for their own interests.

 

[georgephillip]

It is a two sided coin, but to get the government out of making favors for multinational corporation, I reall do think you have to start with cutting the power they have in DC first.

Where would you start cutting corporate power?

50 Years Ago an Economist Worried About Unchecked Corporate Power. Here’s What His Theory Got Wrong

"Galbraith theorized that without governmental check, large corporations would end up controlling the U.S. economy and polity.

"That check never came, but neither did the outcome that Galbraith’s theory predicted. Yet his theory was so neatly laid out that I wondered why it had failed."

 

[fncceo]

As long as we can agree that all globalists are evil

What on earth is a 'globalist' and why are they evil?

 

[sparky]

Not evil, just no allegiance ,all for a $$$ fncceo....~S~