Forum Post: Corporations are NOT evil, let's have some real demands.
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 14, 2011, 3:14 p.m. EST by TonyLanni
(291)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I run a corporation. A fairly large one (1000+ employees around the world). I think that many of you don't really understand what a corporation is or how they work. What is the demand here, end corporations? And then what? We need to start demanding real and NEEDED reforms. There are plenty of problems with the system. Problems that can be fixed with real, meaningful demands. Like a fair tax system where the rich don't pay a lower % than the middle class. Or real energy and environmental policy. Or real political reform where the 2 parties in power don't set all the rules. How about we go for those, and end the more ridiculous demands that make no sense.
UPDATE, PART #2, added 10/18/2011 I'm talking basic principles here, in an non-corrupt system. Communism under Marxist teachings basically says that profits gained by anyone come from taking something from another. If I make anything, someone has to lose. This is actually incorrect. Companies make profits only because the other side gains. This sounds counterintuitive, but it isn't. If the other side didn't gain in the transaction, they wouldn't enter into it, and the company wouldn't make a profit.
Take a simple example. Suppose you decide to see a movie, and it costs $10. You are always thinking about whether the movie was worth it. If it was a really good movie and entertained you, you think it was worth the $10. What does that mean? Money is an arbitrary value indicator. You are thinking that the enjoyment you got from seeing the movie was better than other things you could have done with the money. So you think you came out ahead in the transaction. The movie people made money off of you and you got enjoyment off of them. If enough people feel as you did, they make more and more, cover their costs and make a profit. If the movie stinks, you feel like you got ripped off and didn't come out ahead in the deal. That concept spreads, people don't see the movie, and the studio can't cover their costs and lose money. So profit only results when BOTH sides benefit from a transaction. You get more in benefit than you paid and so does the movie studio. Thus profit is a measure of everyone's overall benefit.
This very concept is what separates two systems and resulting cultures. It can be expressed in mathematics. Marx wrote the supply equations. They basically say that I give up something and you gain from that. The Austrian school of economists wrote the demand equations. They appear to say the opposite, I gain at your expense. You put them together, and the losses cancel out and we both gain. Communists essentially only have the first equation. Capitalists have both. And wars have literally been fought over this difference in mathematical equations.
There is an exception to this. Wall street functions differently. It is essentially a gambling system where people place bets. I bet you that this company will do well. You can bet against me. One of us wins, one loses. This does provide necessary capital and money flow to keep corporations and teh economy going. The problems occur when the betting isn't fair, the money flow is disrupted, and power starts consolidating amongst those who have access to the money.
This consolidation of power and corruption to the system IS the problem. The government's job is to regulate the overall system and act as a check and balance. The government is clearly failing in that regard. The corporations, industry groups, unions (which are essentially worker based corporations), and bankers are controlling the politicians and interfering with the regulatory function the government should be providing. They are allowing consolidation of wealth and preventing access to capital. This is where reform efforts need to be focused.
Right now there are lots of relatively simple fixes that can have dramatic results.
1) Make the tax system fair and predictable. Today, it is neither.
2) Take corruption out of the system. The government has lost its independence and is no longer a regulator, checks and balances have broken down.
3) Put the needed regulations that make sense and control the system back in place.
4) Deal with those areas of economics that the government should be controlling-- shared resources (the environmnet, for example) and extreme resources (healthcare is basically worthless if you don't need it, infinitely valuable if you do).
Of course they aren't evil. They are machines for generating profit, and ultimately are tools of those who run them. So why should they have political power as their own entities? Every person involved in a corporation (owner, CEO, employee, shareholder) has their own political power, so why should a corporation get its own politic voice? It is not a moral being, so why does it need free speech?
We don't need to end corporations, just restore them to their rightful place in our society. They don't need a place in our democracy; CEO's can have their one vote just like everybody else.
This should be achieved by a constitutional amendment rather than waiting around hoping for the Supreme Court to change its mind. This is a real, rational (though difficult) goal that will then allow us to have constructive debates about the demands of the OWS movement in a democratic system.
Good pts. But getting a Constitutional amendment through a CORPORATIST owned system is an oxymoron friendo. The 1% will fight it with everything they have and it has plenty. They also control the electronic voting machines.
I like that, "it is not a moral being." I think that goes to the heart of it.
Fully agree. Corporations are fine. Corrupting private money in politics is the evil being discussed more and more. Here's a poll on draft language for an electoral reform Constitutional Amendment: http://occupywallst.org/forum/poll-what-do-you-want-in-a-money-out-of-politics-a/. Please post your ideas (in bite-sizes), your comments and your votes on the proposals offered. Your input matters!!
Also the 99% Declaration is in progress, and, when finalized, should answer TonyLanni's questions. See the draft and join the team here: https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/home/please-join-this-working-group-and-let-your-voice-be-heard
This is amazing! I fully support this and look forward to the convention- is this resolution officially recognized by the GA?
I'll tell you WHY. Because corporations are like small little governments. They provide jobs and livings for millions of Americans. Most are owned by the public, and their leaders are voted upon to run the company. Those leaders need to make tough choices that benefit everyone in the company, which ultimately is PROFIT. Profit provides jobs, which provides income, which provides demand, which provides goods and services, which provides the sale of product, which provides profit...ful circle.
Stop pointing fingers are corporations. Corporations represent people and people's interests, and they deserve a voice.
I'm sorry but "Corporations represent people"? Hardly. Corporations are an entity with no moral standards, no soul, they are a legally organized conglomeration of funds. As such they have no voice, the people who participate via work or investment all have their own voice which they are free to use.
The reasoning behind Incorporating or Limited Liability Corporation lies in the protections it offers a partnership or a single owner against liability for the business debt, it offers the added incentive of petitioning for the ability to sell shares in an effort to increase capital without production. Often this is done to increase operating capital and to possibly enable production on a larger scale.
You the individual have a voice, your employees have a voice, your shareholders have a voice, the corporation has none and needs to NOT be involved in a political system which by mandate is made up of for, of and by the people.
"They provide jobs and livings for millions of Americans."- Far from true in a globalized economy. Right now an easy tool for increasing profits is to ship jobs over seas to workers whose standard of living isn't as elevated as ours.
I do agree that using the blanket "corporations are evil" line is hardly productive, but anyone can see the disconnect between American High-Finance's quest for profits and the overall prosperity of our nation.
i agree for the most. But you have to think about the real goal and what youth really want, and that is equality for all, not some, not the majority but all.
In a free market system that is not possible. So free market does not help the problem, therefor it is not a solution.
Greed of money will exist with the freedom to obtain any amount of money. It will simply lead down the same road, eventually through growth and family hand downs 1% of the population will end up with all the wealth again.
Do we really want to do this every 50 - 150 years? Or is it time we stand up for the human race and make it so no one has to suffer.
Yeah the point i would make is that corporations are represented by people and those people should be responsible for the actions of the corp as individuals. If the corp fails then the individuals are held to account and share the loss. no fictional entities or company account should exist.
Furthermore I would ask that the corporations incentive and goal not be only unlimited profit as we know when that is the case the product or service produced is inferior and the environment is degraded...with a disgusting aftertaste of planned obsolecense. The only way i can see the creation of different incentives other than profit is by putting a limit on individual wealth. The limit would be high so the individual could lead a very comfortable life, but for certain billionaires would know longer exist.. sorry 1% we are the 99%
Yeah I agree. We through this movement the younger generation has the chance to mold the direction of the future of human civilization for the next century. The free market holds back our technological progression and is destroying the community aspect of our society by eliminating peoples ability to be independent self sufficient citizens. Successful corporations seek not to create the most efficient products or services, but to create the most dependent consumers. The world population will have reached 7 billion by the end of this October. We need a new value system and mode of operation if we are to at all salvage our natural earth resources and environment. We have to stop delegating responsibility for our planet to corporations whose main goal is profit and expecting our environment and society to flourish. This is not just about your everyday corporations, we are talking about the MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX! The corporations that build weapons and invest in WARFARE around the world. The people of the world are tired of POINTLESS WARS fought simply for the wills of private profiteers. Corporations ARE NOT FINE. The people of the world Need economic equality and a new value system. We need to stop seeing ourselves as CONSUMERS, who are dependent upon corporations to attain or achieve anything. We must be citizens and take responsibility for our world together. Profit motive is the Biggest Flaw in modern society. It basically causes parts of our society to act as cancers leeching off of the rest of the society. We are beyond this. We need to end HOMELESSNESS, to end STARVATION, and raise the standard of living of the people of the world by revolutionizing the value system of the world, and start building a infrastructure that takes care of the people whether or not they have FIATCURRENCY to trade for the things they need to survive. EQUAL ACCESS TO HOUSING and LOCALY GROWN FOOD. This can be achieved by build HYDROPONIC TOWERS and USING the CONSTRUCTION METHOD of CONTOUR CRAFTING. Hydroponic farming =http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02Uz95UGhRg contour crafting (automated construction) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=os0RNesv8AE
Whats the point of revolution if we just create more of the same? Economic Equality for all is the only way. Free education Free local food Free equal access housing
Its not a matter of whether it is possible, because it obviously is and has been for a very long time based on our technology. Its only a matter of how open minded you are willing to be. Money is a social construct that has been hijacked Egalitarian democracy NOW
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: One of the main pillars of Conservative propaganda is that both parties are the same. Nothing they say is further from the truth. It is an insidious lie intended to demoralize progressives, and discourage them from voting. Do not fall for this canard, because if both parties are the same, there is no hope for change, and therefore no reason to vote. The truth is that there is a difference between the parties. A stark difference! One party works for the rich, the other party works for all Americans. One party takes money from the needy to feed the greedy, and the other party takes money from the greedy to feed the needy. One party has plans and policies to create jobs, and the other party has a long list of lame excuses for not doing anything. Liberals want to change things. Conservatives want things to stay the same. There is a difference. One party wants to tax the rich, and the other party wants to tax the poor. One party wants to destroy Unions, and the other party wants to support them. One party supports the Occupation of Wall Street, and the other party doesn’t. One party wants to rebuild America, and the other party doesn’t. One party wants to provide health care for all, and the other party doesn’t. One party wants to regulate Wall Street, and the other party doesn’t. One Party wants to end the wars; the other party wants them to go on forever. There is a difference. One party is Myopic, and the other party is Far Sighted. One party wants to help the Middle Class, and the other party is at war with the Middle Class. One party wants to fire Teachers, and the other party wants to hire them. One party wants to create more jobs in America, and the other party wants to create more jobs in Asia. There is a difference. One party wants to protect pensions, and the other party wants to loot them. One party has a heart, and the other party has Ann Coulter. One party protects the right bear Arms, and the other party protects the right of freedom of assembly. One party believes that the only role for the Government is to provide for the common defense, and the other party believes that the Government should also promote the general Welfare. There is a difference, and anybody that tells you there is no difference between the parties is simply not conversant with reality. In addition, anyone that blames the Democrats for the current state of affairs has no understanding of who controls the Government. One Party has the Presidency, and the other party has the Majority in the House, controls the Senate, has a majority on the Supreme Court, and is responsible for current economic policy. So, if you’re angry, and you want to start a real fight, I submit that we should start a real fight with the Conservatives! America has a Two Party System. One party is clearly on your side, the other party thinks you’re and Anti-American mob. At some point in time you’re going to have to pick one. Choose wisely, your future is at stake
but I happen to agree with some parts of one party and some parts of the other. the 2 party system tries to convince us that there are only 2 possible political points of view. it is a bad system. it stays in place because the parties have power and they make sure they keep it. as long as that is the case, the system will always be corrupt. i don't like everything the democrats support. i don't like most things the republicans support. i HATE that they are the only choices. we need more!
I think that is why people are confused by occupy wall street. They can't get past the democrat vs. republican paradigm. Occupy Wall Street transcends pary lines, it's about economic equity.
I agree with that business or corporations aren't evil, but they have more control of our political system than voters do and that's a huge problem.
yes, i agree 100%. and i think we all need to strive to prevent the politicians from taking over the movement and corrupting it. in my opinion, that's what the republicans did to the tea party.
Agree. I think that with real Election Reform, meaning publicly funded campaigns, additional parties will bubble up organically. Done right, it should make it easier for non-traditional parties to participate.
2 parties force the other side to take the opposite view. When the real answer is probably somewhere in the middle. And then the supporters of both sides get angry when their side moves to the middle! Kinda crazy really.
you are not ows because from the start we were about getting money out of politics so republicans want have so much control
lol really?? You really believe the ows is aligned with the democrats, or any party for that matter? the ows started because of a corrupt government (encompassing all parties) that is being funded by corporations.
but i support getting money out of politics. i think the democrats are as corrupt in this regard as the republicans. how am i not OWS? if anything you sound like a democratic operative designed to confuse OWS supporters.
Which one is on my side dude? The one that sides with the other guys day in and day out? The one that gave us three wars in 10 yrs.? The one that gave us a Corp. backed and owned so called health care reform ( Obamacare). The list of that parties back stabbing and betrayals of its own base is growing longer by the day.
Wake up -Obama got us into another war with Libya, and now Uganda I think? And he continued the wars in Afganistan - never closed Guantanamo Bay - I mean, do you really believe all they talking? Just look at what both parties do friend. Just look.
stop the fox spin and get with the facts ows will never support a repiblican view
OWS will never support either party.
BTW - name some 'poor' Democrats in office today....
Jeff Immelt and GE got $126 MILLION stimulus dollars despite making over $6 BILLION profit and paying ZERO TAXES at the same time. BaROKE Obumbler's $852 STIMULUS bill to create JOBS and start SHOVEL READY PROJECTS turns out to be a SLUSH FUND FOR CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTORS LIKE SOLYNDRA, GE, JEFF DOERR and STEVE WESTLY, other DONORS, fictitious zip codes,etc.. Obumbler blew $852 BILLION, NOW HE WANTS $450 BILLION MORE---SHOW US THE MONEY, WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THE $852 BILLION?? Criminals always return to scene of the crime, Obumbler's BACK TO STEAL MORE MONEY FROM TAXPAYERS! Millions went to foreign banks, $529 MILLION went to Finland to build hybrid cars, MILLIONS went to Hezbollah, MILLIONS TO CRONIES. The same type of CRONIES are on his JOBS BOARD! All we'll get from them is more LIES, DECEIT, FRAUD!
What is not different is both parties are bought and paid for with corporate money. They are writing the laws to their advantage and their beholden legislators push the laws thru.
Whether you are Democratic or Republican only vote for those politicians that will work to get corporate money out of politics and corporate influence out of government.
The problem is that BOTH republicans and democrats are in bed with corporations. That's why we need a movement like occupy wall street. Simply voting is not working to change things.
you need to study politics
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0
One party says they are democrat, the other party doesn't. They are both bought and paid for. But it's nice to hear you still have your idealism. Do you stll believe in Santa Claus too? The two party system is designed to keep the monkeys screeching over a banana while I walk out the door with the cash box. Ever heard the term divide and conquer? Start thinking beyond a "representative republic" and get back to me with another solution.
Good post. Please come to www.TheMultitude.org for a troll free discussion space.
Poor disillusioned individual. If what you say is true we wouldn't have half the problems we have now. The democrats have had their chance to fix all that Bush screwed up and what did they do with 2 years of complete control of government. They doubled down on all the wars, civil liberties infringements, and reckless spending that has brought us to where we are today. 8 years of Bush and 3 years of Obama and the slope still points south. You should really reevaluate your thinking.
Thank u!
Your use of the phrase "doubled down on" is a bit Misguided. ......... ........
See what I did there? Hilarious... I know...
I'm sorry but you, my friend, do not represent the 99%.
I have to agree to an extent. The Democrats are not strong enough on things like union support and equal opportunity, mainly because the Republicans have successfully demonized those things. But they must become the part of Roosevelt to inspire real confidence and stop trying to win over conservatives.
Tell that to people who blame both sides
Clinton presided over much of the legislation that gives us problems today. (I am liberal, FYI)
democraps and repooplicans, same old sh#t!
Yes he did, but please, don't say it. Nobody want's to hear that. They think there is one good party, and one bad.
I'd agree with that.... for the "hot-button" distraction issues I'm a total Democrat. But corruption is bi-partisan issue..
stop the fox spin
Well, both sides share some blame but the goals of this movement clearly identify with the stated goals of the left....no matter what people say.
Taxing the rich doesn't fix any problem, it just gives more money to Washington to spend on social policies. They already pay a HUGE share of our total tax dollars - it isn't going to fix the real problem.
OWS has no clearly stated goals. Like I said, tax the rich yes I know. We already tax them more than anybody - do you REALLY think another 5% is going to FIX OUR COUNTRY?
At least social programs go to people, not profts.
Yeah they do, yes they do - but they also cause a welfare state at times, causing people to work less and demand more - this isn't sustainable.
Taxing another 5% to the richie rich isn't going to fix crap in this country - mark my words - the money isn't the issue, it's the spending and debt. Look at Greece. The chickens eventually come home to roost and nobody wan't the pay it back.
Why always look at the worst examples, which have much more to do with cronyism than about building a welfare state. Let's discuss the welfare state in Germany or the Scandinavian countries. I don't see those in deep trouble, unless we see the world economy as a whole as unsustainable.
Worst examples are warnings, so that's why - agree that others can be looked at. Greece is further along the path of spending more than they produce - and it's a very ugly picture. We just did 4 trillion since Obama took office, not even through 1 term - this is criminal - and he wants to spend more!!!
I am only saying taxing the Rich TODAY in the USA, 5% more with the government we have now, they way they do things, isn't going to do hardly anything to fix the real problems of inequality. They will take the rich guys money, spend it, and you still won't have high incomes - it just won't happen like that.
Worst examples are just that "worse examples".
Unlike the US, Greece has never had a well-functioning economy, in modern times.
It makes much more sense to compare the US with countries like Canada, Australia, Germany, France, than to compare it to a notoriously corrupt and dysfunctional country like Greece.
Greece was an empire more than 2000 years ago, so 2000 years from now it makes sense to make a comparison.
I think you'll notice that the majority of us don't want to "end corporations" We just want to get their money out of our politics, putting everyone on even ground. They are simply too powerful.
Class inequality is the problem you are correctly identifying. Corporations are one of the chief means by which the wealthy upper class maintains its privileged status in a society in which money is power and most people have very little of it. We need to abolish class inequality and create a society based on equality and concern for one another, not inequality and people pitted against each other in competition: in other words we need a revolution. Please read "Thinking about Revolution" at www.NewDemocracyWorld.org . Thank you.
If you want to stop crony capitalism, get OBAMA OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE
Demand #1 - Audit the Fed + make them accountable - Who seconds?
do you understand monetary policy, how it works, and what it influences? very few people in this world do. how would you audit the fed? they produce tremendous amounts of data on what they do, what its effects are, etc. they publish their meetings. what more do you want? what do you think they've done wrong in terms of monetary policy and what would you have them do differently? do you realize how much debate fed policy goes through before enacted? they are accountable to our elected officials. should they be accountable to voters who have no understanding of monetary policy at all? what good would that do?
Oh yes and how is the Fed accountable to elected officals?
Oh yes and how is the Fed accountable to elected officals?
How can one call this a free market when we have a federal reserve whose sole purpose is to manipulate the market?
the federal reserve provides a necessary regulatory and balance function to the system. there is nothing inherently wrong with this, and it is needed to keep the flow of the economy functioning efficiently. they aren't the problem. the paid off politicians and regulators are. the continual deregulation is. the corruption in the system and lack of a fair and level playing field is the real issue.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/for-all-those-advocating-to-end-the-federal-reserv/
READ
And it would make them think 20 times more before deciding to bail out certain companies rather than others.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for businesses making high profits, and reducing taxes in general. I actually make a great living without the help of our government.
But talk about corruption when the folks at the Fed choose who gets to be bailed out and who doesn't!
Well if you still believe in reducing taxes and max. profits, you should accept all corporations leave USA, pay min. taxes and the average American will not earn more then the average Chinese in aprox. 12-36 month. Your pay will give you purchase power somewhere between 100 and 1000 USD/month.
I am definitely in favor of reducing taxes and government spending. Start with wars, medicare programs that only benefit big pharma (leading to such high price of healthcare in the US).
We'd then be a much more attractive country to do business in.
Tried running a business in the US, and due to way too many regulations and restrictions, I got sick of it and started operating in countries where the cost of living isn't a quarter as high.
And I am talking about businesses that focus on green technologies that actually help improve the living standards of folks in the country we operate in.
I get to hire professionals at better salary levels than the country's average, offer them training and benefits. My profit margins are great simply because we run an efficient company.
Sounds to me like a win, win, win approach.
