The Corporations That Occupy Congress

The Corporations That Occupy Congress (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

kalikshama -> The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/13/2012 3:27:35 PM)
[image]http://www.commondreams.org/sites/commondreams.org/files/resize/imce-images/us_taxlobby1211_sc-600x430.jpg[/image] Some of the biggest companies in the United States have been firing workers and in some cases lobbying for rules that depress wages at the very time that jobs are needed, pay is low, and the federal budget suffers from a lack of revenue. Last month Citizens for Tax Justice and an affiliate issued “Corporate Taxpayers and Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10″. It showed that 30 brand-name companies paid a federal income tax rate of minus 6.7 percent on $160 billion of profit from 2008 through 2010 compared to a going corporate tax rate of 35 percent. All but one of those 30 companies reported lobbying expenses in Washington. Another report, by Public Campaign, shows that 29 of those companies spent nearly half a billion dollars over those three years lobbying in Washington for laws and rules that favor their interests. Only Atmos Energy, the 30th company, reported no lobbying. Public Campaign replaced Atmos with Federal Express, the package delivery company that paid a smidgen of tax — $37 million, or less than one percent of the $4.2 billion in profit it reported in 2008 through 2010. For the amount spent lobbying, the companies could have hired 3,100 people at $50,000 for wages and benefits to do productive work.

Musicmystery -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/13/2012 3:33:57 PM)
While I hear ya...it's not a corporation's job to provide work for the greatest number of people. Their responsibility is to the stockholders. Thus, lobbying, and not maximum employment, fits better with this goal. I share your concern about influence, and about unemployment. But this is neither surprise nor malfeasance.

tazzygirl -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/13/2012 3:58:32 PM)
Its time we got rid of lobbyists, time corporations were, once again, a business and not a person, and some freakin term limits.

Musicmystery -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/13/2012 4:31:29 PM)
But this has nothing to do with corporations as individuals (which I strongly oppose). It's businesses looking after business, and that's their business. Politicians should, in fact, listen. Undue influence is another story, but that burden here should rest with the politicians, not the businesses.

Real0ne -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/13/2012 4:45:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery While I hear ya...it's not a corporation's job to provide work for the greatest number of people. Their responsibility is to the stockholders. Thus, lobbying, and not maximum employment, fits better with this goal. I share your concern about influence, and about unemployment. But this is neither surprise nor malfeasance. what are citizens for 300

tazzygirl -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/13/2012 4:47:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery But this has nothing to do with corporations as individuals (which I strongly oppose). It's businesses looking after business, and that's their business. Politicians should, in fact, listen. Undue influence is another story, but that burden here should rest with the politicians, not the businesses. Undue influence that is, at least in part, removed when the cash ends... when the number of terms are shortened.

Real0ne -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/13/2012 4:50:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Its time we got rid of lobbyists, time corporations were, once again, a business and not a person, and some freakin term limits. that wont happen until you get rid of the commingling of the word Person" to mean anything that can have standing in court. that is where the problem is.. A person is a trust, corporation, association, anything that can be combined and constructively blended into one name. In the case of a corporation et al it is an artificial entity, in the case of us they are the dignity of Man. Persons need to be flesh and blood, not entities. Then ban any entity etc...

tazzygirl -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/13/2012 4:55:08 PM)
time corporations were, once again, a business and not a person, I already mentioned that.

Real0ne -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/13/2012 5:31:03 PM)
yep and here we go with definitions that date back to the early bullshit the kings created. If it were the king you bet your ass its properly recognized but they have a gold mine by miscontruing that when it comes to us. I mean a gold mine! cha ching! [image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/stuff/hydra1.jpg[/image] [image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/stuff/TaxReady.jpg[/image]

popeye1250 -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/13/2012 10:47:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Its time we got rid of lobbyists, time corporations were, once again, a business and not a person, and some freakin term limits. Lobbyists should be outlawed. They shouldn't have "special access to our congressmen and senators. They can sit down at their kitchen table and write a letter to their congressman just like I do and any of us can. Anything more than that especially by big corporations is corruption with payola and graft!

tazzygirl -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/13/2012 11:43:36 PM)
And yet it is legal for a "person" (corporation) to go to Congress, demand, and get, a meeting, and make deals to get their way.