I´m totaly happy for you there (and for me, because I love the idear of us investing and working way more in the green energy sector.) But you should know that even if the USA asked you super low taxes, you would still be better off in eastern countries or you need to go to countries where lots of tax money is used by government to stimulate your sector. And lowering taxes means your fellow US friends might end up with a very empty stomach, or maby not reading your point of view:) Keep up the good work, but I believe more in the Swedish model lately. (Lots of taxes and lots of regulations, but with other advantages)
I´m Dutch myself, living in Barcelona and sadly only dream of doing what you are doing, meanwhile working for the most succesfull company in the world earning less then 2000 USD/ month :-).
I would actually favor the Honk Kong or Singapore model over both Swedish or US model.
Great healthcare system, great economies, great infrastructure...And very business friendly with a flat 15% tax.
As for my fellow friends in the US? They have all the opportunities to succeed back home or overseas.
I am seriously sick of the police state and over regulated country that we've become. I made the choice to move out, and I can tell you that it was one of the best decisions I've made.
At least where I am now, my potential is welcome ;)
Listen, from experience in many, many countries, more governments = more corruption = more oppressive laws against the people.
In the US, this is exactly what we are facing today!
You can't even grow your own food in your backyard anymore without having to get God knows what license! And our dear President and more than half our politicians facilitated this.
Who wins? Big pharma and Big insurance(with Obamacare and the FDA), Big Agro, Big Auto (With the EPA). And they get to use the police and the IRS to bully anyone trying to go their own way!
Thanks for sharing your knowledge, I value it a highly. I´ll see what my next step will be. For the moment I´ll wait for an operation where the sanitairy system has to take a friendly tumor out of my head, and then I will most certainly accept we are living in a global economy and Spain is not the country where my (nor hardly any) potential is welcome. Kind regards.
Good luck with the tumor! I hope it all goes well...
My advice to anyone these days, start growing your own food to feed your family and your neighbors and encourage them to all do the same ;) Saves you money, and who knows, you could actually make a living off this :)
What about the $16 trillion in loans to some of the largest banks here and in the US AND outside the US...I don't think most Americans would have approved that.
You want to talk about monetary policy? We have over $14 trillion in debt. In less than a few months, the geniuses at the Fed managed to loan more than the US debt to banks without the American public knowing any of it.
and a lot of us are for moving beyond capitalism because its doomed to failure and ecological destruction. And that involves ending corporations. People should produce things together, not for bosses and CEOs.
we have already moved beyond capitalism, as defined by adam smith. we are in a world where network economics apply, and where the government is supposed to fix the problems of a pure capitalist system by doing things like preventing monopolies, protecting the environment, etcc. the problem is NOT corporations, but a corrupt system. we need to demand REAL reform to that system, and get off this all corporations are evil stupidity. let's demand political reforms, energy and environmnetal policy reform, tax reform, etc.!!!
"we have already moved beyond capitalism, as defined by adam smith."
I think a closer reading of "Wealth of Nations" and "The Theory of Moral Sentiments" and you might be surprised to discover that Adam Smith probably advocated everything you said. It's an extremely common misconception.
You are stating the obvious and your perception of OWS appears to be a product of propaganda Americans call news. Kill your TV it's lying to you.
I agree, Steve. And I came here hoping to find out what OWS is about, and only found the same propoganda. I listened to speeches given at the park by wall street, and heard the same propoganda. How do we get the message to be the right one about reform and changing the system?
I think if you look at the list of demands you will find they are well thought out. Most are only to restore past legislation that has been overturned. The new ideas address issues that have been burning in my mind for quite some time. I believe if you are a fair man you will agree there is a need and embrace the movement. They are a diverse crowd but not crazy.
Steve, i think I am embracing this movement. i want to support it. i don't want the well formed ideas to be corrupted by the crazier ones. i want this movement to find it's voice and the message to start resonating with main stream america. i want to help in that regard. i want to be a spokesman and a positive influencor. i am searching for how to do that.
this is an evolving thing... evolving to reach consensus through education... if you have knowledge that will help share it :)
We do not hate corporations. We hate corporations that underpay their employees so they can make more money, out source their jobs, allow unsafe working conditions and health violations to occur, destroy the environment, and influence politics with their money.
You are obviously not one of these, or you wouldn't be here.
i agree. and i think government has a role here. they shouldn't allow this. we should be demanding a fair trade system. and by fair, i mean the same laws and protections-- health, wages, worker safety, the environment. there needs to be a fair and level international playing field and a national one. today, i think we all agree we have neither. we have corruption in the system. government is for hire, and paid off by the worst of us. this needs to be ended. this is why i am here.
If we lowered taxes for companies in the US, raised taxes on imports (ie: outsourced products from China) Then businesses would find it easier and cheaper to employ US citizens.
i have a post on free and fair trade that i put up that more fully addresses this. but that's not so far off.
That I cannot help you with. I have been watching closely for infiltration and was turned off for a time myself. Then I realized there are people here with many different perspectives. Some more radical than the others but thats a good thing. If we only support people like us we will again be a minority. To be a majority, we have to let certain differences go. 99% is a catchy phrase but it's more like we are the 99.9%.But that would just look silly on a sign.
the more i participate, steve, the more i see that and agree with what you are saying. i see real reform and real demands starting to coalesce. i see consensus on the issues that make the most sense. i feel like a part of the movement, and that feels like a good thing.
I have also noticed a huge number of uninformed individuals trolling around. Mostly pushing shallow outdated ideologies. I was a "right winger" my whole life but I can't turn my back on reality for the sake of standing by a political party. The corruption is deep. Just found this watch a bit of it. I think it's a good one. http://youtu.be/AzULm4d8h8w
uh no. Late capitalism as we see it now is a natural evolution of the logic of capitalism. The state has never been a counterweight to capital. Its always been a tool of the ruling class.
Human nature friend...human nature. There will always be a boss to work for. Have you ever been married?
I call bullshit.
http://eng.anarchopedia.org/An_Anarchist_FAQ_-_What_about_Human_Nature%3F
I am only saying, you will always have someone you will have to answer to in society ultimately. Humans are social - and exceedingly smart. So for those that do not gather together and organize, they will take over and control those who do not. Thats called, 'he who has the guns makes the rules' (based on greed). And when that settles down over time it turns into 'He who has the money makes the rules.'
And when THAT becomes too much to bear for the population, they take up arms (guns), and revolt to overthrow - which circles back to "He who has the guns makes the rules..."......etc, etc, etc, Bolshiviks, Stalin, etc, etc.
You call bullshit all you want - you can't change human nature - and when you can, you can call yourself the 'Creator'.
You will never get rid of greed, the need for power, jealousy, lust or other human maladies.
you didn't read my link. human nature does not exist. If anything it is the opposite of what you describe. For the vast majority of human existence we lived in classless and stateless society based on mutual aid rather than markets, money and capitalism.
economic anthropology http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnOqanbHZi4
Believe it or not, I did read your link. Human nature does exist no matter how much you say it isn't so. Here is classless for you...HUNs, Romans, Goths, Visigoths, Napolean, Hitler, America, Indian nations, White Settlers, British colinization, Spanish armada, French colonization, Asian history. Dude....humans will always organize and seek to control others that do not.
I'm sorry that you believe in original sin.
Don't be sorry - ever seen a 2 yrl old say he didn't take the cookie when he has a bite of it in his mouth? Ever seen a 3 yr old, steal the other kids toys because he wants it?
I didn't create greed or lust, it just is. You don't have to even teach a kid to lie- I have 4. They can and do lie before they can form sentences.
your simplistic view of human behavior is lacking in so many ways that I don't even know how to engage with you. 2 year olds are socialized into a certain kind of society with certain values. it wasn't always this way and doesn't have to be in the future. we're heading off an ecological cliff anyway so we're going to have to find something besides capitalism no matter what.
No we are not. America is based on captalism, will remain with Captalism and you denying that there is no such thing as human nature, I agree - I cannot engage you at all based on your simplistic view of Human behavior. You are twisted by extreme left propaganda.
and for the record, I think America was a shitty idea in the first place. I have no respect for arbitrary borders based on genocide and colonial power grabs.
no, I'm twisted by actually reading intelligent things. Mull on this for a second. Capitalism requires infinite growth. We live on a finite planet. Is that simple enough for you?
Any such system should be voluntary, not required by a government regulated economic system. It's extremely hard to get the commune-like lifestyle to work, especially if it is mandated. Just ask the Ukrainians who burned their fields and slaughtered their livestock rather than collectivize under Lenin (or was it Stalin?).
thats why anarchists like myself advocate communism from the bottom up. no rulers, just free association for mutual benefit.
Communism came and it failed because it has flaws, then came socialism which also came with flaws, then capitalism, everyone thought that it is the best since it is based on democratic principle of "as to ones own worth and capability" but in reality, it is half-baked in its basing on democratic principle, it has inherent flaws that can be exploited and abused and those things are what we are now experiencing and seeing right now.
A new economic system should be developed addressing the flaws of those three and taking all the best from them. How about an enhanced cooperative system?
One of the flaws in capitalism (as it is practiced in the U.S.) is that the laws the govern incorporation and define a corporation's responsibilities are really bad. They set the only goal of a corporation as making money for shareholders.
If other responsibilities were included, that would be a small step in the right direction. There are groups which have developed model laws like the "benefit corporation".
The corporate structure has some economic advantages over co-ops in terms of raising capital. However, co-ops are very, very constructive. I'm just trying to suggest an additional avenue to consider.
Cooperative system is better we just need to enhance it to get the best from capitalism. I believe Cooperative system is more compatible with democratic and socialist principles - the perfect economic system. An example of it are the credit unions.
While I admire co-ops (am credit union and food co-op member), they have a terrible time competing against the corporation model as the scale gets larger. For one thing, they seem to have difficulty in accessing capital for expansion.
Unfortunately, many enterprises that started on a similar model, the mutual insurance companies and small banks, have sold out to become shareholder owned, to the detriment of their services. Blue Cross is an example.
communism never came. thats the problem. communism is a classless and stateless society. this has never existed save for certain tribal groups and the nomadic hunter-gatherers of the past.
"Certain tribal groups and the nomadic hunter-gatherers of the past," and present, do not employ communism. The structure that they live within may be similar to communism, but has been around for a lot longer. Some thousands of years. It is an ethnocentric mistake to call indigenous worldview communism, a mistake similar to the aforementioned conclusion that the "2 party system tries to convince us that there are only 2 possible political points of view." :)
I agree with you. I can only drop so much in a comment. I'm just trying to explain that humanity has existed without classes or states for the majority of its existence so its bullshit to claim that real "communism" is contrary to human nature.
yes it did but since it is succeptible to abuse by despotic leaders and tyrants due to its inherent flaws, it usually transforms immediately into a dictatorial totalitarian regime. Communism is actually beautiful if you will read the communist manifesto it really is a beautiful and simple system but that only exists on paper. Once implemented it suddenly crumbles and transforms to another dreadful form.
dude, a classless, stateless society never came. Except very briefly during the Spanish Revolution in anarchist held Catalonia. All economic systems only "work" on paper. Lets be clear, communism (with a small c) has never been implemented. What you call communism is really state-capitalism where the gov't controls all industry and competes in the global capitalist market for dominance. Communism doesn't have a state. (contrary to what marxists like lenin would have you believe)
This is a good point too. If capitalism is based on ever increasing growth--the consumption of resources and an increase in population--then you are right. At some point, capitalism is unsustainable.
But not most of us. Just want to make that clear.
and a lot of us don't want to end corporations... we just want them to behave in a loving manner... and prosecute those that hate...
Well said
Do you have any clue what it takes to make a watch, let alone an ipod. or the infrastructure required to bring gasoline to our vehicles, power to our homes........ Corporations do an admirable job bringing us the goods and services we need.
Such a sacrifice the corporations are making just for the good of mankind and Americans. I don't know what's involved in manufacturing a watch or iPod. I'll call China and find out. I do know what it took to build the Hoover dam, the glen canyon dam, the aqueducts... A whole lotta tax payer money. So why is some admirable private corporation making all the profit off them?
"Do you have any clue what it takes to make a watch, let alone an ipod"
Can't comment on the watch, but I know Apple hires child labor at terrible wages for (often) more than 60 hours a week. I'd say that's far from admirable.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ArkJmUOIqM&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
Workers' Self-Management: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neNwAZSBMb0&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
China Blue: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVWZSZJBkMc
exactly. you got it. we can produce the things we need ourselves! We don't need bosses or managers or markets dictating what and how we should produce. For autonomous self-organization!
and then what? as any organization grows, it needs structure. leaders emerge. the system becomes more organized. planning needs to happen to determine what to produce. and what have you changed? you wind up with a similar system in the end. i am a burner, and i even see this happen at burning man, where i run a camp. we need to reform the system and fix problems we have, for sure. but your proposed radical change is really the same system we have. read Animal Farm.
Hey sir, interesting to have your view and idears. It is not going to be easy to give you my opinion in a few frases, but I´ll try.
Corporations as you well mention are not all evil, but companies like Ibedrola, Shell, maybe some pharma companies have become way stronger than your government. I believe these corporations "belong or folow the direction" of a few families. Partly the same families that print the money for your government.
Now when Shell makes the rules in Nigeria, Iberdrola in Argentina you still believe that is ok. Its not that these countries are only running the way they are because their governments are corrupt, but because money can buy almost everything (good and bad). Over the last decades frontiers have opened and the wealth of the superpower families and underlying corporations have grown in ways you know better than me and are now (or maybe decades already) so strong that no US president can do anything. All of that is still more or less acceptable in your world (because the 1% will always remain as you mentioned Animal Farm).
Problem that you have in the USA and some other countries, is that the little wealth that the 1% is willing to share (of course min. by defination of profit max objective), now has to be shared worldwide. Some countries like mine Spain or yours? USA was ok a few years ago. Now the corporations search for labour elsewere, the middle class and poor people in many countries are suffering in ways that i personaly believe are worse then the poor people in third world (its easiers to be poor in Sudan then the USA).
Sounds like you had good education, maybe some help and the entrepreneurship in you. Than you might have had some luck started your bussiness a while ago and are making lots of money because you do your job well, took some risk... (But your corporations are not helping your country towards prosperity on the shortterm at least, but maybe the worlds average person worldwide is better off)
As you are here, I believe you would agree with some more taxes to help the poor left behind in your country, and maybe even some worldtax for the IMF so that corporations don´t have more power than the laws of economics and governments.
I´m not sure, but for the moment I believe this movement is the best thing that might have happened over the last 20 years for the childeren of the lower and middle class and hopefully for mother earth. I do believe that corporations might do the world more good than harm, but right now the rules have to be changed, and hopefully this peacefull movement will lead to answers. (otherwise its gonna be messy for sure). Kind regards from a Indignado (The Spanish Wall Street fighters :))
I actually agree with a lot of the points you made, especially in an international view. In the US we believe the government is pretty strong and has alot of power, which may or may not be true and we can argue that one. But I wholeheartedly agree that multi-national corporations are more powerful than MANY governments. It's not just corporations, too. Investment funds and billionaires have more money than lots of governments. So what is the solution to that one? I actually think a stronger world governing body is the answer, or part of it. I think the EU was a step in the right direction, though not far enough. We seriously need a level and fair playing field across the world with real environmental, worker safety and health, and other standards. How do we get that? The UN is a joke. The US and the EU should be taking a leadership role here, but they aren't. Elect me president of the US, and I would require it of all trading partners. But that's what it comes down to for me. It's not about corporations being evil. It's about needing real rstandards, regulations, and laws and the ability to enforce them. It's about reforming the political system to take corruption out of it. To me, that's what we need to do to limit the power of corporations. That to me is the real cause here.
I think limiting the power of corporations is the general idea of the OWS movement.
I only started studiing these idears here, mostly founded by good studies you can find on the internet by taking some risks (I don´t advise you to study the way I did because you will be listed somewhere as an enemy), but the anonimus provide us with more then interesting additional info on top of your MBA (I myself am a master in science of economics 2000).
I started studiing the way I did after I believed it was too weird your country hides the truth behind the 9-11 desaster. I then studied many conspiracy theories (JFK, laws 100 years old that do not permit to make products of high quality like lightbulps, and the history of the FED).
I since believe that a president of the USA will get shot, the moment he tries to do what is best for his country. And the money the people could have behind the FED (couple of families that also have power, shares and other pressures on all strategic sectors) is beyond our imagination, so today the richest family could have many times the amouth we get told. So not around 70.000.000.000 but multipliable by lots.
Animal farm is a good book, but the piggs that follow this 1% (if this movement leads to a revolution) will need a lot of time to be able to behave as there predesesors.
Nice meeting you, i´m off to bed because it´s getting late in spain and tomorrow i´m going to see how many people hit the streets here to peacefully fight existing systems and raise awarness. 15.O the first day the movement officialy becomes internationally linked.
i'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories, but i do think there is a wealthy class that exerts way too much power and influence. i am fully in favor of real reforms, real transparency, and real and independent oversight. i think most of us are. any true businessperson wants a fair and level playing field, both nationally and internationally. we don't want others to be rewarded for unethical behavior. if that occurs, it only encourages others. with proper oversight, it can work. i'm not sure how we get there, but i think this movement is at least moving in the right direction.
dude I've read animal farm. A non-hierarchical system is not the same thing as an authoritarian one. Its the exact opposite. Read The Dispossessed.
i just don't believe a non-hierarchical system is truly possible. heirarchy always develops, in some form or another. i don't think non-heirarchical should be the goal. i think fairness and transparency should be. markets are natural. they always exist. they are really just a model for a basic human interaction and interchange. this forum is a market for ideas. some get more traction, more comments, and have more currency. markets aren't the problem, the regulation of the system is.
"markets are natural. they always exist. they are really just a model for a basic human interaction and interchange." this is just anthropologically false. Have a listen to economic anthropologist david graeber talk about the misconceptions we have about social interactions, the rise of markets, money, debt etc. I guarantee you'll rethink your assumptions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnOqanbHZi4
So you have never had an unproductive co-worker.? I have worked with plenty of people over the years that did not deserve the checks they were given, because they didn't earn them. I have also seen people lose their jobs for not doing the work they were hired to do. While I didn't applaud my bosses for firing them, I did agree with my boss that they should be fired.
You're not getting it. I'm challenging the employer-employee paradigm. I'm challenging the concept of jobs or "work." C'mon think bigger people, be bold.
nothing short of a revolution will move us beyond capitalism
exactly. thats why we need to SHUT IT DOWN.
we've already moved well beyond capitalism. let's reform the system and get it working in a fair and sustainable way. it can be done, with real and meaningful reform. we can be the agents of that change. let's focus our energy there!
The only way to reform it, Tony, is to take away corporate influence on politics....very simple actually.
I challenge your assertion that capitalism can be sustainable and no we haven't moved beyond it. Capitalism requires infinite growth. The world is finite.
infintie growth is not required, progress is. this notion comes from a fundamental misundersatnding of what profits really are. replace the word profit with benefit, and consider a system. people generally do things because they get benefit out of it. i go to the movies because i get the benefit of entertainment. i hope that the value of that entertainment exceeds the cost i paid for it. that excess benefit is my profit. if the movie sucks, then i feel that i overpaid for it and lost overall benefit, my money would have been better spent elsewhere, it was a bad investment, i lost and did not make profit. your notions come from a flawed undersatnding of economics and how basic capitalism works. money is infinite. why? because it is an arbitrary value indicator. profit in the ecomonic sense is a measurement of money, which is really just a numerical way of measuring benefit. a good corporation is producing things that benefit people, and people are therefore giving money to that corporation in exchange for that benefit. it is entirely a sustainable system and absolutely does not require infinite growth as you perceive it.
listen I study political economy in school. I majored in Political Theory and ecological economics .I know what I'm talking about. capitalism requires infinite growth. this is not debatable. if it doesn't require growth then it isn't capitalism. I don't understand why so many people are so quick to defend capitalism on this forum. don't you want to be bold and visionary? There are many ways of realizing mutual benefit and "progress" that don't involved an exploitative set-up.
anonbloom, I'm sorry, but you didn't understand what you studied. Please read my post "In Defense of Corporations and Profits". It is a simplification, but may change some misconceptions you have. The growth you are talking about is good, and can in fact be infinite. Try asking yourself whether progress can be infinite. If prgoress can be infinite, so too can growth. Read that other post, and let's chat more after.
I will remind you that the largest owners of these "big corporations" are the pension funds......you may recall that the pension funds contain the "peoples" money. Hurt corporations, and you hurt the "people". Don't let a few over paid CEOs set the tone. When the pension fund managers find out that the CEO of a company is not worth the money.....the CEO's time is numbered.
Does that mean they should be allowed to essentially buy votes?
Only within the private sector. That's what corporate stock is for. They should not be allowed to donate money to politicians. Nor should the unions (I am not referring to individuals) . I don't know who started it (probably the corporations...remember Clarence Darrow) but now both sides feel like they have to fight the other side to stay in the game. I believe that only individual American citizens should be able to give donations. NO ONE ELSE...PERIOD (and that should have limits...ie...no "bundling"...etc).
Corporations are great! Latte, anyone? Good stuff. Corporations corrupting our democracy. Not good stuff.
Its about CHANGING THE POLITICAL SYSTEM.
NOT hurting corporations! We love our lattes. Let them make lattes and more lattes!!
They just need to get their latte money out of the government!
That would be ALL corporations? You are too emotional.
And yes....I will take a latte.....thanks you.
I am so sorry, I realize I got carried away. Was talking with somebody else who thinks greed is good and that got me a little worked up I guess. Didn't mean to take it out on you!
Do you mean, are all corporations great? Probably not, but I think most are good. I will tell you this - I think that many of our corporations could use a HEALTHY dose of responsibility and ethics. I do not think that is incompatible with profitability and success. At least it shouldn't be.
This is why we are here.....to find common ground. I agree with you.
Oh crap! This is not what the two political parties want.
If I could, I would raise my cardboard latte cup with you now in a toast to Election Reform!
Re: the 2 parties, I would think that with Election Reform, more parties would bubble up organically. More choices would have to be good. It would promote greater participation.
I think there are lots of fringe benefits of Election Reform.
the idea of profit is the problem.
Disagree. Profit is not the problem. It's necessary for success in a capitalist society. Are you against capitalism? Why do you think profit is a problem?
The idea of profit is what makes the world go around in all systems: political, economic and physical. If you believe in evolution, you believe in profit. Evolution is nature's free market.
So what you are saying is that you support the OWS movement. These forums and the MSM are not a good representation of the OWS movement. Our system is broken and it needs to be fixed. The power needs to be shifted back to the people. You might hear people talking about all these crazy ideas. Some good , some bad, some border on lunacy... Take it for what it is, talk. It's not the main goal of the OWS movement. Fixing our broken system is.
and that is a goal I fully support! So in that way, I do support OWS. But everything I hear isn't that goal. The main demand I hear seems to be corporations are evil, end our current system, not fix it. How do we change that message and appearance to be what you are saying the message and goal is?
You are hearing loud people on the fringe. The truth is that people want more equality. People want to feel like they make a decent living again. People want to see the greatness of the country. But that will not be done by taking even more off the business sector. They have shown that, the fewer rules they have, the more stuff they will do. They will not do it willingly. They will pay as low as they can, pollute as much as they can and get as much money from the consumer as they can. That is unfettered capitalism and that is what almost everyone is against.
in a capitalist system, the governmnet has important roles. it needs to protect shared resources. it needs to insure fair competition and stop the consolidation of power. there needs to be a fair and level playing field, where true innovation is rewarded. when companies get competitive advantage because they pay off politicians and regulators, we have a failed system and capitalism has broken down. industry groups can come up with fair standards and rules, but the government needs to exercise oversight when they can't or if they don't do enough. our politicians and our political system has failed us. it has allowed corruption. it has rewarded unethical behavior. this must be stopped, for the sake of capitalism, not to end it. when someone is rewarded for unethical behavior, we all suffer, and the honest businesses are the ones who suffer most and who should be complaining the loudest. i satnd with you and demand the same reforms that you support.
I don't think there are very many people in this country that do not support the occupy movements... They just don't know they do. Most people are buried under mountains of political propaganda and don't even know what they support anymore.
It's simple ... Our government is out of control. The MSM is out of control. Put the politics aside and you will see what this is all about. Put the politics aside and we can fix it.
I am a small business owner. I believe in corps and why they exist. I do not however believe that a corp is a person and should be able to have ANY influence on elected officials.
i still don't get the link between being a "person" and influencing politics. corporations can't vote. but they are "persons" so they can be subject to laws and regulations, enter into contracts, etc. the political system is corrupt. industry groups, unions, lobbyists, all have too much power. this needs to be fixed. and the 2 parties in power are not capable of doing that. that should be where we focus our efforts.
I dont get it either and thats what makes the Supreme Court decision so mystifying.
Personhood is also a guarantee of protections that corporate entities shouldn't have, such as the right to influence elections. It's not that corporate entities in a vacuum are evil. It's that the resources that corporate entities bring to bear on the governmental process overpower the individuals - the real "persons" the Constitution is meant to protect - and in that way suborn the priorities of government.
There are multiple proposed avenues for addressing this. Strong and strict campaign finance reform. Banning lobbyists from giving gifts and favors to influence policy. Imposing Congressional term limits. These are all aimed at one goal: get money out of governance. Abolishing corporate personhood is a means - only one, but an important one - of ensuring that the protections meant for individuals are not suborned by corporations.
Absolutely. The purpose of the corporate charter is to allow business to be unaccountable to the public for it's actions. It's a screen that those who wish to purpotrate malfesance hide behind. What was wrong with direct ownership of business in the first place, accounability?
money out of politics is a noble goal. ending corporations is dumb. they are legally defined as people so they can enter into contracts, have laws and regulations enforced against them, etc. they don't get to vote. this classification has no bearing on their ability to donate, lobby, and corrupt the political system. if we are talking political reform, lets talk about that, and get industry groups, unions, and all the special interests out of the system. let's stop having the 2 parties in power make all the rules to keep them in power. let's actually reform the system.
Here is a listing of the top campaign contributers. Seems like an awful lot of cash being floated around in the hands of our politicians. Some are non-profit, some are not. I think they all hold too much influence.
http://www.followthemoney.org/database/top10000.phtml
Several years ago I participated in the creation of a not for profit incorporated company, the reason for incorporating was that the laws of the state it was based in required it.
Now that part is out of the way, in the process of creating this not for profit, I learned that, such is not legally to participate in influencing political issues by funds or endorsement, while the individuals involved with the not for profit corporation were free to do so on their own time and with their personal funds.
Between the current ability of corporate to contribute large sums to campaign finance creating a sense of political debt on the part of candidates and by extension a sense of debt owed on the part of the corporate along with the ability to further influence policy by the means of lobbyists a atmosphere of continuing debt is fostered.
Unions, not for profit, for profit should not be influencing our national policies. There should be no sense of debt or sense of debt owed in the political system.
I see pages upon pages of reports of candidates collections of finances for campaigns, I see pages upon pages of party collections of finances...often these reports are used as talking points about the viability of the candidates available.
We need not only campaign reform but also finance reform.
If the purpose of defining corporations as people was for the sole purpose of allowing corporations to enter into contracts and to conduct business then that purpose needs to be more closely defined and the definition enforced.
Matt Taibbi says:
Break up the monopolies. The so-called "Too Big to Fail" financial companies – now sometimes called by the more accurate term "Systemically Dangerous Institutions" – are a direct threat to national security. They are above the law and above market consequence, making them more dangerous and unaccountable than a thousand mafias combined. There are about 20 such firms in America, and they need to be dismantled; a good start would be to repeal the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and mandate the separation of insurance companies, investment banks and commercial banks.
Pay for your own bailouts. A tax of 0.1 percent on all trades of stocks and bonds and a 0.01 percent tax on all trades of derivatives would generate enough revenue to pay us back for the bailouts, and still have plenty left over to fight the deficits the banks claim to be so worried about. It would also deter the endless chase for instant profits through computerized insider-trading schemes like High Frequency Trading, and force Wall Street to go back to the job it's supposed to be doing, i.e., making sober investments in job-creating businesses and watching them grow.
No public money for private lobbying. A company that receives a public bailout should not be allowed to use the taxpayer's own money to lobby against him. You can either suck on the public teat or influence the next presidential race, but you can't do both. Butt out for once and let the people choose the next president and Congress.
Tax hedge-fund gamblers. For starters, we need an immediate repeal of the preposterous and indefensible carried-interest tax break, which allows hedge-fund titans like Stevie Cohen and John Paulson to pay taxes of only 15 percent on their billions in gambling income, while ordinary Americans pay twice that for teaching kids and putting out fires. I defy any politician to stand up and defend that loophole during an election year.
Change the way bankers get paid. We need new laws preventing Wall Street executives from getting bonuses upfront for deals that might blow up in all of our faces later. It should be: You make a deal today, you get company stock you can redeem two or three years from now. That forces everyone to be invested in his own company's long-term health – no more Joe Cassanos pocketing multimillion-dollar bonuses for destroying the AIGs of the world.
Matt Taibbi is doing some of the best reporting out there today.
Corporations are not evil. They are abstract legal entities and extensions of government power. However, corporations should not have any influence over government beyond that which might occur at a public hearing and at the request of one of the people's representatives. As well, we ought to exert our prerogative to regulate and oversee these entities that we have bestowed with public power to ensure that they are serving society's ends and not their own or the interests of the people who manage them.
Corporation are evil as long as they use their money to bribe politicians with campaign contributions or pay lobbyists to pressure politicians to vote a certain way. Politicians must vote for what is best for the country not for those who pay them money.
Businesses exist to provide a service or good in exchange for someone else's wealth. How is that evil? Businesses try to provide that good or service at the best quality at low cost. That is how we ended up with innovations like the iPad and the automobile. The only thing that is "evil," is when the government robs the taxpayer to bailout or subsidize a bank and/or corporation. That manipulation of the market and is not considered capitalism. Capitalism does not reward failure. Obama is rewarding failures like Goldman Sachs, General Electric, and General Motors. END CORPORATISM!
Nice post
Firing bonuses called "golden parachutes":
Shareholders do not have the clout to prevent these amazingly self-serving contracts that CEO's can get. The WSJ reports four multi-multi-million contracts that are coming up in mergers.
If you have a 401k or IRA, this may be your money they are getting ready to gobble up.
The contracts are generally written so that "merely" doing a terrible job doesn't keep the CEO from getting the money. It is an example of the interlocking good-old network of CEO's and corporate boards.
Shareholders absolutely need the power to get nominees for the board on the corporate ballot. The corps have been able to beat this back just recently.
here's the latest TonyLanni, looks like it's going to happen: Million People March to WDC to Reinstate Glass-Steagall Act. When? 6/16/12, 79th Anniv of G-S Act.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/its-time-for-a-million-people-march-to-capitol-hil/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/its-time-for-a-million-people-march-to-capitol-hil/
Corporation is not a person. End corporate person-hood. Support the Human Worth Amendment. To learn more, please go to: http://occupywallst.org/forum/human-worth-amendment/
19 Facts About The Deindustrialization Of America That Will Make You Weep
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/deindustrialization-factory-closing-2010-9#the-united-states-has-lost-approximately-42400-factories-since-2001-1#ixzz1bbzlg6Jt
“Rich People” and Corporations are not job creators. They even somewhat admit this when they say that there aren’t more jobs because there aren’t people spending money.
Without the American people spending money, there wouldn’t be any jobs.
Why is a company made?
To make money, but to also fill a demand.
If no one wanted what they offer they won’t last, thus the jobs won’t be there.
So who are the real “Job Creators”?
You, me, and anyone else out there that spends money because we want something beyond our needs. (if we just bought within our needs there wouldn’t be enough jobs out there for everyone, hence the high unemployment rate right now)
Tony,
you say: 1) Make the tax system fair and predictable. Today, it is neither.
So, what do consider fair?
This is a consequence of buying cheap Chinese junk at WalMart:
http://www.chinasmack.com/2010/pictures/chinese-children-tied-up-while-parents-work-zhejiang.html
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/chinablue/film.html
very upsetting...hope all the billions are worth it...
Here is a consequence of buying cheap Chinese junk:
http://www.chinasmack.com/2010/pictures/chinese-children-tied-up-while-parents-work-zhejiang.html
very upsetting
This certainly relates:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/if-the-rich-are-jobs-creators-where-are-the-jobs/
Tony,
you say [quote] Make the tax system fair and predictable. Today, it is neither.[unquote]
This line you wrote doesn't mean too much. It is very non-specific.
Could you clarify? What do consider is fair?
I would not mind having a discussion with you because we would likely agree on many critical points, but not all. I'm realistic. Maybe we both could learn something from such an exchange.
Today more $$$$$ is in the hands of the Richest Americans than at any other time in modern U.S. history.
An analysis of income-tax data gleaned by the Congressional Budget Office two years ago found that the top 1% of households own nearly twice as much of the corporate $$$$$$ in the United States as they did just 15 years ago.
While the average income for the poorest Americans has barely gone up over the past several decades running, the incomes of the wealthiest Americans have absolutely exploded.
The truth is that over the past couple of decades, the "rules of the game" have been skewed even more in favor of the rich. Centralization and globalization have been two keys trend which have contributed to this. For example, in the old days you could make a good living by opening up a store in your local town if you worked really, really hard. But today you will be crushed by Wal-Mart and other "big box" stores.
So where do all the those big profits that Wal-Mart and the other "big box" stores make go?
They get shipped out of our struggling neighborhoods to a bunch of rich fat cats. The numbers don't lie. We always need to remember that the statement that the rich are getting filthy richer than ever before while the poor get poorer is true and verifiable.
We are waking up to the truth.
Yes, I agree lets be fair. That's why it's time for the rich to pay their fair share. They enjoyed their staggering wealth, now they need to pay more. Trickle down doesn't work. We tried it, they got richer we got poorer. The numbers are easy to add. Simple accounting.
We will be in the streets to help those who forgot to account for us. Those backs they rode on to the tippity top.
For more clarification, take the link: http://occupywallst.org/forum/if-the-rich-are-jobs-creators-where-are-the-jobs/
Tony Lanni:
Per who "Owns it all" and why things are as they are, please comment on article - http://occupywallst.org/forum/walter-burien-speaking-to-the-health-and-freedom-c/
Thanks,
Walter Burien - CAFR1.com
I have a real list - http://occupywallst.org/forum/this-will-fix-everything/
criminals don't follow the rules or laws. Successful criminals don't get caught. That is who we are dealing with. There is no law, reform, regulation, or rule that will affect the way they do business. Enforcement of law is impossible if you can't find the criminal or prove they did anything wrong. We know there are war criminals,traitors in our country, but we don't see them being prosecuted or even accused in the public's view. Media complicity in corporate/state crime is indicative of a deeply corrupt system. if the authorities of the state will do nothing to remedy the lies they are equally corrupt and cannot be trusted. Therefore occupy. Until the facts come out, logic overcomes disinformation, and lies are pointed out. The people alone and as a group must do this. No authority will. Educate yourself, question authority, trust not those who make promises but those who seek justice on the behalf of all others. The quest for justice is never ending if the quest for power knows no limit.
i agree with lots of what you say. but these people can be caught. they can be stopped. if we all band together and insist and make it happen. media control is a giant issue. the majority of people in this country are brainwashed by a corrupt media that spouts talking points. we must all stand together and make logic prevail.
I still have not figured out exactly who are the puppet masters. That does not matter. They will become ineffective once the structure is corrected to empower the individual to live without the need for specific material assets as a quantitative value of worth. Equality exists within the qualitative value of each individuals potential. We will then be free from the fear of others and loss of basic needs. All people have some value to all other people. We can organize to facilitate the expedient discovery of this value by allowing each person to inform others of their contribution through a common medium.
I don't think corporations are evil. I just don't think they're people. Do you? And because they're not people, they shouldn't be able to bribe politicians for their votes with endless treasure chests of money. In fact, NO ONE should be able to bribe politicians for their votes. That's why we need strict public campaign financing, and why we need the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling to be overturned.
the "people" issue seems to be a very confused one. corporate personhood isn't real personhood, there is already a clear difference. corporations can't vote or do the things most people would do. personhood in the corporate sense really exists so that they can enter into contracts, have laws and regulations be enforced against them, be subject to taxes, etc. there is an issue of limited liability, where some reform is needed. SOX was an attempt towards this, but wasn't the best one, and more can be done in that regard. but ultimately people are responsible for their criminal actions and can and should be held accountable for them, even when within acting in a corporation. as for political contribution, etc. limits were put in place, and this resulted in PACS to get around them. PACS are people, not corporations, but still a problem. what we need, and what we all agree we desperately need, is real political reform. there are clear problems that MUST be addressed in this area. our government has failed us because it has been taken over by special interests-- industry groups, unions, groups like the AARP, even foreign governments, all of which have powerful lobbyists, donate massive amounts of money, and buy our government. a fair and accessible political system is what we need. there are proposals out there that address this, and I've heard some great ideas, which i fully support.
Then I think we basically agree...
Eliminate depreciation and allow all equipment purchases to be fully expensed in the first year and carried forward as necessary. Taxes should not be paid until an enterprise is profitable, and in the real world of small business, profits are not real until ALL expenses have been paid first. The beauty part is that taxes could be deferred indefinitely as long as profits were domestically reinvested in the enterprise. This would provide tremendous economic stimulus and power job creation more than anything else conceivable. Preferred rates on long-term capital gains can’t do that because they lack a direct connection to productive investment.
Make dividend payments a deductible business expense and tax the dividends only as income for the payees. This would unlock significant amounts of the money being held by major corporations and increase the number of stocks that pay dividends. This would be an excellent complement to the full expensing of capital investments. More dividend payments will of course generate more tax revenue and real economic activity.
Repeal the 879-page Dodd-Frank act of 2011. Reinstate the 37-page Glass-Stegall act of 1933. G-S worked for 60 years. Despite its length, D-F is still not complete with 243 rules yet to be defined by regulators. The regulators have asked the financial industry to fill in those blanks. Essentially the foxes have been asked to not only guard the henhouse but to build it too. Right now the banks derive only 30% of their income from lending and 70% from gambling, euphemistically referred to as “trading”. One by-product of this is that all the monetary benefit from productivity gains in the last decade accrued exclusively to the “financial sector”. The imperative of a functional financial system is simple: efficient allocation of capital to productive enterprise, because the financial system should support economic activity, not the other way around. Clearly, the titans of finance have failed miserably at this, yet they not only still have jobs, they continue to be richly rewarded for their incompetence.
Stop “C” level executives from looting public companies. Stock options and Golden Parachutes are insidious methods to siphon shareholder equity and encourage outsize risk by executives with no downside personal financial stake. If a “C” level executive is “all that”, then he should be confident enough to buy the stock of his firm and he and his family should be willing to refrain from selling any stock in the company long or short for the duration of his employment or board membership. The sale of company stock by insiders is a direct conflict with their fiduciary obligations to the other shareholders. Paying proprietary scale rewards to people who have no proportionate proprietary risk position is bad business, and this abuse cries out for legislative action since the cronyism of corporate boards seems to be incapable of reasonable self-governance.
Good post! Here's one idea:
Eliminate the preferred rates at which long-term capital gains and inheritances are taxed. Capital gains already enjoy unlimited exemption from tax until they are realized. Make all income including capital gains, gifts, inheritance and trust funds subject to the same marginal rates as ordinary income. Estates should have all the unrealized capital gains taxed before distribution to heirs, and then heirs should pay marginal rates from the first dollar. These preferred rates rate do not create jobs; they only accelerate the acquisition of financial instruments and consolidation of wealth. Lower marginal rates and shorter depreciation schedules can create jobs much more effectively. It’s not a matter of “soaking the rich”, but just bringing the tax rate of all income streams into parity with marginal rates. I would however recommend a much higher tax on the portion of individual inheritances above a certain threshold. There is no economic or social justification for 9 and 10 figure inheritances. We are neither a feudal society nor a caste system. Heavily taxing these kinds of inheritances is an essential component of creating a sustainable economic system. A society that fosters dynastic wealth is on the road to perdition, because the historical destinations are brutal repression, economic catastrophe, or revolution, and more often than not, the heirs of great fortunes are not prudent stewards. These are the facts of history. If death and taxes are both inevitable, it makes sense that they also be concurrent, because the more we pay as a society after death, the less we will have to pay while living. Lower marginal rates provide a superior economic stimulus to preferential treatment of inherited wealth or long-term capital gains. We could ignore history and just let things run their course, but I have to stress that these severe wealth imbalances never end well, unless you are a fan of repression, revolutions or economic calamity. The last time a similar imbalance occurred in our country was 1929. How did that work out for us?
An excellent post. Kudos to you sir, this is a well worded and hard hitting post.
Anyhow, just wanted to add this: No, corporations aren't evil, people are. It is an innate fact that all humans will act to their own personal best interest. The concept of Capitalism is based on this. Because people run corporations the corporations act on behalf of evil agency. These corporations are not people (nor legally should they be treated as such).
No, everyone in OWS the TP and any movement, we're evil too. The problem for the 1% now, though, is that we are the majority and each individual is seeing that banding together with each other to exert pressure on the 1% is the only power we have and that the only way to change a system that is not in our interest.
Again, the problem is that large enterprises can overly effect the interests of a small group of people just as evil as anyone else. What I personally want is to see that neither my evil nor the evil of a 1% is overly powerful. In that corporations can effect the evil of a handful in ways that others in the society do not have access to they are agents of greater evil. That is the problem with corporations. The problem for corporations and those they represent is that they comprise a couple million evil people. The 99% comprises several hundred million people, many of whom have nothing left to lose.
And, yes, we are evil too. That should make anyone in the 1% pissing the bed at night because as fewer gain more, and more gain less, there is less and less to prevent the majority from becoming very, very pissed off. If the only way those in the 99% see that their lives could be better is by betting those lives in violence, seeing that if they survive a terrible point in history they will be far better off, then there will be a major problem.
Such violence is the implicit threat of mass protest. I personally hope it doesn't come to that. But, if it does, I do know that the numbers are on my side's side. And, as for me, I will either be better off if I survive because I will be living under a system not like the current one, or I'll be dead and won't have many worries.
As I stated elsewhere on these boards, the 99% has direct control of the food supplies, gasoline, finished products, guns and services. If the 1% force the issue with us, they are not the soldiers who carry the guns into combat; they are not the grocery store clerks who monitor who can leave with what. They are not the truck drivers and train hands and ship hands who ensure transportation of goods over distance. They are not the oil drillers and plant employees and gas station attendants who control the energy production in fact. They are simply a bunch of people with pieces of paper saying they control these things. But pieces of paper are little defense to guns, gas, food and equipment, and to this point the only thing that separates them from violent reprisal is that the American people respect their own laws.
If the current situation does become so desperate that we are no longer American citizens, but humans trying to survive, those pieces of paper mean nothing.
The story of revolutions is one in which a few elites are violently overthrown by a disenfranchised majority. The threat, then, to articulate it plainly is that many in the 99% want those in the 1% to do whatever will make sure we are surviving well, or very bad things will happen. If it was possible for revolutionary 99ers and French 99ers to do this in the 18th century when they had no clue what the world would be like without their 1%; if it was possible for Russian 99ers to come together to oust their nobility; if it is possible for these groups of disenfranchised majorities to violently act when they had no other recourse and very little precedent for unified action, how presumptuous to think that we 21st century American 99ers can't do the same or better with the existing templates.
This is where we are, and as things worsen, the problems for the 1% will worsen too. It will be at the point when you order your 99% soldiers to fire on 99% starving old ladies and they turn their guns on you that the worst will occur.
I see OWS as an attempt to avoid that solution peacefully. But there will come a time if this warning is not heeded that things will become very bad for the 1%. Some part of me is even evil enough to hope it does come to that. I sincerely hope the 1% is listening because that's what's at stake, and mind you, if you do take away the food of Old women because you don't want to pay taxes that violent solution is closer than you might think.
Your sell/transaction argument is flawed. Corporations also make money off of negative externalities--if an oil company decides not to clean an oil spill if it will eat into profits, it won't. If a corporation decides to slash and burn a rain forest to build a cow farm, it costs the environment and us money. We shouldn't pay for these externalities, these companies should.
It's time for a change. To prevent greed from governing our lives, politcs and social mindset. Most people can be altruistic. We do care how our actions affect others. Capitalism is not evil, the desire to own more than we need is. Perhaps it's time for Alpitalism (Altruistic Capitalism). When a successful person reaches a point that they realize that they have enough. Maybe it's not necessary to own a $50 million dollar mansion, maybe a $25 million dollar mansion is enough. Maybe it's not necessary to own a $30 million dollar yacht, maybe a do without the gold plated faucet or just have 2 servants instead of 6. Now imagine taking that extra money you just saved and paying for the paving of a road you drive on or covering the costs of maintaining a favorite park you visited as a child. Perhaps, instead of charging $100 for a baseball ticket you could make it $50. Guess what might happen, people would have more money to spend and they would spend it and the successful people would still make it back. Could Alpitalism work? Maybe it's the next social experiment to begin here, the last one was called Democracy.
Oh, and here's a 21 for you:
21.) Any business whose direction is based in the U.S. must repatriate all funds and assets subject to taxation immediately; no business may base its direction in the United States unless its production is based solely in the United States as well. No business will be eligible to receive benefits from the U.S. government in the form of tax incentives unless all their employees are American citizens. All companies which have enjoyed tax incentives from the U.S. government but employed workers oversees must repay any financial boon enjoyed from locating their directorial offices and legally locating themselves within the U.S. They must also repay the U.S. government for the military protection they have enjoyed during the period in which they have located their production outside the U.S. These repayments are to be considered with interest on the principle owed.
please stop ruining this thread with ridiculous demands that make no sense.
Concerning both you comments:
Honestly, I have studied economics and the problem is no one is willing to recognize a cardinal truth any economics professor will tell you about in economics 101; there is a ceiling at which point an individual has everything he/she wants or needs and beyond that point any further income is an economic leakage. This is the problem with the 1% today. Their money is a leakage and is not working to make the economy work properly, but is only being used to further their personal interests and sustain their wealth and power.
Or perhaps we should discuss that Adam Smith openly states that the wealthy ought to pay tax to provide for the common good. That's Adam Smith. Yes, I have read The Wealth of Nations. What those who cry loudest for Capitalism really want is Plutocracy, not Capitalism. There does indeed come a time when too much wealth computes to too much power and, hence, an undemocratic control over policy. We are at that time. And so in the interest of suggesting actions we might collectively take to undo this damage to our country I have made suggestions that seem correct to me.
What I feel you are standing by are rightist propaganda points. Just because someone scowls when saying, "liberals," does not make Liberalism wrong for any rational reason. Perhaps there are better specific actions that we in the 99 can take to correct this systemic problem, and if so, I am all for them; I do feel that the problems my suggested demands hope to correct are pretty obvious, so if someone has a better method of correcting them, then by all means.
The only fact is that these are indeed problems with American society today. And my apologies if you believe that my understanding is lacking, but I would challenge anyone who feels this way on the basis that such an attack lacks an understanding of how "Capitalism" is not working for most Americans. It never has either, hence the crash of 1929. But we have been hoodwinked again by those with a pulpit. If the system were working, if those who supported this system knew best, then there would not be so many people protesting right now, nor would 40% of Americans be living below the poverty line.
So tell me, supporter of the current system, how is this system correct? And how is doing away with it as much as possible wrong? I suspect that you won't find many people on this forum who agree that things should not change and that creating hard and fast demands that make sure no citizen in this country ever wields more political power than any other (which is the objective of the ideas I proposed) is wrong.
the fact that you think i am a supporter of the current system tells me that you lack understanding. some wealth accumulation is necessary for larger investments in the overall system. pooling of capital in and of itself is not bad and is not economic leakage. economics is the flow of money. a fast and steady flow is a good economy. there are many flows in the system. your entire reasoning clearly demonstrates that you do not understand those flows. and deregulation is not the answer to keep things flowing, it is the opposite of the answer and something i would never propose. the crash of 1929 had nothing to do with a failure of capitalism. it was a failure of the regulatory system that governs the flow. start with my explanation of what profits are above, and i can take you through fundamental understanding of the system in a way that your professors or your reading seems to have missed. do you get the first part that profit only occurs when both sides benefit in a transaction?
I didn't. And speaking civilly, I wanted to point out that I question that the proper level of government involvement in the market cannot exist without Draconian restrictions on those acting in the market.
Also, another problem I'm having is the idea that two parties can ever benefit from a transaction. One party will always attempt to benefit more and that is the story of the free market from the time Upton Sinclair wrote The Jungle about Chicago meat-packing companies selling shoddy product that sickened consumers, to the many news flashes of recalls on products made by existing American companies and foreign interests that sell in our country. Also, look at the many products produced abroad for consumption domestically that have been hazardous to consumers' health: Lead-paint toys, toxic drywall, diseased foods....
Here is the very sensible problem with Capitalism as we practice it in the U.S.: Centralized financial power will always find a way to break down government checks on its interests no matter how many times the people collectively pass laws to prevent this. But here is an illustration of this in a chart because maybe that will express the problem I see more aptly:
Baseline=Systemic Collapse
Systemic Collapse-->Strictures Enacted to Improve Economy and Prevent Future Collapse-->Economy Running Again-->Wealthy Individuals Profit Slowly-->Wealthy Individuals Use Profits to Infiltrate Government-->Strictures Lifted-->Wealthy Individuals Profit Quickly-->System Undermined By Lack of Oversight-->Systemic Collapse
So you see, I cannot believe that simply tightening the leash on Wall Street will work to any good. Our great-grandchildren will have the same problems again, and I would like to see us correct the problem now. Capitalism seems to be the problem. I hope you can see why I feel this way.
Anyhow, I am more than willing to remain open-minded about this and hear out any arguments and explanations to the contrary. I am looking at this problem as a social and political problem as well as an economic one. The question is how to balance economy with politics and society so that all prosper according to their share and no one person may take on more control of policy making in our democracy than another.
Really, my suggested demands are aimed at correcting these over-arching problems of how we are all less-than-equal on the field of our governance due to Capitalism. What I would like to see come from this discussion is some new concept that changes the way administering the nation state works in all social facets. The market should not take primacy over the church, the state, the family, the school... or any facet of human endeavor. And its success should not take primacy over the interest of all individuals living within the boundaries of the state. What seems to be the current problem is that it has taken primacy over the interests of most of us in so many ways and this must stop.
Here are a few simple demands:
1.) Inheritance of estates valued over $1 million are to be taxed at a rate of 90%
2.) The loophole allowing parents/grandparents to "gift" their assets to their heirs prior to death is closed permanently by constitutional amendment.
3.) All for-profit institutions with over $500 million in liquid assets will be treated as monopolies (even if they are not a monopoly in fact) and broken up.
4.) All necessity industries food, clothing, shelter, heating, water, electricity, communication will be under the sole purview of the federal government, the profits from which will be used solely for upkeep and to defray the tax burden the Republic places on its citizenry.
5.) Legally the private sector will be restricted to engaging in commerce and production of goods and services unnecessary for human life by constitutional amendment.
6.) Higher education will be fully funded by the federal government.
7.) All further federal military spending will cease until that time that the states' and federal government have eliminated their debts.
8.) Those whose personal assets exceed $1 million may not collect government benefits, must return the total value of all government benefits they have thus far collected plus interest; all collection of government benefits by a wealthy individual is considered felonious fraud.
9.) Private schools are shuttered permanently. Primary and secondary public education becomes the sole purview of the federal government, with all school taxes nationally pooled for this purpose and all public schools receiving equal share of the pooled funds.
10.) Lobbying politically elected servants of the Republic is outlawed for all parties. The effect of an individual politically is restricted to his/her vote. All further lobbying is considered bribery and punishable as treasonous intent to undermine the will of the electorate.
11.) All those directly involved in profiting from the collapse of the housing market will be jailed immediately and tried for felonious sedition against the United States of America.
12.) Remaining businesses will enjoy only one tax break: It is to be equal to the annual percentage expansion of the number of full-time employees working for them in comparison to the previous year.
13.) All part-time, "intern," and "contractor" employment is to be banned.
14.) A median "above the minimum" wage is to be set for skilled and educated workers. No employer may employ these persons without paying this rate, which is to be above the minimum wage.
15.) By constitutional amendment, those making under $75,000/year are not subject to income taxes.
16.) The minimum and median wages are to be raised annually by Congress to account for inflation.
17.) Employing non-citizens is considered a felony. All issuance of "work visas" to the U.S. is to cease.
18.) Federal grants and loans for schooling and business development to non-citizens is to cease.
19.) Collection of government benefit by non-citizens is to cease.
20.) A federally administered, collectively owned, not-for-profit health insurer is to be instituted and allowed to offers its services in all 50 states equally; no for-profit insurer may offer its services across the state lines of the state it currently operates in.
These are only a few specific fixes I can see personally. Anyhow, point is, yes, we 99%s do have ideas. And there are a lot more of us than 1%. I say they either start listening to our demands or we resort to more extreme measures.
wow, no offense, but most of these are awful and not very well thought out. number 3 for example would just cause continual spinoff of business as they approached the threshold and would hurt competition and all of our prosperity. #4 argues for what seems like a centrally planned economy, which history shows would be a huge disaster. if you are still allowing market mechanism here, then you have removed competitive factors that keep costs down, and will drive waste and shortages.#5 puts us back in the stone ages by removing any technological innovation. #7 gets us invaded by other states that don't share our values. i'm sorry, but after this lit of demands, i can't take you seriously. i apologize for that and being so direct.
Re 3. How can having more businesses engaged in a market hurt competition? It is having fewer businesses with a greater concentration of wealth and therefore power that harms competition. This simply means that, yes, there would be continual spinoff, but because individuals cannot become overly wealthy/powerful, these spinoffs would have to be purchased by others and therefore would be in competition with their mother companies.
Furthermore, the market does not drive costs down past the point that a sector hegemony is created. What is at issue here is that to afford to compete in the pay-to-play system we have requires reliance on the capital of the same 1%. Take Microsoft and Apple, for instance: To fund such large competitive companies takes capital, but the capital is so centralized in such a small portion of the population that this competition has merely become the same 1% (investors) betting against themselves. This does not lead to innovation as change is the enemy of anyone who has everything. Why, pray tell, would anyone on top want anything to change? So, realistically, that same 1% is funding everything and therefore there is no real competition. Rather, it creates a trust mentality. And these corporations are so large that, in fact, they can waylay any smaller entity whose innovation might challenge their primacy. So we see from the many instances of tech giants buying out start-ups.
5.) I remind you that we were not the first nation into space. Certainly no nation needs capitalism to innovate. If so, most of the inventions in human history (most of which came about in antiquity) would not have come about. America did not invent the steam engine; the computer was invented to fight a war, not for profit; the same for nuclear power; even the space race in the U.S. and all that came with it resulted more from a military pissing contest with Russia than from the drive to profit. The history of capitalism is not innovation but simply the re-appropriation of existing technologies for profit. Sadly, the capitalistic elite have run out of history to rip off at this point and will eventually be hard-pressed to show any real innovation, considering most of what we "learned" in the 19th and 20th centuries was already discovered somewhere in the distant past. Necessity is the mother of invention, not profit.
again, i find your positions too ill-concieved and not thought out logically to engage in any debate here. your fundamental assumptions about how economics works and about monetary systems are all off-base. i suggest studying economics more, starting with the early thinkers and working forward.
Plantations: $14,000,000,000,000 (fourteen million million) plus $1,600,000,000,000 added each year. We currently can not pay the interest on this money with our tax revenue. Taking all of the money, not taxing all of the money, of those making over $250,000 per year does not fill the gap. The clear implication, taxes do not do the trick so "taxing the rich" is nothing but a Democratic buzz word to incite support. We must stop spending and that means some are going to suffer, some. If we do not control this insanity, we all will suffer, ALL. Are you aware that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of wealthy Americans making contingency plans to leave America if this thing blows up? No? It is true. Are you aware that millions of Americans are making plans to unite for mutual protection if this thing blows up? No? Well, it is true also. On the verge of collapse and the damned Democrats are still name calling, finger pointing, twisting words, lying and any thing else they can do to further a failing ideology. No? Read:
Do you pay your workers a living wage? Do you make them do drug tests, personality tests? Do you restrict bathroom breaks?
Corporations are immoral. They are creations of the state. They either do the right thing or their corporate charter should be revoked.
yes, no, no, no. corporations are not immoral. they are not moral either. most business people want a fair system and a level playing field. being anti-business shouldn't be your cause. being anti-corruption and for real and meaningful regulation should be.
If you did the right things we would not dislike you.
see, this "us" versus "them" all businesses are bad attitude is the problem with some of us in this movement. the vast majority of business people support the same reforms we are all talking about. we want a fair and level playing field where people can't get advantage by buying off politicians and regulators. we want real and fair free trade, where every company is held to the same health and safety, environmental, workers rights, etc. standards. we don't want people to be rewarded for unethical behavior and them to get ahead for it and want to see such people punished. we want fair competition where real innovation is rewarded. we want the government to do its job in regulating the system, preventing concentration of power and anti-competive behaviors and unfair and misleading advertising and things of that nature. we want access to capital in a fair way, not based on who you know and who you pay off. 99% of the business people in the world want these things. 1% are unethical. power is too concentrated. these things MUST be fixed. being anti-corporation and anti-business does NOT serve your cause. We need to band together and fight for the real causes here.
Corporations are not the same as small business, that's just the truth. If they are too big to fail they must be broken down.
or at the very least be allowed to fail. that part i agree with. not sure on the forced breakdowns, but it can at least be debated with some of the largest companies.
yist, the wealthiest people, and other countries and give the power to control America back to the American citizens where it was always meant to be withThe American Citizens' Vote
Billy Jetland CEO
James Jetland
Website: http://theamericancitizensvote.com
Skype: theamericancitizensvote
Email: thecitizensvote@ymail.com
Phone Number: 702-445-4782
Email: Jetlandjimmy@yahoo.com
Email: Jetlandbill@yahoo.com
We expect recent efforts to boycott products produced by companies owned or controlled by the Koch brothers, (Charles and David), (pronounced "coke"), to grow in 2011, and will eventually include an effort to have pension funds drop the company's bonds.
Their company, Georgia Pacific, has $10 billion in outstanding bonds.
The organizers of the boycott are suggesting people not purchase things that their company produces, including: Brawny Towels, Dixie Cup Products, Angel Soft Toilet Paper, Mardi Gras Napkins, Quilted Northern Toilet Paper; and Stainmaster Carpets.
I would like to add:
5) Institute rock solid accounting standards
Over the last decade trillions have been lost due to improper accounting methods.
Examples:
Enron (goes without saying) Pentagon ($2.3 trillion could not be accounted for according to Rumsfelt on 9-10-2001) Foreclosure crisis (ownership of real estate cannot be established)
Without proper accounting there cannot be a proper investment climate, without which there cannot be job growth.
i agree with the thought 100%. i had that in mind in my #3.
I think it's better to speak of rock solid accounting than about regulations. I think there is nothing controversial about accounting. Even the most staunch conservative will agree that proper accounting is important.
In fact corporations are not evil BECAUSE they are not people. We just need the Supreme Court to understand this very basic fact.
Corporations are not evil.
They are also not people.
http://robinhoodtax.org/ Tax all global financial transactions 1% watch: 'The Banker' vid about the Tobin Tax spread this as one of the main demands.
Use that fund (trillions) to pay for collectively identified & agreed goals From Earthquake relief, to famine, to health concerns, and more importantly to Policy Shift - climate change mitigation through Energy policy shift, Food policy shift, and healthcare policy shift, education policy shift, jobs creation through infrastructure - old to new- shift that. Those things can be paid for and more.
not a bad idea. we definitely need a fair and level international playing field, with the same environmental laws, health and safety standards, living wages, etc. i'm all for anything that moves us in that direction as a world society.
my bullshit detector is going off...they pollute the natural environment at the peoples expense because its cheaper than properly disposing their waste...so families, generations of families get cancer...then those people go to a corporate healthcare and they tell them that the disease is genetic and they dont know exactly what causes it when it was clearly caused by a carcinogen which came from industrial pollution...they then proceed to charge those dying people for everything they have so that they can stay alive for treatments that are not even particularly expensive..however people will pay a lot if their lives are on the line...corporations are evil...have you seen the mutant cows and chickens that they experiment on in order to get them to grow more meat faster for less food while they keep them in a four by four stall standing in excrement...FACTORY FARMING...it is completely disgusting..but what do the rich care they buy free range organic food because it is healthier..however the 99 percent out there cannot afford to eat healthy so they have to buy the mutated, hormone full, bacteria infested meat
corporations exploit the living shit out of people..even their own workforces...its disgusting
the pollution in your environment is a sickening result of corporations not giving a shit and not caring about who or what they poison because it isnt "cost effective" to drum up the waste and ship it somewhere safe..so they dump it into the river or the air...if it gives someone cancer if it gives three generations of that persons family cancer they dont care...it just means more money they can make off of cancer...get a clue
corporations push drugs...they advertize beer commercials at kids watching sports trying to encourage addiction and irresponsible drinking habits...they make beer commercials that look more like cartoons...they had and still do have cartoon characters selling cigarettes to kids...even their products cause diseases not just their pollution...a lot of corporations rely on organized crime to keep their underpaid exhausted work force "compliant" and they make sweatshop merchandise for a few pennies then they ship it over here and sell it to us for 20 dollars
corporations aren't evil...shut the hell up...maybe one corporation isn't evil
that doesnt make the rest clean
this is where I disagree 100%. There are flaws in the system when it comes to shared resources like the environment. it is the governments job to regulate this. those that violate that need to be punished. our governmnet has failed in this regard. they have been infiltrated and corrupted. this is the problem. we need a fair and level playing field. we need transparency and accountability for actions. when people push drugs unethically, they need to be punished accordingly. this we can all agree on. that doesn't mean the system is bad or corporations in and of themselves are evil. it means some people are evil and that our government has failed in its duties.
A tool is never evil, the people who use the tool for evil is though, The 1% have done nothing but use the tool for evil and that should be stopped.
not all of the supposed 1% are evil. some billionaires have given more to society than anyone. bill gates is a good example. but those that are evil, that manipulate the system for their own gain, that are dishonest and corrupt, those are the ones that we all stand against. i demand a fair and level playing field, both nationally and internationally. i demand an end to political corruption, where politicians go to the highest bidder. i demand real transparency and oversight in and by our goverment. i stand for the same causes you do.
Bill gates? The man who stole his billions? Have you not seen pirates of silicon valley? I would also like to mention that the rich donate money for the tax right offs in order to not only NOT have to pay some taxes but to also recieve money back for donations. If there where no benefit to donations than the rich would never donate.
there are 2 bill gates in my mind. the one who profitted off other's ideas through savy business decisions and the one who exists today who has and is giving away the vast majority of hiw wealth for noble causes. do you honestly think he is funding vacinations in the billions of dollars for a tax writeoff? but if we have a system that punishes people for be good and fair businesspeople, then we will get nowhere. we need a system that punsihes people for their real crimes and lack of ethics. those are the causes we can all support.
Of course he is donating money, he is old and is trying to buy his way into whatever heaven he believes in. His last acts will never justify the ones of his past no matter how hard he tries and the microsoft monopoly shows he was never a "fair" business person. In fact small business' who play by the rules are being punished for being fair while big business is being rewarded for being unfair. That is why the system does not work.
well, there is a certain network economics to things, and i don't agree that microsoft really has a monopoly anymore, but we can debate that forever and i can see points on both sides. i do also agree to a certain extent about motivation behind some of his acts, but is that really such a bad thing? where i do really disagree is in the concept that you are holding him to a standard of perfection. what if a supposed 1% stood up and said "you guys are right. i've done bad. here, take all my money." what you are saying is that this person is still in the wrong, and this act forgives nothing. i think this is more or less what bill gates has done, and i don't think it's wrong to have some amount of admiration for that. i mean how many other billionaires aren't leaving the majority of their wealth to their children and families? we need a fair overall system for sure. but people need to be encouraged to get ahead, so long as they do it ethically. otherwise the system can't really work.
The OWS movement by definition is one of Democrats protesting the rights of the 99% Majority
Definition of Democrat A democrat is a member of the Democratic political party or someone who believes in equality for all people and ruling by the majority. (noun) An example of is Wisconsins recalling a elected republican who favors the 1% rather than the 99% in exchange for a democrat who supports the 99%
We Wisconsin protesters of republicans believe
Republican 1. Paid to support the 1% Rich, corporations 2. regulates in favor of leverage to rich, protects them from being prosectuted for financial fraud 3. Believe it is all right to supress the vote by donations from rich corporations to 4.Believes in a communist governement ruled by the rich elete who write the laws that are in favor of top 1% 5. Plege never to raise taxes on rich, give tax breaks to the rich, cut 99% workers rights
Democrat 1.a person who believes in and upholds government by the people; advocate of rule by the majority 2.a person who believes in and practices the principle of equality of rights, opportunity, and treatment 3.a member of the Democratic Party 4. believes in democracy
Ask the protesters in Wisconsin recall of republican Scott Walker believe these Republican Party had remained fairly cohesive, as both strong economic libertarians and social conservatives opposed the Democrats, whom they saw as the party of bloated and more secular, liberal government.[84] Yet, some libertarians have argued that the GOP's policies have grown increasingly restrictive of personal liberties, and has contributed to increasing corporate welfare and national debt.[85] Some social conservatives have expressed dissatisfaction with the party's support for economic policies that they see as sometimes in favor of top 1%
we CANNOT let this movement become a democrat one. I actually think the tea party started off well intentioned until the republicans took it over. i think the democrats are equally as corrupt. they accept the same money and are equally for sale. i tend to support their positions more and vote that way, but they are as much to blame for deregulation and other problems as anyone. we need real reform that transcends party lines!
First, corporations are not one thing. The biggest problem is with publicly traded corporations. The reason for this is that corporations are not evil, rather they are amoral. The ethics according to which a corporation behaves is not something humane. It is very simple: maximum return for shareholders.
In the corporate world management must maximize profit or they risk being sued by the sharegholders (see: Ben & Jerry's). Corporations often do things that appear "good". This happens when what people consider good is the same as what increases or maintains profits.
Corporations act as a separate, aggregate entity from the people who work for them. The fictitious personhood of a corporation gives it the protection afforded humans without the accountability. Incorporation shields the human actors from the consequences of their actions. People do things as "employees" they would never do as themselves.
It is my belief that we need a revolution in ethics, not government or law. Corporations have a disproportional impact on law because of lobbying. The law is not a limit on corporate behavior, per se. If the people who run the corporations, and the shareholders who can choose to sue, acted ethically and considered people before profit, things would look much different.
I am not suggesting that people shouldn't profit, rather, I am saying that if a corporation makes $1,000,000,000,000 in profit losing $100,000,000 of that to pay for benefits, reducing the profit to $99,990,0000,000 is not unreasonable for society, and we, the people, who by proxy of government grant the corporate personhood, to demand.
But, I think that demand must be for a change in ethics, of which law is the ghost. Law only has descriptive power and law will follow the ethical revolution, not the reverse.
i agree that the ben & jerry's lawsuit was a travesty. investor knew what they were buying and supporting. there were clearly issues there in that decision. you raise some very good points. as for the liability shield, i also agree that people should be held directly accountble for their actions. some reforms, like SOX, have sought to do this. but this can be done much better. people should be held directly accountable if they are unethical and commit fraud or other questionable actions. well said, yaakov.
Maximum return for shareholders = corporations' only aim is actually built into the laws. It could be changed. There are model laws like "benefit corporation" laws for incorporation that require a broader, more constructive focus.
Change the ethics, yes, but we need to change the laws that define what a corporation is and what it must do.
First, to be clear, I am discussing publicly traded corporations, and as I pointed out, law follows morality. Laws that don't represent the pervasive ethical milieu are ignored either by the prosecutors, the courts, the people or all three. The force of law in preemptive control of behavior is very weak and hinges on precisely ethics: some people won't do something simply because it is illegal. But, most don't care about that alone. (see: marijuana use).
Corporations, though, take law into account only insofar as violating the law represents financial risk. If an analysis of the cost of violating the law falls out on the side of increased profit, many corporations will simply do it. I personally know of such cases where during discovery such analysis was brazenly passed around on paper. In these cases the analysis was correct. While civil penalties were paid the result of violating the law was a net profit. It was a cost of doing business.
The one thing law can do is to give decent managers a purchase for resisting actions that violate it. They can choose to say the law is a limit. The results for them personally depend on the corporation.
Good points - thanks.
It's time for a change. To prevent greed from governing our lives, politcs and social mindset. Most people can be altruistic. We do care how our actions affect others. Capitalism is not evil, the desire to own more than we need is. Perhaps it's time for Alpitalism (Altruistic Capitalism). When a successful person reaches a point that they realize that they have enough. Maybe it's not necessary to own a $50 million dollar mansion, maybe a $25 million dollar mansion is enough. Maybe it's not necessary to own a $30 million dollar yacht, maybe a do without the gold plated faucet or just have 2 servants instead of 6. Now imagine taking that extra money you just saved and paying for the paving of a road you drive on or covering the costs of maintaining a favorite park you visited as a child. Perhaps, instead of charging $100 for a baseball ticket you could make it $50. Guess what might happen, people would have more money to spend and they would spend it and the successful people would still make it back. Could Alpitalism work? Maybe it's the next social experiment to begin here, the last one was called Democracy.
thanks for the comments moose26. you actually raise an interesting point. i do think there are diminishing returns. a 1 million house is great. a 2 million one, maybe twice as good. but is a 4 million one twice as good as that? doubtful, and even more so as you keep going up. i see people like bill gates giving away most of their fortune, and i see it is at least possible, but we are talking ridiculous wealth there. but i don't think the drive to get ahead and profit is necessarily bad. read my economic post titled "In Defense of Corporations and Profits" to see why I think profits are actually good. but there clearly needs to be oversight and regulation. and I think if there is one thing WE ALL AGREE ON, it's that the government has failed in this role and has been corrupted by the worst people in the system.
Agree! Don't hate the player, hate the game. We all play in this game and since we live in a "democracy" we should be able to change the rules to this game. However, the first and most important thing we must do is set up a better democratic framework and system. THE NUMBER 1 DEMAND SHOULD BE TO PROHIBIT PRIVATE CONTRIBUTIONS TO CANDIDATES AND POLITICAL PARTIES. They should be required to earn public airtime and campaign funds by demonstrating that their platform/ideas reach a certain benchmark of popularity among the public.
amen, brother!
Corporations are disgusting. I'm sorry, but I can't agree with you that corporations aren't evil. By virtue of what they are, they cut out individuality and creativity. They destroy the person in place of the corporate identity.
The very existence of corporations is just destroying our uniquely human capabilities for original thought, free will, good will, our connection to our communities, our connection to any higher purpose we could have. Corporations just have utter neglect for beauty. They value money and little else. It disgusts me.
that actually where i disagree most. if anything the last few years of the economy have taught us is that the creative, the most innovative, the ones with the most ingenuity, are the ones that thrive. corporations that cut out individual creativity fail against those that encourage it. a corporation that encourages the traits that you describe is one that can crush ones that don't. it is quite literally how my company has gotten ahead and gone from 4 employees in 2003 to where we are today.
But the bottom line is still making profit. You're at the top, so you don't necessarily feel the drudgery of having to go to work at the bottom of a corporation. For example, walk into a restaurant like Applebees and feel the atmosphere. Feel the way that the employees act. Feel the way the food tastes.
Then go into an independently owned and operated restaurant (after you've had time to digest, of course) and notice the atmosphere of the restaurant. Notice the way the restaurant feels personal, the way it feels touched by the human heart. Notice the way the employees feel like their part of some grand team--how they feel responsible for the continued existence of the restaurant. Notice how the food tastes REAL, and not manufactured.
When you work as a nameless entity in a corporation, you just don't care that much about the place. You're just another worker. You in your heart start to feel as if you're a slave. You don't bother thinking too hard, you don't bother living out your true human capacities. Corporations, even the best, swindle us of our humanity and personality.
i agree. corporations that push people to feel like nameless entities are inferior. but it doesn't have to be that way. imagine you could build a corporation where people were empowered and didn't feel that way. would you have an advatage over other corporations? hell yeah! that's what most companies strive for. the ones that do it better tend to succeed these days. my company is living proof. we are successful over our competitors precisely as a result of that. and i don't think profits are bad at all. profits mean that someone thought what you were selling them had more value than the price you offered it to them for, so they bought it. read my post "In Defense of Corporations and Profits" for more details on why this works as an overall system.
Can you post me a link to your post? I'm not aware of a search option on this site. Then I'll respond more fully after reading your post.
I don't see this movement as anti corporation, I see it as anti greed, anti fraud. Not all the men/women who run corporations are greedy or commit fraud. We need effective regulations that catch the bad guys.
agree 100%!
I agree your problem is not Corporations or Businesses. Its Government that we have and the Politicians thats the problem. There needs to be a system in place for the people to be able to put the politicians in check. The average guy has no voice in this country due to the electoral college and that should change. We should change how senators and congressman get paid. There should be requirments to be in political office you must have education and experience. When you become a politician you should be paid the average of the wages of your state or district. The perk would be the retirement which would also have a requirment along the terms of how long your in office. That way they would live like the average joe and they would work hard to bring the whole community and state up with them because their pay would be based off of how everyone else is doing.
And when i say strict requirments on pay i mean they can recieve no donations, no contributions, just plain 'ol Salary!
I agree your problem is not Corporations or Businesses. Its Government that we have and the Politicians thats the problem. There needs to be a system in place for the people to be able to put the politicians in check. The average guy has no voice in this country due to the electoral college and that should change. We should change how senators and congressman get paid. There should be requirments to be in political office you must have education and experience. When you become a politician you should be paid the average of the wages of your state or district. The perk would be the retirement which would also have a requirment along the terms of how long your in office. That way they would live like the average joe and they would work hard to bring the whole community and state up with them because their pay would be based off of how everyone else is doing.
And when i say strict requirments on pay i mean they can recieve no donations, no contributions, just plain 'ol Salary!
The 99% should boycott imported goods!!!! Buy Made in America!!!
why? what is american? show me 1 company that isn't an international conglomerate? show me a manufacturer that doesn't source componenets from around the world. resources are dispersed and trade is good. i suspect this stems from the idea that there isn't a level international playing field. that i agree with. we should require fair competition and real free trade, where the same standards in labor, environmental laws, etc. apply. we should push this, and have a real international system of checks and balances and fairness. that i support 100%.
I own a corporation. However, I see how greedy individuals are driving this country into the ground using the corporate mantle. I agree with the posting at the link below. We should "ELIMINATE "PERSONHOOD" LEGAL STATUS FOR CORPORATIONS. The film "The Corporation" has a great section on how corporations won "personhood status". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SuUzmqBewg . Fast-forward to 2:20. It'll blow your mind. The 14th amendment was supposed to give equal rights to African Americans. It said you "can't deprive a person of life, liberty or property without due process of law". Corporation lawyers wanted corporations to have more power so they basically said "corporations are people." Amazingly, between 1890 and 1910 there were 307 cases brought before the court under the 14th amendment. 288 of these brought by corporations and only 19 by African Americans. 600,000 people were killed to get rights for people and then judges applied those rights to capital and property while stripping them from people. It's time to set this straight." http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-demands-please-help-editadd-so-th/
I am also the CEO of a corporation that's been in business over 10 years. I'm one of what recent self-serving politicians are calling "job creators". And I think Occupy Wall Street is the best thing to happen to America since the civil rights movement. And, at your request, here is a list of real demands. Be sure to read the intro.
I am with you on this, brother! i add my voice to yours and call for change.
Getting power into the hands of the people is good for the people, good for community and good for business. As zooms as business owners and shareholders recognize that (and they will eventually), out country will thrive. This whole "we need to suck the last of the blood from the people an give it all to the rich because that will create jobs" is the biggest load of horseshit I've ever heard and we've been listening to that line of bull trickle down malarkey for long enough. Don't you think? And look where it's gotten us.
we all need to demand a fair and level playing field where true innovation is rewarded and where no one gets an advantage because they pay someone off or act unethically. if we all support that, we are all way better off. when someone gets rewarded for unethical behavior and goes unpunished, we all suffer. we must demand that the government do its job in regulating the system, ensuring fair competition, protecting shared resources like the environment, etc. we need to demand real and fair free trade, where no one gets the advatage of tariffs and subsidies, and everyone is held to similar standards in terms of wages, worker health and safety, environmental protections, etc. only then can the system be fair and can we have true capitalism where the best ideas and best corporations and the best people get ahead.
no sane person is saying corporations are evil simply because they are corporations thats like saying white people are evil simply because they are white..if you run a corporation that does no harm to the earth or the population (any part) of earth..right on but .....BUT ......corporations are bound by law to act in the interest of corporate profits..just as lawyers are bound by law to zealously represent even thier most reprehensible clients.....congradulations you do no harm and i a supporter of OWS know there are a lot of sensless idiot ill informed voices..dont be one of them and i will do the same here is a video for you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QrDLwSgg24
Corporations controlling 2 parties are making sure that real energy and environmental policy cannot take root. So large global corporations and MNC's are evil and are responsible for the current global order of inequity and environmental degradation.
agreed. acting outside, above, and around the law is evil. the government not doing their job to regulate the system and protect shared resources is a travesty. those that commit such acts are evil. agreed 100%. but the system itself isn't the problem, the cancer in the system is.
Agreed, but there are some industries where the corporations are evil. The retail industry comes to mind for having senslessly sent so many good paying jobs to China, contributing to the death of our Middle Class.
international trade and specialization is not evil or even unethical. the problem is that we should be demanding true fair trade, which would mean a level playing field-- similar health, safety, environmental laws and enforcement, etc. our government has been failing us in this regard. i will actually reveal something. we have overseas workers. we are the highest paying employer in those places. we give stock and equity to those employees as well, something unheard of in those markets. we require fair treatment, pay well above a living wage, and give those employees the same rights and priviliges as those in other offices. when we recruit in these markets, we have vastly more applicants than we can hire because of this, get the best workers, and have a competitive advantage because of it. our business has grown, and we have hired more and more workers in the US because of it. i suspect other companies will figure this out. i'm not sure why they haven't already, though several other IT comapnies seem to be catching on and starting to do the same.
Tony, If you run your corporation in a fair, above board manner, follow the laws, pay a competitive wage, while offering goods or services at a fair price, no one is gonna have a problem with you. If you had a hand in packaging credit default swaps, and went ahead short-selling them for yourself while unscrupulously peddling them elsewhere as investments, then you should be in prison.
you are mixing the producers (corporations) with the financiers (bankers). what you are saying is anti-banking industry, not anti-corporate. and i agree that there is a corrupt and criminal system at play that needs to be stopped.
That's mostly true (except for AIG). But this is about Wall St. A corporation is not, in and of itself, either a good biz nor a bad biz. No one is against incorporating per se. This is a problem of a swiftly expanding wealth gap due to abuses in the system by a few dozen bad actors. These people brought down not only the US economy, but the entire globe.
I really think it would help if the incorporation laws, that define what a corporation must do, were improved. Right now, the only purpose is shareholder profit. Better laws would include benefit to the community, care for the environment, ethical treatment of employees, etc.
those are very decent ideas, really, but I don't think we need to legislate morality and/or ethics. thats the kind of thing we should be able to vote with our wallet for or against.
criminality, however, thats where we can, and should, get 'em!
yes, insurance companies are a whole other bag, and "mixed" companies like GE that have banking sides and manufacturing sides are also confusing. but i agree 100% that consolidation of wealth and power is a big issue. government oversight, regulation, and prevention of this, as is supposed to be their role, is an even bigger issue. the abusers should be stopped and then they should be punished for their crimes.
yeah, thats why we need to put the regulations back. Gramm-Leach-Bliley must be repealed.
How about one person one share like in many co-ops and credit unions? We should bank with credit unions buy from and work for co-ops when we can, if most people do this the power of the 1% will shrink till it is gone. We should set this as one of our goals.
I appreciate your openness to incite change within the system instead of merely throwing stones from without. Tell us what things work in your corporation than you wish were replicated in other corporations? As an insider, how do you suggest we gain the attention of those who have the power and make the rules? What should our approach be to keep from appearing to be naysayers without a purpose but instead a group of committed people with solutions? Answers to these kinds of questions will go a long way in helping us all to craft a system that lifts all boats.
thanks! i'm actually working on all those things, commenting and participating. there are plenty of solutions to the problems we are faced with. i agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment that the system is corrupt and broken and needs fixing. i will continue commenting on how throughout this forum and in other areas.
This forum is terrific. It is nice to see an educated debate between opposing viewpoints without insults and slander. It shows me that people are much mor informed, educated and intelligent than mainstream media would like to portray. What makes this such a divisive issue is there is no absolute right and wrong. In our nations short history we have come a long way. From the slavers who "discovered" then subsequently invaded (colonized) this continent, followed by genocide of the native civilizations to make room for our own idea of a civilized society.
Now we argue over the "evil capitalists or the "evil socialists. The bottom line is neither "system" is inherently evil, they are both good and necessary. If you want to live in a society, you need socialism. If you want a strong economy, you need capitalism. If the pendulum swings too far either way, society will breakdown.
Our young country has a long way to go. We need to stop whitewashing our history and take responsibility for our past, stop ignoring the warnings of mother nature and take responsibility for our future, and learn from our current mistakes and regulate our greed to bring balance to our society today. Stop lying to ourselves. There is not a single person in this country that has not participated in both capitalism and socialism. We ow it to all we trampled on to get here. Let's start acting like the "greatest" country on earth instead of just saying it.
TonyLanni
"Corporations are NOT evil, let's have some real demands. "
Well they tend to unlimited consumption of resources oppose regulations that would interfere withunlimited profits, pay politicians to remove laws that contain their unlimited growth and devise schemes like oil derivatives to name one, that plunder the economy.
But yes, aside from those points they are not evil.
.
the unlimited consumption of resources isn't really correct. unlimited profits are actually a good thing-- in a profit driven transaction both sides gain (see my post "In Defense of Corporations and Profits" for an explanation. the opposition of regulations is bad and evil, but that's why the government is supposed to act as a check, and the governmnet and corrupt politicians are the real problem there. the schemes and the plundering of the economy is more the bankers, the corporations want a sustainable economy. don't confuse producers with finaciers.
"the unlimited consumption of resources isn't really correct." the unlimited consumption of resources is really correct. Look at the gas and oil industry. Those corporations will happily exhaust or destroy the water supply, the atmosphere, and the eco-system in the pursuit of their profit margin.
unlimited profits are actually a good thing-- in a profit driven transaction both sides gain (see my post "In Defense of Corporations and Profits" for an explanation. Unlimited profits inevitably leads to a concentration of the wealth in the hands of the few or to monopolization. This has been proven time and again in history. It's why we needed the Sherman Anti-Trust law and then the Clayton Anti-trust Act and the Glass-Steagall Act Your proposal is not even acceptable from a theoretical point of view.
"the governmnet and corrupt politicians are the real problem there. the schemes and the plundering of the economy is more the bankers, the corporations want a sustainable economy. don't confuse producers with financiers." So you're saying, I'm going to go ahead and concentrate as much wealth as I can, at everyone expense if I have to, and I will oppose every attempt to limit me. If you fail to stop me then its your fault for whatever reason. This time the reason happens to be because you allowed me to buy you off. So the corporations bear no responsibility at all. That is why we have OWS Tony.
"don't confuse producers with financiers." Tony, let me remind you. The workers you have in your corporation are the producers.
Each of your proposition exposes a fundamental corporate elitist premise.
Their in no elitism here at all. I think you are very off-base in that assessment. Did you read my other post?
ahh I agree that,
They are suppose to act as a check, But can you really be 'corrupt' if you are doing business as usual? Business & Politics as usual seems to be a "you scratch my back, I'll Scratch Yours" ...
I think there lies the root of the problem, Greed, not just in Corporations but Political Greed, corporations influence on Our Government.
yes, greed for power is clearly bad. that i agree with. we need leaders, for sure. but not ones who want to lead for power's sake. greed in the idea of making profits, however, that something i think isn't necessarily bad. read my post "In Defense of Corporations and Profits" to see why I say that. but yes, it can be taken too far, and that is where we all agree.
idk, what's better/worst, a leader who act as a vessel to those he leads, or one that has a vision of his own, damn what the populous want...
Maybe that's why we are a Representative government and not a Democracy...
it's all about balance in the end, the economy, politics, leaders. it's when we lose balance that things get screwed up.
You are correct, a corporation is just a business format. One of the key issues however are corporate abuses, and the corporate structure with hand picked boards having proxies with no control giving CEOs ridiculous pay that and ignoring the small shareholders is just making things worse.
I do not believe corporations are evil or that their profits should be overly taxed but I do believe that MEANINGFUL reform would help our middle class. I don't believe government creates jobs but I believe we the people have been asleep at the wheel and not supported our local small businesses and I am a part of the we. Only small business should be helped by the government to get us out of this! Here's my story: Fixing my resume, and hoping beyond hope I can get myself out of this bad choice. Wal-mart with all their profits are cheating their employees! They started a Quit Tobacco program last year and got a huge list of all the tobacco users. This year tobacco users are facing incredible rate increases. If employees with high BMI numbers were offered such a program and then the next year when a list was compiled, their insurance climbed like ours, there would be outrage across the country. Can they legally do this program, get names, and then raise life, health, and critical care rates for those employees? Can those employees afford a lawyer? Can those employees find other jobs in this market? If they offer diet help, gym discounts, and programs for obese people, DO NOT SIGN UP! To keep my insurance which was $145 last year it will be $717 with an even higher deductible. Oh yeah, I have been to the Dr. once in three years and have used less than $100 in health care. Of course, I am struggling to quit but this is another corporation that under pays its employees and then does this. Yes, I am sure that smokers probably do cost more to insure. I am positive that overweight employees cost even more. Also, positive that this would be out in the media, press, on signs, and everywhere if it was the overweight being targeted. There is no protections for us. Do I dare say that Wal-mart is ripe for a union. Union talk can be a job ender for a Wal-mart employee you know! Sam is greatly missed. Last year they ended our profit sharing and this year, they are getting their salaries covered on the back of our benefits coverages. What does next year bring?
Or real energy and environmental policy.
I don't understand why this could be have been included in the jobs bill
Get money out of politics.
Reinstate Glass Steagall.
End the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.
These seem to be the things we all agree on!
Buddha says Wants is the root of all suffering... hence GREED, endlessly wanting... is horrible, and perhaps the single reason we are heading towards disaster.
please read my post "In Defense of Corporations and Profits" to understand why this notion is incorrect. Buddha was talking about a slightly different concept. He was talking about transcendance from suffering and a higher form of human being.
get a clue, its about the ability of corporations to buy access to our elected representatives that is evil.....that is what is being protested... how can anybody so obtuse get to the position of running a corporation is what is scary.
see kookla, that's the problem with the movement. people like you who attack and insult allies for no reason. this post was put up to challenge the more radical elements who are anti-corporation in general. don't think they exist? read the forums! ending political corruption and the current pay to play system is something we all support and seems to be a unifying principle. i don't think there is anything obtuse about challenging the views of the more leftist radicals within the movement.
16th october 2011 Bank Bosses Day Surprize! We are here to declare the 16th of october as a starting day of " FILL THE SOCKS" - coordinate action taken by a people in order to give the lesson to the banking sector. we shall never be used by the ruling system as a shield to protect their wealth again! therefore since the october 16th 2011 people who are fighting for our freedom begin to withdraw the money from theirs banking deposits and convert them from virtual to the fresh printed dollar bills. the action starts immediately and last until the simple people will gain back their rights. all people who are unhappy with the status quo of corporatocracy are well welcome! this is the first announcement . help us spread the news - media somehow try not to see the occupy wall street properly - this action will open their eyes - just the risk of banking runs creates attention, and the need to coordinate policy with us - working class - 99% of the society. soon you will hear about the project everywhere. and you can create and add to it by yourself feel free to share this post with your friends, feel free to modify it and post it everywhere. this is people for people project.
It is also important to distinguish and separate the small local businesses from the huge international conglomerates. Big Corporations (wall street traded) are imperialist organizations whose only alliegence is wealth and money. Once they suck one economy dry they will just move on to another. To give them all they ask with the faith that our money and wealth will trickle down and they will be our saviors by creating jobs for our benefit... Wishful thinking. Sorry, nothing personal. It's just business.
see, this actually isn't true at all. it's part of the misconception of how profits and corporations work. yes, there are clearly problems with too much power and control. but this is the governmnets job to regulate it. corporations are not the problem, and profits are actually a very good thing. see my post "In Defense of Corporations and Profits".
Ok, I am trying very hard not to get rude or sarcastic here. Thank you for stating the obvious. It's the governments job to regulate... REALLY? The government is also supposed to be for the people. BUT, wall street has methodically corrupted every body of our government with boatloads of cash like a cancer. We don't stand a chance of saving our government until we elliminate the cancer. For over 30 years this cancer has slowly ravished our governing body, successfully repealing all regulations and manipulating policy to benefit their profit margins at the expense of American citizens and out economy. So thank you for your brilliant insight. You are absolutely correct, it is the governments job to regulate but that won't happen as long as wall street is occupying capital hill. That is why we have to occupy wall street.
thank you! finally someone said it well!!! i agree 100%. my issue is that people in the movement confuse the issues, and are anti-capitalism, anti-corporation, anti everything in the system, and that is why I added this voice. I am anti-cancer as much as anyone. The system is corrupt. It's not just wall street. All our politicians are for sale. But the interests that have been pushing for deregulation for the last 30+ years are agreeably a great place to start to fix the issues. behind you all the way!
They might not be evil, but they certainly act evil in many ways.
wtf corps are not evil, the influence they have on politics is.
exactly my point! thanks.
I had a Petition，Let taxpayers choose where their money will go, by setting accounts for different goverment departments. http://www.petitiononline.com/FengGao/petition.html
Wealth is not evil. The corruption of wealth is evil. We are not opposed to people earning wealth, AS LONG AS, it doesn't jeapordize our nation or community.
No you are right Tony, corporations are not evil in themselves. To make it short, there are no reponsible profiteering in these international corporations. It has been replaced with maximum profit, profiteering. This Quest for maximum profits comes at the expense of everyone else though. It also creates an end game economy where there are only a few winners in the end and everyone else is knocked out of the game. The trick is to balance it out so it can stand on its own. You can do that some with regulation and law and with a progressive tax. But an end game economy only serves a very few in the end.
that is the view that is wrong. profits are not bad! See my post "In Defense of Corporations and Profits." It explains why. The trick is actually having a responsible governmnet that serves as a check and balance, regulates the free market and protects shared resources, etc.
Well, we know they are not evil, but we also know that there is something inherently wrong with their motto, profit above all, forgetting all else but self. This is not sustainable.
but yes it is. Profit isn't what you think it is. It is a good thing. ask yourself if progress can be infinite. If you answer yes, then so too can growth. And profit is a measure of benefit to BOTH sides, not one over the other. See my post "In Defense of Corporations and Profits" and let's discuss this further after you read that.
Let's begin...
I am taking you at your word My Friend...Male or Female or Transgender!
I like what you type!
You intrege me.
I am college educated. Raised by an English/History Major Liberal Mother. Valedictorian of her college UG class. Registered Repuke. Repuke because I am a self proclaimed Lincoln Republican! This putrid party does NOT represent me anymore!
List the things you have taken from your supposed 1000 employees in the last 3 years. Health Care, Vacation, personal days, et fkn cetera. NOW jimmy john... list the things in productivity you have fkn demanded of those same employees!!! Duh! Losing!
List the sacrifices YOU YOURSELF have made in the last three years.
Then I will be HAPPY to continue.
With all unknown due respect,
Alleric
we pay the majority of healthcare costs of our employees. it costs the company a fortune. i am on the same plan and under the same policies as all of them, vacation, etc. I din't take vacation and worked 80+ hour weeks for many years. This year is the first time I've taken any real time off, because I was getting burnt out. I push my people to use vacation and maintain good work-life balance. i'm not sure what you are asking here. i still work longer hours and worry more than most of my employees. it should be that way, because the decisions i make effect their lives. if they make a mistake, it costs some money and they have a minor setback. if i make a mistake, all their lives could be effected. responsibility has its own costs.
Certainly, there are ethical people in some corporations. I don't think anybody would try to deny that. I know lots of people who work for corporations. I'm a freelancer, and I do a lot of work for corporations. I like working for many of the corporations for which I work.
The problem isn't the existence of corporations, but that a small handful of super rich people AND corporations have seized control of our government, and push to dismantle labor laws, environmental protections, just tax laws, to boost their already insane profits, while destroying our environment, exploiting labor (who must struggle to keep a roof and food), etc. The problem is also our entire civilization being strung out on an economic model that demands constant growth, that is only fueled by rampant consumerism, environmental destruction, and the holy bottom line. It's unsustainable. We can't keep driving the cost of products down, endlessly producing new stuff, and expect there to be anybody to buy the products. We're destroying the environment and driving labor into poverty. Let me repeat: It's unsustainable.
you had me up to constant growth. this concept is a misconception. ask yourself this, can there be such a thing as constant progress? if you answer yes, then growth can also be constant. see my post "In Defense of Corporations and Profits" and it may make this concept clearer.
Growth, per se, isn't the problem, but that this "growth" is only fueled by continuous purchasing of more stuff we don't need, while destroying the environment to produce that stuff and exploiting third-world labor, etc. is what is unsustainable. Growth based on technological advance, sure, but it must be made just and sustainable, environmentally, economically, and socially. It must respect our environment and human rights
For me, the problem is not corporations, but regulations. We live in a society which works only because of its laws, it's only when these laws are taken away from us, do we repeat history, as when Congress threw out Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 in 1999, we are feeling the long-term affects now: after all it work great till 1999, seems to me it all started then, with one of its architects Phil Gramm: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKQOxr2wBZQ&feature=related
Why we need Glass-Steagall to be reinstated:
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/071603.asp#axzz1aPEc3wXj http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/09/19/shattering-the-glass-steagall-act/
by Chana Cox
In Tuesday night’s Dartmouth debate, the Republican candidates were generally agreed on the need to repeal Dodd-Frank. That is all well and good, but banking does need regulation. For 70 years a cluster of New Deal laws, the Glass-Steagall laws, successfully prevented American banks from becoming “too big to fail.” Dodd-Frank should be repealed, and an updated Glass-Steagall should replace it.
In 1933, the Glass-Steagall Act introduced the FDIC which insured bank depositors for up to $10,000 in loss because such insurance was seen to be essential to the maintenance of the banking system. Once the taxpayers were on the hook for bank losses, Glass-Steagall severely restricted the risk to those taxpayers by restricting the scope of banks. The act separated commercial banking, the relatively low risk business of taking deposits and lending money from investment banking, the very high risk business of issuing securities and taking capital positions in businesses and in all manner of other investments. Commercial banks were insured by the federal government, but they were to be stiffly regulated and limited in geographic scope. No American bank would be allowed to do business in more than three states.
In contrast, investments banks were not restricted geographically and they were less regulated but they could not take deposits and their operations were not guaranteed or insured by the Federal Government. Taken together, these Depression-era statutes limited tax payer exposure and risk and limited the size of any one commercial bank. High risk investment banking could and did continue, but it was not federally insured. Furthermore investment banks were often formed as partnerships and the individual partners were personally liable for the firm’s debts.
The 1999 repeal of Glass-Steagall was a disastrous game changer. Commercial banks were allowed and even encouraged to engage in high risk activities – particularly those supported by the politicians in power. The politicians used banks to advance their specific agendas, and the banks used the politicians to insure them against failure. At the same time, as the commercial banks became larger and larger, they became less and less effective as traditional lending institutions. In Oregon, we were better served by First Interstate than we are now being served by its successor Wells Fargo; we were better served by Washington Mutual than we are now being served by Chase; and Bank of America was a strong West Coast bank but it has become a very weak national bank.
After 1999 these newer, larger, freer commercial banks were finding it very profitable to take increasingly risky positions in other markets, like mortgage-backed securities and credit default positions. Under Glass-Steagall such investments would have been illegal for a commercial bank. Instead, commercial banks would have been lending money to local citizens and businesses. They would have been serving their communities as bankers. These riskier investments should be illegal for banks not because they are risky but because it is the taxpayers who are at risk. Our bankers are playing roulette with taxpayer money. If individual bankers win, they are rewarded with multi-million dollar bonuses that get paid out every year; if they lose, the taxpayers foot the bill. Mere months before the repeal of Glass-Steagall, Goldman Sacks, the quintessential investment bank, went public as a corporation and ceased to be a partnership. The partners were no longer liable for the debt – the corporation was. No one was personally liable. Goldman Sacks has now taken the further step and legally turned itself into a bank. Now, even the corporation is not liable – the Federal government and its taxpayers are Goldman Sacks debt. That has proven very expensive for the taxpayers.
In the 1990’s one argument offered for the repeal of Glass-Steagall was that America’s banking system, with its restricted local banks, was inferior to the far more powerful and monopolistic European banks. The banking industry preferred the European model. Ten years ago Deutsche Bank, through its own share position, was in control of much of the German economy. The European banks were far more powerful than the American banks and American bankers wanted that kind of power. In retrospect, we have come to understand that the major European banks have contributed greatly to the current European financial breakdown.
The Glass-Steagall laws successfully regulated the American banking systems. In crisis situations, like the savings and loan crises of the 1980s, the government could step in and save depositors. The problems were manageable. Once banks were allowed to go national and to go into virtually any and all investments, the problems became unmanageable and the moral hazard for both the bankers and co-dependent politicians became catastrophic. Banks were too big to fail and too unregulated to save. Dodd-Frank merely exacerbates those problems.
Bring back Glass-Steagall.
Corporations are not people either.
With only 1000+ employees... I'm sure you don't give $Millions to your favorite political candidates or send Lobbyists to Washington D.C. to influence the Politicians on your behalf. Or, do you?
no. and you hit on the heart of the problem! it's the governmnet and political system that is the problem here, and their f
Here's my final thought on what has to be done. We need more Presidents like you!
It's Time for a Million People March on Washington, D.C. to Reform Wall Street--Time to take back our Country from their Influence over OUR lawmakers! Here's how easily we do it, a focused good start: Take away their powers once again.
"We are here Congress because we want to REINSTATE the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/071603.asp#axzz1aPEc3wX which saved our country from the Great Depression by preventing banks and insurance companies from merging and becoming large brokerage firms; instead of Banks and Insurance companies--can't we learn a history lesson here Congress? Btw, why did most of you vote for its repeal in 1999? http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/09/19/shattering-the-glass-steagall-act/
And also we want you to CHANGE the Commodities Future Modernization Act of 2000 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000 BACK to where it was before 2000, which since has deregulated energy markets and has allowed such scams as The Enron Loophole; whereas in the early 2000's Enron Corp. was charging 400 bucks plus for a kilowatt hour...They all when to jail for this. But, the Enron loophole is still not CLOSED, for example, allowing speculators to resell barrels of oil over and over again before it reaches the gas station owner. It's basically, legal gambling at our expense. What were those lawmakers thinking then? What are you thinking now? Either do the right thing, or you're part of 1%."
Reasons:
Why are oil prices high? The Enron Loophole
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbdtTGYQBMU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNp0y0SjOkY&feature=related
Rolling Stones Reporter: Truth about Goldman Sachs--how they have cornered the markets--basically, The Enron Loophole and the Repeal of Glass-Steagall Act in 1999. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waL5UxScgUw
Yeah they are not evil, it's the people behind them which runs them that CAN become evil especially when greed takes over. The best way is a new foolproof economic system that cannot be abused and exploited at the expense of the public. We should set up businesses not as corporation but cooperative. A cooperative system is the best way because it is owned by the people.
cooperating to do what? this is actually what a corporation is. it is literally owned by the people, and is no different than a large coop in any real way. the problem is really that the government is supposed to regulate the system, and has failed in this capacity and allowed consolidation of power that hurts the overall system.
Nah, corporation owned by the people? I don't think so. Well perhaps you are right CORPORATIONS are really owned by a FEW PEOPLE. You just forgot to mention the word few.
Its not that the super rich people need a fair share of income taxed, they already are taxed much more heavily. The problem is that the very rich people have no taxable income. Bill Gates makes thousands of dollars because of his investments and profit he earns. If one wants to fairly tax the super rich, we need to tax their wealth, not their income.
Secondly, both our political parties are corrupt and the only way to have a fair election is to have at least three viable parties. Otherwise we will forever be voting for "the lesser of two evils."
Third, capitalism cannot end, it is the breeding force of competition and innovation. If we look at several European countries and Canada as a model, we can see that a good mixture of capitalist and socialist ideals can build a stable, competitive, strong system.
i agree with all your points except the opening. i can explain why the super rich aren't taxed fairly on income. when looking at income tax alone, it appears they are. by the latest 2008 IRS data, it says they got 20% of all income and paid 21% of all taxes. the problem is that only takes into account income tax. adding social security, payroll tax, and all the other forms of income tax, the numbers look quite different. all those tax generally only apply to income up to about 110k. So the middle class pays this tax on all or most of their income. Someone makingm say 330k a year only pays this tax on the first 1/3 of their income. the net result is an unfair tax ssyetm.
Corporation were never intended to have the rights of a natural citizen. Your corp may not meddle in the affairs of our system of self rule but thousands do. We want to limit these rights that crop have gained in very questionable ways through the courts. Corp money is subverting the will of he people. I don't want them destroyed at all just reasonably limited so that the people return to the controls of this great nation
I inquired about TonniLannis opinon of having his corporation lose its right to free speech and equal protection of law near the bottom of this page. No response.
Methinks as soon as incorporation occurs, the lawyers transfer their mentality to the corporations. It's first about evading liability and having power to push poor people around, then its about being able to lie, while having so much power, there will never be any accountability for it with equal protection of law.
I say take their rights, we will never stop them from neglect, malfeasance and non feasance as long they have ways to get away with it. Many truely bad corporations will just dissolve. If any that we really need do that, well, they'll get remade much bettter. Good corporations will have stock holders who are willing to see less profit because they know they provide a real valuable service and have job security even though profits might get cut in half.
There is no reason profits would be cut in half unless they on the gov manipulation nipple.
Logically, but I feel corps cut corners because they perceive they can use equal protection of law to limit liability. Insurance will change, a division of legal accountability will probably be added to most larger corps, in addition to the legal departments perhaps growing until operations have well known costs with new levels of accountability. Like I said, some corps will not be able to operate at all, they won't be able to afford adequate measures in all those areas. Not possible, too much liability.
What? Millions operate every day holding full liability. If a corp can't be responsible for their actions they should not exist. Provide a service or produce something just like the rest of us have to or be gone and good riddance.
I agree, too much power to effect too many too greatly.
What is not seen is the courts help them to get rid of liability by increasing the amount of litigation in pretrial, then unjustly ajudicating at trial. The corp onlu has to pay attorneys. The large awards story/problem/cost was created by referring to token decisions, although some are made examples to reduce the amount of collusive support provided and show hard limits to the indulgence allowed.
Accordingly, corps and courts are a problem together in the current environment of un constitutional government. A tragic example is NAFTA and GATT. People don't realize it but all of the attorneys, the courts, the corporations, even individuals are taking part in a massive mental dissociation relating to the constitution and environemental destruction. Those treaties are treason, they usurp US law in US territory.
Americans are trading their precious environment, atmosphere and water along with their rights and freedoms, eventually the constitution too, for short term comfort and security sheparded by corporations. Now, as some aware enough, even those in denial are realizing that government is sabotaging the comfortable fanatasy based in false economy they made us accustomed to, is being torn apart right in front of us.
Just like 9-11, the public is afraid of the truth of how the secrecy is created and maintained. Damm, I love a good rant!
That's a good rant:)
I don't think people are looking for handouts. They're looking for a little reimbursement for putting YOU "the corporations" where you are. Where do corporations get their money from? Not from outerspace, from people, from Americans. We are giving you our money and you squander it on diamond studded pens, gold sinks, and overpriced garbage that benefits nobody. We are giving you OUR money in the assumption that you will pay us back for our generosity. We made Donald Trump, we made Kim Kardashian, we made Derek Jeter, we made Alex Baldwin, we made Anderson Cooper, and every other millionaire out there....without US you are nothing. Without OUR money you have NO money. So how about reinvesting in US, the people that put you where you are. We don't want handouts, we want investments that put us to work building a better country.
I don't think people are looking for handouts. They're looking for a little reimbursement for putting YOU "the corporations" where you are. Where do corporations get their money from? Not from outerspace, from people, from Americans. We are giving you our money and you squander it on diamond studded pens, gold sinks, and overpriced garbage that benefits nobody. We are giving you OUR money in the assumption that you will pay us back for our generosity. We made Donald Trump, we made Kim Kardashian, we made Derek Jeter, we made Alex Baldwin, we made Anderson Cooper, and every other millionaire out there....without US you are nothing. Without OUR money you have NO money. So how about reinvesting in US, the people that put you where you are. We don't want handouts, we want investments that put us to work building a better country.
I don't think people are looking for handouts. They're looking for a little reimbursement for putting YOU "the corporations" where you are. Where do corporations get their money from? Not from outerspace, from people, from Americans. We are giving you our money and you squander it on diamond studded pens, gold sinks, and overpriced garbage that benefits nobody. We are giving you OUR money in the assumption that you will pay us back for our generosity. We made Donald Trump, we made Kim Kardashian, we made Derek Jeter, we made Alex Baldwin, we made Anderson Cooper, and every other millionaire out there....without US you are nothing. Without OUR money you have NO money. So how about reinvesting in US, the people that put you where you are. We don't want handouts, we want investments that put us to work building a better country.
actually, no, that's not how the system works at all. you give money to corporations because you buy something they sell. you buy it because you think it has more value than the price it is offered at. this notion that one gives and one loses in the transaction is wrong. yes, there is corruption in the system that needs to be addressed. but your target and your view of economics is wrong.
Well, you have a valid point for sure. One problem is that our leaders have let this problem fester far too long, and what you get is a backlash that going to take out a lot of current practices, rightly or wrongly.
And you are right that corporations aren't evil, anymore than they are good. However, corporate lobbyist who change laws in order to benefit shareholders at the expense of community could be called something other than benevolent, such as getting laws passed that identify corporations as having the same rights as a human being--that is, corporate personhood.
What do you think people are going to do, especially when a highly qualified and educated populace has low wage, boring, and dead-end jobs to look forward to, such as stacking books or pouring coffee for Barnes and Noble or Starbucks? (I'm not downing B&N's or Starbucks either as they seem to be fair companies.)
My question to you is this: Since you own a corporation and you have demonstrated a real concern for fairness and progress for all people, and an ability to pose a valid question, why not come up with your own answers and make a corporate stand. After all, you are the one with real power to make real changes, not us. We only have numbers and our only leverage is to stop working for an unfair system--which brings everyone down, even the wealthy and powerful. Yes, it's a kludge to change, but what do you want us to do?
If people like yourself cannot come up with real solutions--then prepare yourself for real revolution, such as that described by Camus' in The Rebel. That's just the way civilizations work: thesis, antithesis, synthesis--(Hegel: The Master and the Slave). At some point, the repressed masses will toss away their masters, and become their own.
And to answer your question, some of us are smart enough to reconfigure and reset social and economic systems in a positive light. We're simply waiting for the masses to push the effort because It's impossible to march in a parade if the masses don't support you.
it's the "you" and "us" mentatlity i disagree with completely. I am one of you. i support what you are saying. i am proposing real ideas and real solutions as part of the movement. i stand with you, ready to push for positive change. don't push me aside because i am a businessman. this isn't about us versus them. this is about fixing the system and standing up for our beliefs and way of life.
Put an end to the infinite growth paradigm!!!!
can there be infinite progress? think about that question for a minute, and if you say yes, then you too believe in infinite growth.
Funny how corporations want the legal status of person-hood, but deny the moral responsibilities of person-hood. "We're people enough to have our campaign contributions counted as free speech, but not people enough to be held accountable morally for our actions."
Corporations are not all evil, but many are. And, those that are have bought politicians to structure the system in way that makes it very hard for other corporations to not commit evil, in order to be competitive. Wells Fargo and Bank of America charge ATM card fees that hurt the 99% so they charge lower interest rates for the wealthy 1%. Other banks must follow or lose competitiveness. And, everyone says that it's just business, so it's ok. Well, OWS is just democracy.
Corporations don't need to be done away with. But they are creations of the state and need to be subject to rules of the state. Today it is the other way around.
I think you are making assumptions. We do not want to end corporations only bring them under control. The political system needs cleaned up first. Then we need to bring corporations under control, yes by control i mean regulated, properly, by the govt, who works for the people.
An example of why corporations need to be under regulations is:
I like seafood. I cannot each as much seafood as i want because of mercury content. So i have to limit my amount as does everyone else. So because some *hat corporation wanted to make a few extra bucks per unit it hurt consumers, the environment, and businesses in the seafood industry. This is an example of the sort of thing we want to stop.
We want to stop the exploitation of people, the environment, and other businesses for corporate greed.
If you do not exploit any of these, most us of will not have a problem with you. But stepping on others so you can get a head is not the way to do business. Ruining the environment so you can afford your own private jet is not the way to do business, and running all the other businesses out of town with shady strongarm tactics so you have no competition is not the way to do business.
These practices will be stopped.
these are the exact causes and messages i am trying to push as well. we are on the same page here, and agree 100%. thanks for the comments.
The first four words of this statement are a lie. Corporations, by enabling business owners to be unaccountable for their actions, are at the root of what's wrong in the world. Re-instate Glasss Steagall.
i support accountability 100%. it is needed for capitalism to work. so is real and non-corrupt independent government oversight, which is also missing from the system right now.
OK everyone, need to run for now, so I won't be commenting. But if you followed this thread and liked what I had to say, consider Liking this page on facebook: http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Tony-Lanni-for-President/121705151270841
Basically, I feel we need to demand Congress to reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, which was the solution that ended the wide-spread corruption on Wall Street during the Great Depression by preventing banks and insurance companies from being one, which I feel is the root issue of how we got here. Please read this:
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/071603.asp#axzz1aPEc3wXj http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/09/19/shattering-the-glass-steagall-act/
great thought, real idea, and I like it! i think you are getting to the root of the problem here, and that's the message i am trying to spread. thanks, Howtodoit!!!
Thanks! Maybe this may help to, my post and letter to Congress:
Time for a Million People March on The Hill
"We are here Congress because we want to bring BACK the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/071603.asp#axzz1aPEc3wX which saved our country from the Great Depression, and also CHANGE the Commodities Future Modernization Act of 2000 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000 which deregulated energy markets and allowed such scams as The Enron Loophole; whereas in the early 2000's Enron Corp. was charging 400 bucks plus for a kilowatt hour...They all when to jail for this. But, the Enron loophole is still not closed, allowing speculators, for example, to resell barrels of oil over and over again before it reaches the gas station owner. It's basically, legal gambling at our expense. What were those lawmakers thinking then?
My letter to Congress:
This financial reform movement has been a dream of mine since 2008, after hearing the Congressional Hearing on Energy Reform and on how Financial Deregulations hurts the hard working Americans, and turns undeserved brokers/executives into overnight Millionaires!
So I feel (and many others) that only way we can get back on safe financial footing again is to close the Enron Loophole, created for energy/oil speculators, and bring back The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, which prevented the current banking and insurance loopholes/scams. After all, it worked great until late 90's, until when Congress threw it out. Since then, like prior to 1933, we are experiencing what our country went though then, total Wall Street Greed with no Penalties, its all legal Gambling now...thanks to the architects of our new system in 1999, President Clinton and Rep Senator Phil Gramm. Think about where we are now, it all started in 1999 with the subprime loans Gramm was preaching on Senate floor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKQOxr2wBZQ&feature=related
And for the Free Trade Movement, bringing back the Glass-Steagall Act will not hurt our financial markets or hinder Free Trade, as the GOP rhetoric claims, instead with this back in PLACE bankers can still make millions a day, but not the trillions as they do now on the accounts of hard working Americans.
Bankers need more regulation, not less. Don't let the Bankers new Game to charge for debit cards as the results of the Dodd/Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act surprise you. Right after it passed, we have the banking lobby on national TV saying that "we" will pay for it, after we bailed them out, What nerve! So this is their response to having it their way since 1999: We have have to find a way to give out Executives their way out of line bonuses: Bingo, charge for debit cards! This is the banks throwing their influence over our Elected officials, that are suppose to work for us, after all we voted for them to do the right thing, which doesn't include the banking lobbyist agenda....
Let's get focused and bring back Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, they got it right 1933, we don't need to reinvent the wheel because bringing this Act back will create an even playing field once again....and let's finally Close the Enron Loophole, which allowed Enron to charge what they wanted for energy; they went to jail for this; but no one closed the loophole, why? Re-election Monies from the banks and oil companies! The writing is on the wall.
Why we need Glass-Steagall to be reinstated:
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/071603.asp#axzz1aPEc3wXj http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/09/19/shattering-the-glass-steagall-act/
Why are oil prices high?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbdtTGYQBMU&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNp0y0SjOkY&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-kExdTgNZA&feature=channel
Rolling Stones Reporter: Truth about Goldman Sachs--they have cornered the markets, why? Enron Loophole and repeal of Glass-Steagall Act in 1999. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waL5UxScgUw
The starting line should be the American people (not corporations) demand of the prsident to direct DOJ to open the investigations. It is Presidents Obama's Executive Orders that will set aside the politics, give citizens some respect, put criminals that crashed our economy in jail as 99% citizens have been. Companies will start spending money and the loans to small business will start to flow, wallstreet will try to act as good citizens, and the republicans will see President O'Bama play a thumping game of hardball. Demand DOJ INVESTIGATION! The rest of the goals are needed as well such as to big to fail and bye, bye Chase (can we ad Mobile to the Chase list?). Yeah Americans, we deserve to be treated better by government and business.
My two cents for what it's worth. We need more corporations/business's/jobs. The way to get there is through regulation of the necessary evil "capitalism". It should not be profitable to outsource jobs overseas. It should not contaminate the air we breath, the food we eat and the water we drink. Fundamental and basic. Capitalism means "it's all about me", socialism means "it's all about us". Both needed working together hand in hand for a civilization to succeed. It is a absolute fact that we are all capitalists, (have you ever borrowed or loaned money?) and we are all socialist, (have you ever needed the police, fire dept., schools, courts, highways, bridges, or used electricity?)... The problem as I see it is that unless you can afford to buy a politician, and that's approximately 99% of us, then you are not being represented. So what's a solution? Maybe we the people need the final say before any bill becomes a law. Who in this country would be against democracy?
"ending corporations is dumb. they are legally defined as people so they can enter into contracts, have laws and regulations enforced against them, etc." Corporations are defined as entities, not as people or as citizens, and became separate legal entities so that the "people" behind them could avoid being punished (limited liability) for the same things that they would go to jail for without the special designation. The fact that they can have a few of the duties of citizenry (paying taxes when absolutely necessary) does not confer on corporations the rights of citizenry. A state referendum allowing political donations only by registered voters would take the corporate money out and get us a little closer to democracy.
True, there is nothing inherently evil about corporations. It is a socially recognized and accepted structure of collusive behavior for shared ends.------
By the same reasoning capitalism is not evil. It is a method of inspiring and empowering people to excel.-------
Niether justifies deception, manipulation and exploitation populations.------
BTW, please let me thank you for posting the truth of where you are coming from, etc.----- All the problems you mention are real and vital and need to be solved. Unity upon definably functional methods comprehensive to the specific situation is critical to solution. When you mention rules, logically it can be said you ultimately and ideally refer to the US constitution as it reads. Meaning corporations are using individual rights to trash people. According you are in a position to understand because you are posting here.-------- Cognitive distortions were introduced as legitimate language for communication through 40 years of very deep exploitations by media corporations using semiotics to unconsciously manipulate human being. Americans, suffering the dumbing down from about 1920 onwards, worsening, http://www.realityzone.com/hiddenagenda2.html to the present day, added to the manipulations, are unable to do anything but generalize with a social voice. So that is what you are hearing, a distortion.------
Due to the intense cognitive infiltration's this forum is currently subject to, perhaps up to 60% of its traffic, the real info is diluted, as the nwo intends (yes, it is real.) Add to that the effect of the dumbing down and the possibility to describe to you how it is organized and works is not yet likely, and not needed really.---------
However, to get past the obvious issues the movement might bring up, and have with a corporate owner, let me ask how you feel about your corporation losing its right to free speech? How about equal protection of law?
Each member would have those rights, but the corporation would not and actions of it become those of the individuals. Corporate owners hold liability for corporate actions because they are responsible for their acts as individuals, just as they do now in many cases but mostly limited to corporate officers, that will change.
If I'm correct about you and your intentions, you can accept the above because of one real fact; corporations currently doing good business, do not need to lie mislead or manipulate in their advertising. They also keep such good records and are so aware of the quality of their operations that they always have proof of their innocence readily available. They do not need individual rights and in fact, can enhance the awareness of individuals to logical responsibility just by being an example.
If all that were to result from an Article V convention under the US constitution, would you be happy?
i fully support fair and level playing fields. i hate that some companies have politicians in their pocket and get unfair advantages because of it. i fully support international standards for health and safety, fair wages, environmental protections, etc. this is the only way to have a fair system where the best and most innovatiove can excel, in the true capitalist sense. i am against anyone being rewarded for unethical behavior, because it encourages others to do the same. i stand with you and fully support these efforts.
A corporation is just a label. In practice a marriage is a corporation. A labor union is. This OWS general assembly acts like one too. It's just people agreeing to share the risk and potential rewards of it. But, that doesn't mean they should get special entitlements or access from the government.
How about a system that isn't based on privatizing profits and externalizing costs ("externalizing" them onto the poor, the disenfranchised, the natural world)?
Many of the demands make perfect sense.I would like to not focus on taxes so much in the short term or regulations in the short term. What makes more sense is creating demand through jobs in the short term, then broaching the issue of all these broader things later. But none of this is ridiculous and not everyone sees things the way you do. I see this as the beauty of our democracy.
TITLE 28 > PART VI > CHAPTER 176 > SUBCHAPTER A > § 3002
(15) “United States” means— (A) a Federal corporation; (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or (C) an instrumentality of the United States.
My kind of poster. See this page to realize how that structure was reinforced,
http://algoxy.com/poly/emergency_powers_statutes.html
Corps. are not in of themselves EVIL true. Corporatism / Fascism is evil though. Most Corps. don't buy politicians but major ones do and then they subvert the will of the people by using their elected and appointed shills to do their bidding.
The list:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-demands-please-help-editadd-so-th/
You're angry, too. Everyone's angry and taking the same initial - totally natural, human, and nonetheless erroneous - approach: lashing out. You are correct that some of the anger is misguided.
But we are not working to "end" corporations. At its core, Occupy is working to reclaim government for people. It is a logical misstep to say we should do that by "ending" corporations. But then it is also a logical misstep to say that "some" misguided or confused protesters means the entire movement is misguided or confused.
No more FTAs and repeal our existing FTAs.
Strengthen our corporate prosecutors.
Get money out of politics - no more revolving doors, kickbacks, bailouts, wasteful subsidies (I do NOT mean kill investment), etc.
A corporation is NOT a person.
No more tax breaks for the wealthy. No more loopholes.
I can't agree with end free trade. free trade is to make the system fair and transparent, not the opposite. again, this view comes from a misunderstanding of economics. free trade is good for the worker, not bad. free trade STOPS the government from protecting industries and corporations. are you saying we should enact tarrifs and protect our industries and corporations? that's what saying end free trade means. it is NOT the answer. we need smart free trade. tarrifs and subsidies need to stop. but we also need to demand level playing field. free trade needs to include the same protection of worker's health and safety, the same environmental laws, etc. we need FREE and FAIR TRADE. that's what we should demand.
"but we also need to demand level playing field. free trade needs to include the same protection of worker's health and safety, the same environmental laws, etc."
Then that wouldn't truly be free trade now would it? Also - what about wages? Worker rights? True Free Trade would usher in a Global Race to The Bottom - anything to cut costs and increase efficiency.
And you are somewhat correct. We already DO have (weak) tariffs....while we subsidize oil and pass PRO-MULTINATIONAL laws. The problem comes when other countries use slave labor, do not buy from us while flooding our markets with cheap slave labor crap to destroy US Industries, buy up our money while artificially devaluing their currency (although the REAL issue is cheap labor) AND have higher tariffs against us...therefore breaking their end of the "bargain". Oh and not to mention that other countries subsidize too.
Can a truly free market exist in a world of "Might rules all?" Example - The Gilded Age
http://www.academicamerican.com/recongildedage/topics/gildedage2.html
no, actually i think that true free trade REQUIRES a level playing field, and anything short of that actually isn't free trade. i also don't think it is a race to the bottom at all. efficincy is progress and improves things for all. see my part #2 added to the main post for why i think that's the case. if we exerted our power in the US to demand a fair and equitable system throughout the world, I think we can maybe start to get there, I think that is one of the main goals of this movement, and why I am supporting it.
on my blog
http://blog.richardkentgates.com/
or just the form
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?hl=en_US&formkey=dFlNNHJTRlZwMWs5ZjlhTWN0NlZReHc6MQ#gid=0
Corporations by themselves are no more evil than they are persons.The problem is when they use their monetary brawn to manipulate our politics. Corporations should concentrate on the business they created by themselves. And our politicians should not hinder them or give them undue assistance at the expense of the citizenry or the environment of these United States.
It's corporation's blind greed and meddling with politics to gain unfair advantages which has made them unpopular. They're not about to change. Your employees around the world instead of at home is the problem. You can't just make 2.9 million a year, you HAVE TO HAVE the 3.1 a year or you're not happy.
having workers around the world is bad, i should only operate in 1 country and have workers there? why? what would that accomplish? and blind greed? who is blind? i take ethics and responsibility very seriously. as for meddling in politics, i agree 100%. our political system is corrupt and needs serious reform. as for 2.9 million versus 3.1 million a year, that isn't how it works at all. we plan for what we think we can do every year. people pay for goods because they value them. we hope we are producing value and benefit. if we planned for 2.9 million and we get it, we are very happy. thinking profit in general is bad represents a fundamental misunderstanding of economics.
I have worked for smaller corporations for a long time. And I agree they are not the problem everybody is upset about
The issue I have with smaller corporations is them using “corporate” money as their personal piggy bank. I have seen airplanes, yachts , Hot air balloons, exotics cars, Non employed children’s cars, Renting machinery from one company they own to the other that company to siphon profits back to them, Mexican beach houses, credit cards, for personal use etc.
Much of this is legal, much of it is not, but easily lumped in with the legal.
The bottom line is we pay more taxes because they pay less
amen to that! we need serious tax reform and serious regulations. couldn't agree with you more here!!!
Running personal expenses through a company is never legal. That's why we auditors exist!
That's obvious, but I have been there done that and auditors are pretty easy to fool. And when you get caught all you do is pay the taxes on the few things that got "over looked"
Hey man, no one ever said dishonesty doesn't exist in all facets of life. We have rules in place. If individuals choose to lie and cheat, that's on their conscious. You can never prevent people 100% from breaking the rules. If that's the type of system you're looking for, just stop the search now. It doesn't exist.
This movement is about theft, corruption and collusion with a government that enables and allows it.
It seems you are saying, we need to police it better. My position is that we need to get rid of all the loopholes, and then there is nothing to police
No - I'm a supporter of a smaller government. Start getting rid of things, that's fine with me!
Yeah I really can't handle these protestors using the word "corporation" when they can't define the word "corporation".
Thank you for working hard, adding value to society and proving 1,000+ jobs to our citizens. You are the real hero here.
I am sure if YOU read 'NEW WORLD ORDER' published in 1940..by H.G. Wells and all of the other books that follow under that same name, you would realize that the definition of a Corporation is synonymous with most ideologies of men who believe they have the right to control everything and everyone, since what the books have predicted is exactly what is taking place now...under the guise of CORPORATIONS! No one is being fooled by a name that originated from the Latin
language...
TITLE 28 > PART VI > CHAPTER 176 > SUBCHAPTER A > § 3002
Defines corporations, how they are formed and how we are living under the system of one..as well as many others.
Why do people try to sweep all this under the rug?
You post is hardly; a reply, coherent or pertaining to the subject. Good try, though.
The subject is CORPORATIONS ARE NOT EVIL...let's have some real demands.
The post at the top tells the whole story....THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS A CORPORATION....therefore...its articles of incorporation, rules and regulations and other "legal" ways of doing business ALSO has a system of checks and balances. Unfortunately, this day and age is for being paved for "Corporate" America to sustain itself and have no interference from the little guys..in cooperation with other corporations...see the similarities??. Therefore, what everyone is up against is the manifestation of Corporations...GONE BAD!!!
Thank you.
While I think certain aspects of the corporation need to be reigned in: 1) personhood 2) ability to lobby/buy candidates
I think overall there is nothing WRONG with our current model. What's wrong is our politicians and their non-accountability for spending our tax dollars.
As a 1%er I say that I have no problem paying a higher tax rate --- so long as the government has better programs and is held accountable for spending.
Just as I wouldn't give a drug addict $500 because I don't trust that they'll use it for good ... I don't want to give the government an extra percentage of my income until I can trust it will be used intelligently.
Social programs that don't have incentive to move off, funding of endless wars, funneling of my money to "political friends", riders on bills to help out "friends" ... I could go on, but what's the point.
My demands are simple: 1) Money out of politics - corporate/union/whatever. The government represents the will of the people. Not the will of the largest donor. When 94% of the time the highest earner gets elected -- it becomes obvious it's a pay-for-play game. 2) Fiscal Accountability. There needs to be fiscal reform. Balance both sides of the equation. Don't reduce spending growth ... reduce spending. Kill programs that are not needed. Terminate redundant government agencies/offices. End wars that take money we don't have. Quit borrowing. Quit using the Social Security Escrow as actual money that can be used -- it's a trust!
Corporations are shortsighted, public corporations more so. Legally they're people, but they're more like mindless zombies on an unstoppable search for brains. A lot of that has to do with investors more than management, but it doesn't change the fact a corporation has one sole purpose and that's to make profit.
The market culture we live in where short term profit is greater than EVERYTHING is just steamrolling functional society. You can't invest in people, in labor when everything is based on profit profit PROFIT now now NOW! Grand scheme, the labor market IS the customer base, and poaching from labor costs has left the entire American customer base barren.
As far as fixing that, I don't really know. So, I agree, corporations aren't evil, but they are definitely zombies.
in terms of the "generating profits" argument, you clearly do not understand economics. no one would do anything if they didn't hope to get more out of it then they put in. this is true of everything. we are a being that moves toward progress. i enter into relationships because the emotional benefit is greater than the investment i put in. i buy things because the joy or benefit the thing gives me is greater than its cost. this is all profit. economics is taking an arbitrary value indicator, money, and assigning it to things, so such a system of benefit can be numerical. profits are what makes any system in our society work. you can change the word profit to benefit and say corporations seek to generate benefits, and it would mean the same thing.
I think you actually mean consumer's surplus more than profit, if we're talking economics.
You're missing my point. Corporations have no survival instinct, and the "PROFITS NOW" mentality is self destructive, because it sacrifices long term sustainability for short term gain. It is completely and utterly cannibalistic, unsustainable, and so on.
that's actually not true at all and i disagree 100%. Corporations that focus on short term profit rarely last. i've seen that thinking wipe out many competitors. long term sustainability is the goal of every real corporation that lasts.
That's basically my point, corporations somehow need to have room to breathe and focus long term rather than living and dying by their quarterlies to placate speculative investors looking for a payday.
Instead we get bandit CEO's paid 350x what their workers make to gut worker pay, benefits, relocate to China, India, or lord knows where, so a speculator can get whatever % payout when the stock rises.
i am all for a fair and ethical system and level playing field, and support any reforms that encourage the long term thinking we are talking about. this is actually how the system is supposed to work. the majority of a companies stock value comes not from the short-term profits and losses, but from the projected future ones. if we had a fair system where there were real regulations and independent government oversight, it could work. my big issues are the same as yours. i believe the government has failed in its duties. they aren't protecting the shared resources like the environment, aren't properly regulating the financial sector. they are letting the crooks run the kingdom. we need serious change and reform, and in that regard I stand with you.
I also run a corporation (sub S). My job is to see that the company's limited resources are focused on the areas that will accomplish the best results. OWS needs to think more like a business (oh-my). You have limited resources. You can't do everything at once. You have to use your limited resources to accomplish what you can "actually" accomplish. Don't waste your time and resources chasing what is not practical...nor prudent. Gather your thoughts......rally your troops.....narrow your goals...and go about accomplishing something.
Amen!
Tony Lanni, I agree with you to a point but we need fairness from the corporation. I think its sick when the CEO sends us a letter the day before Thanksgiving indicating that they are taking away 3 or the 5 personal days we get to be more in line with some new company they bought out. Why not give them 3 days and make the employees happy which in turn better performance.? All the whiloe the ceo still raked in 13 million in compensation for a company of less than 1000 employees! We just want fairness since its been one sided for 30 years in this country now. Corps and unions should work together, no outsourcing for cheap Chinese junk.
I hope that you don't believe that the US government can dispense the fairness. Just take a gander at the current system.
Its not that corporations are evil - lets get that straight - its that their goals never change. That goal (singular) is to make as much money as they can without being efficient, fair or law-abiding unless absolutely necessary.
I worked for one of the largest global multinationals (Fortune 50) and I can tell you that they had a take-no -prisoners attitude. Their motto was get it done - no matter how. This is the reason that the environment, people living near plants, regulations, and for that matter even employees were/are ignored unless it affects the main goal - make more money.
Sorry but that's the bottom line - no pun intended. If we trusted corporations to do the "right" thing then there would be no legislation covering their activities - just like private citizens - should we hope criminals will be good if we tell them we trust them?
I agree. We need real regulation, real enforcement. we need a level playing field where the honest and fair can compete. this is what the government is supposed to do, and where they are failing. we need to demand reforms.
they're not failing you're paying them off
who is? me? i hate that some campanies can gain advatage by paying off politicians and regulators. this destroys the whole system. i demand a fair and level playing field where people are rewarded for their innovations. this is true capitalism. we all need to insist on reforms and stand up for these causes. businesses aren't your enemy. corrupt politicians and individuals in businesses are.
Get the money out of politics. Focused on that issue, no party affiliations and no other issues discussed.
New facebook page http://www.facebook.com/pages/Get-Money-Out-of-Politics/170454236375392
REAL IDEAS (NOT DEMANDS, DEMANDS IMPLY FORCE) http://occupywallst.org/forum/ways-to-improve-and-equalize-the-economy
I have yet to see anybody calling for the end of corporations.
Oh and one more thing the fair tax is the most unfair tax ever.
There are some in corporations that engage in activities that are not illegal but do actually end up destroying the lives of innocent consumers. The answer I think is to further restrain the actions of corporations with new laws. Laws that hold them more widely and deeply accountable for their actions and their effect.
couldn't agree more! i believe that people in corporations should be criminally liable for their actions. i believe in real and meaningful regulations and actual enforcement. that is the cause we should be championing!
I do not believe it makes sense for a corporate entity, in and of itself, to be a person. Requiring that a person be a human-being doesn't sound outlandish to me.
An Amendment to the Constitution will be necessary to this end:
"A corporate entity, in and of itself, is not a person and, therefore, is not entitled to the rights and protections afforded to a person as set forth in the Constitution of the United States of America."
again, why are corporations deemed people? what does that mean? they can't vote or do anything like that. they are deemed people so that laws can be applied to them, so they can enter into legal contracts, so they can be regulated. we could have a separate classification for corporations, separate from people, but it would be the exact same system we have today, and that system is the problem. let's reform the system. let's talk real political reform. let's talk regulatory reform and real oversight. let's talk real energy and environmental policy.
Some are.
Puh...Leeze....get your employees to sign a declaration STATING they receive all the benefits afforded your corporation and show how it trickles down to them. How many agree you gave them proper raises and fairness in the work place? How many have affordable health care (paid for by your $$) and how many are protected under your EEO policies and show how you follow these policies. We don't want to hear from you....get your workers to speak up and then you just might have a chance at being an honest HUMAN BEING...
I am a worker at the company. i have done every job here, and still do. you obviously have no idea how economics work. see my post on "generating profits". people get rewarded for their contributions in any system, and no system is perfect. how do you decide who the best protestor is? how do you pick leaders of a movement? the OWS organization, as it gets bigger, is no different than any other organization. you are crazy if you think otherwise.
Me thinks you protesteth too much!! You are contradicting yourself as well: "I run a corporation. A fairly large one (1000+ employees around the world)".
Then you state you are a worker at the company and have done every job there too. So when do you have time to keep your books and records straight flying back and forth and all around the world? You live the corporate ideology where no one gets a chance at the brass ring unless ....HE/SHE DOES IT YOUR WAY... right???
You have absolutely no understanding of how businesses work, do you? Ask a real question and I will answer it. I was employee number 4. It was me doing marketing, 2 developer, and a sales guy. We built a product people like and that gave them real benefits. For that we grew. I logged over 100,000 miles flying around the world last year, yes. Where we had 1 accountant 5 years ago, we have an accounting department today. i value creativity, mine and others. i like when people come up with new ideas, and tend to reward it. we try and reward people for their contributions as best we can and in the fairest way possible. we take ethics very seriously. we have fired people that were making lots of money for us for doing things we weren't comfortable with, and do not stand for that kind of thing. it's pretty much how every business operates. to assume people in corporations are all evil and plotting to make money and cut corners is absolutely wrong.
So...what is your point? No one said all people in all corporations are evil. Perhaps you are one of the more conscientious ones...yet..if you are not a part of that brotherhood, why are you adamant about OW "allegedly" making assumptions?. I believe we are all aware of what has been taking place in the Corporate world..If you did not spit out hedge funds to the masses, or have a part in the wrecking ball of people's lives..and their homes, jobs, food supply, medicines and health care....then you are doing just fine...now aren't you?
corporations do not spit out hedge funds, or any investment vehicles. bankers do. do not confuse producers with financiers. i am adding my voice to OWS to push for positive change and reform, and welcome this movement.
Ha ha, people get rewarded for their contributions my ass. I think you've been an executive too long.
no system is completely fair. take any single organization you have ever been a member of-- sports teams, party planning, whatever. did some people put in more and not get thanked or apprecited enough? i firmly believe salaries, bonuses, etc., of every employee, should be public info. if the system is fair, no manager or executive should have a problem with that.
Sure there are systems that are completely fair. Maybe not ones that have been tried but you could easily do it if you really want. I'm glad you believe that but I see a lot of execs not liking that idea.
there are always unbalances, but yes, there are fairer systems. I am a burner and have spent enough time in black rock city to know other things work pretty efficiently, at least in the short-term. i am all for eliminating corruption and unbalnaced influence in government, too. i firmly believe the government has failed in its role in the capitalist system-- to protect shared resources, to serve as check and balance and ensure fair competition and level playing field, etc.
as for the "generating profits" argument, you clearly do not understand economics. no one would do anything if they didn't hope to get more out of it then they put in. this is true of everything. we are a being that moves toward progress. i enter into relationships because the emotional benefit is greater than the investment i put in. i buy things because the joy or benefit the thing gives me is greater than its cost. this is all profit. economics is taking an arbitrary value indicator, money, and assigning it to things, so such a system of benefit can be numerical. profits are what makes any system in our society work. you can change the word profit to benefit and say corporations seek to generate benefits, and it would mean the same thing.
corporations should be transparent
those that labor for corporations
should be able to openly discuss their wages
and the profits and losses of the business
Matt, couldn't agree more! everyone's wages, bonuses, etc. should be public knowledge. this is the only way to keep a system fair. if you believe you pay people what they deserve for their work, and are fair, you should have no problem with this concept. i first learned it in school when i got my MBA, and continue to believe in this wholeheartedly.
Citizenship has never been conferred on a corporate entity. A corporation can not serve in the military, or give a son or daughter to war. A corporation can not be jailed or executed for committing the same capital offenses that would send a citizen to the executioner. Many corporations don’t pay taxes. In short, the corporation is not a citizen, and therefore should not be granted the voice of a citizen. If the corporation’s unfair financial advantage can influence our representatives to enact legislation that is detrimental to we the people, there is no democracy, and there is no republic.
and how exactly is a corporation given the voice of a citizen? it can't vote. the ones that "don't pay taxes" don't because they don't produce income, but do still need to file tax returns. what does it really mean to have the legal entity of "person" for a corporation? it means they can enter into contracts, have laws and regulations enforced against them, and those kind of things. what effect would ending this have? the influence in politics has to do with a corrupt political system that needs to be reformed. it has nothing to do with a legal classifiction of person. let's reform the political system. i fully support that goal and demand!
Right on, brother.
There are many misguided efforts, and it seems that the OWS movement has become a platform for just about any concern. A movement needs to focus and be very clear on what it seeks to accomplish.
I have spent nearly 4 years researching and educating myself on the law and rules that make up the basis on how business is financed and how the rules affect business and the individuals who own them and work for them.
First let me say that this problem is not liberal or conservative, democrat or republican but it is a common problem we all share. One key point must be stressed we are all affected by the issue at hand.
Now, let’s look at the laws. If you look at the fall of the exchange in 1929, its cause and the reaction by the government you will find most of the problem. In 1929 only ~10% of all businesses were public and the remainder was private. ~2% of the population were involved in trading stocks and most of the individuals we very heavily leveraged (They bought on credit).
Next the market dropped, individuals lost their ability to pay off their margin accounts and wiped out the capital overnight in the banking system, Couple that with the hysteria of the people running on the banks to get there gold out and you have a recipe for disaster.
For most they were not initially affected by the falls of the exchange in 1929 but when banks failed they felt it. Businesses lost credit to operate, accounts were wiped out and small private business failed. No fault of their own but the fault of the overzealous banks. Individuals found there savings wiped out alongside the private businesses and the world plunged into the abyss.
The reaction to this was FDR and the 1933 securities act and the 1934 securities and exchange act. What these two pieces of legislation did was strip the ability of the small private business (who did not cause the market collapse) to raise capital in a traditional form, Bonds. Direct investment was for many years the mainstay of the entrepreneur. It put the restrictions on who could invest (Qualified institutional investor) and how the investments could be sold. It stripped the ability of the individual to invest and make the high returns they became accustomed to and placed all of it into the hands of the very few 1%.
Today if you are a business owner there is a glass ceiling of about $3 million dollars where a business could potentially get debt to expand, retool, or modernize. The Wall Street and Banks prefer an Equity offering. How often do small business owners sell the majority share of the company they own under a public offering or private sale (sale to high net worth’s) to raise the capital they need. The horror stories of this arrangement are very clear. They give up control, get voted out of the company and the new share holders shut them down move the product manufacture to China to maximize the return to the High Net Worth investor (new owner).
The laws perpetuate the problem. Now remove the Glass-Steagall Act and it becomes a high net worth orgy.
Focus, access the laws, and fix the system that perpetuates the behavior.
FIX THE LAWS
1 - Big Business (and Wall Street) controlling our Government by means of excessive Lobbying and Campaign Contributions. While the rich keep getting richer.
2 - No regulation or controls on Wall Street to curb or hinder the excessive greed and corruption that the tax-payers ultimately pay for. While the rich keep getting richer.
3 - Corporate bail-outs, Wall Street bail-outs, Bank bail-outs... with both Congress and the American people left in the dark as to how it was distributed. While the rich keep getting richer.
4 - 16 Million people Unemployed... Poverty and Homelessness on the rise... and we continue to fund useless Wars and dole out $Billions to other countries in Foreign aid. While the rich keep getting richer.
5 - College Students graduating $40K to $100K in debt... with American jobs being outsourced and transferred Overseas. The job market looks more dismal by the day... and yet the rich keep getting richer.
The most important Demand is that Obama leaves.
Exactly, but many more people will come to your side when you are proactive (for “new” Business & Government solutions), instead of reactive (against “old” Business & Government solutions), which is why what we most immediately need is a comprehensive “new” strategy that implements all our various socioeconomic demands at the same time, regardless of party, and although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 10% Management System of Business & Government, there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves; that is, using a Focused Direct Democracy organized according to our current Occupations & Generations. Consequently, I have posted a 1-page Summary of the Strategically Weighted Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:
http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategic_legal_policy_organizational_operational_structures_tactical_investment_procedures
Join
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/
because we need 100,000 “support clicks” at AmericansElect.org to support a Presidential Candidate -- such as any political opportunist you'd like to draft -- in support of the above bank-focused platform.
Most importantly, remember, as cited in the first link above, that as Bank Owner-Voters in your 1 of 48 "new" Business Investment Groups (or "new" Congressional Committees) you become the "new" Congress replacing the "old" Congress according to your current Occupation & Generation, called a Focused Direct Democracy.
Therefore, any Candidate (or Leader) therein, regardless of party, is a straw man, a puppet; it's the STRATEGY – the sequence of steps – that the people organize themselves under, in Military Internet Formation of their Individual Purchasing & Group Investment Power, that's important. Sequence is key.
Why? Because there are Natural Social Laws – in mathematical sequence – that are just like Natural Physical Laws, such as the Law of Gravity. You must follow those Natural Social Laws or the result will be Injustice, War, etc.
The FIRST step in Natural Social Law is to CONTROL the Banks as Bank Owner-Voters. If you do not, you will inevitably be UNJUSTLY EXPLOITED by the Top 10% Management Group of Business & Government who have a Legitimate Profit Motive, just like you, to do so.
Consequently, you have no choice but to become Candidates (or Leaders) yourselves as Bank Owner-Voters according to your current Occupation & Generation.
So please JOIN the 2nd link, so we can make our support clicks at AmericansElect.org when called for by e-mail from the group in the 2nd link, and then you will see and feel how your goals can be accomplished within the strategy of the 1st link as a “new” Candidate (or Leader) of your Occupation & Generation.
no more corporations. we shouldn't have to pay to live on the earth. we can organize our lives according to our needs and desires without money or markets.
??? ok. no corporations - then no ipod, facebook, twitter, mobile phones, etc. Your needs and desires will magically create whatever you need. Hopefully, you're not designated as one of the spokesmen.
stop being simplistic for the sake of trying to make me look bad. mobile phones are based on the unsustainable extraction of rare metals that are obtained by brutal imperialism. if you don't factor this into your sunshine-happy-feel good social justice future then you are deluding yourself.
anon, barter and quit using money. it works. sell the car (if you have one) and ride a bike everywhere.
put pannier bags on it and haul your bartered groceries home. grow your own veggies and trade the excess for fruit. collect rain water and filter it for drinking. show up at garage sales late on the last day and they will give you stuff FREE. keep what you need and barter the excess.
So simply stop buying things. This is not hard to understand. And if you want to live without money and have no further use for it, kindly send it my way. I will put it to good use, I promise!
what is money? what is a market? have you ever gone to burning man? it's not a bad organizational system. one of the best in the world if you ask me. but things still get organized. there is still a system, and an economy of sorts.
exactly. a gift economy is where its at.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy
Ok use your money to send bread, toilet paper, toothpaste, and soap to the protesters. Ideas are a dime a dozen. We need that presence on the ground to affect change.