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/14/2012 12:06:04 AM)
Ahhh... and what of THESE Corps/Businesses that O'Failure's Administration will ultimately cost tax payers billions?!! Yet ANOTHER Obama Failure -- Eleven... yes, ELEVEN more Solyndras ! ! ! CBS NEWS Video: http://youtu.be/R_bQgFBDZjo ----- January 13, 2012 8:12 AM Tax dollars backing some "risky" energy projects By Sharyl Attkisson WASHINGTON - Solar panel maker Solyndra received a $528 million Energy Department loan in 2009 - and went bankrupt last year. The government's risky investment strategy didn't stop there, as a CBS News investigation has uncovered a pattern of cases of the government pouring your tax dollars into clean energy. Take Beacon Power -- a green energy storage company. We were surprised to learn exactly what the Energy Department knew before committing $43 million of your tax dollars. Documents obtained by CBS News show Standard and Poor's had confidentially given the project a dismal outlook of "CCC-plus." Read the documents Asked whether he'd put his personal money into Beacon, economist Peter Morici replied, "Not on purpose." "It's, it is a junk bond," Morici said. "But it's not even a good junk bond. It's well below investment grade." Was the Energy Department investing tax dollars in something that's not even a good junk bond? Morici says yes. "This level of bond has about a 70 percent chance of failing in the long term," he said. In fact, Beacon did go bankrupt two months ago and it's unclear whether taxpayers will get all their money back. And the feds made other loans when public documents indicate they should have known they could be throwing good money after bad. It's been four months since the FBI raided bankrupt Solyndra. It received a half-billion in tax dollars and became a political lightning rod, with Republicans claiming it was a politically motivated investment. CBS News counted 12 clean energy companies that are having trouble after collectively being approved for more than $6.5 billion in federal assistance. Five have filed for bankruptcy: The junk bond-rated Beacon, Evergreen Solar, SpectraWatt, AES' subsidiary Eastern Energy and Solyndra. Others are also struggling with potential problems. Nevada Geothermal -- a home state project personally endorsed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid -- warns of multiple potential defaults in new SEC filings reviewed by CBS News. It was already having trouble paying the bills when it received $98.5 million in Energy Department loan guarantees. SunPower landed a deal linked to a $1.2 billion loan guarantee last fall, after a French oil company took it over. On its last financial statement, SunPower owed more than it was worth. On its last financial statement, SunPower owed more than it was worth. SunPower's role is to design, build and initially operate and maintain the California Valley Solar Ranch Project that's the subject of the loan guarantee. First Solar was the biggest S&P 500 loser in 2011 and its CEO was cut loose - even as taxpayers were forced to back a whopping $3 billion in company loans. Nobody from the Energy Department would agree to an interview. Last November at a hearing on Solyndra, Energy Secretary Steven Chu strongly defended the government's attempts to bolster America's clean energy prospects. "In the coming decades, the clean energy sector is expected to grow by hundreds of billions of dollars," Chu said. "We are in a fierce global race to capture this market." Economist Morici says even somebody as smart as Secretary Chu -- an award-winning scientist -- shouldn't be playing "venture capitalist" with tax dollars. "Tasking a Nobel Prize mathematician to make investments for the U.S. government is like asking the manager of the New York Yankees to be general in charge of America's troops in Afghanistan," Morici said. "It's that absurd." Does the government believe that this kind of economic support to these companies is a success story? Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57358484/tax-dollars-backing-some-risky-energy-projects/

Hippiekinkster -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/14/2012 1:13:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl And yet it is legal for a "person" (corporation) to go to Congress, demand, and get, a meeting, and make deals to get their way. Here's why I think Citizens United was a bad ruling: the argument was made that corporations are merely groups of citizens, and are entitled to have FirstA rights. But they are not groups of citizens banded together for any political purpose; they are only aggregations of capital (or non-profits) which choose the corporate form for business reasons. Frequently majority stockholders in corporations are mutual funds, or other corporations.

farglebargle -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/14/2012 2:20:07 AM)
There's no reason that we can't recognize Corporations as the SLAVES without rights that they are. If they don't have a vote, why do they get any voice?

Musicmystery -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/14/2012 5:58:16 AM)
quote: Lobbyists should be outlawed. They shouldn't have "special access to our congressmen and senators. They can sit down at their kitchen table and write a letter to their congressman just like I do and any of us can. Can you still go and visit your Congressional representatives? Or would such "special access" be disallowed? When you visit, can you bring up your concerns about business? Or aren't you allowed to discuss economic matters?

Real0ne -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/14/2012 6:59:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl And yet it is legal for a "person" (corporation) to go to Congress, demand, and get, a meeting, and make deals to get their way. thats the core problem. the heart of the GUBAFIA. we get one vote per living man then the assholes who control the money get one vote as the living man and any number more votes for each each fictional corporate person. We vote with 10 bucks per living man, they vote 1000 per fiction. Not only does their vote trump ours financially but also it is the corporate controllers who get to vote twice, 3 4 and more times dependent on how many "persons" they own. the whole system is set up tot steal everything! The money, the law, and the lawful government and yours and your childrens asses. slicky wiki got this much right anyway quote: A legal fiction is a fact assumed or created by courts[1] which is then used in order to apply a legal rule which was not necessarily designed to be used in that way. For example, the rules of the United Kingdom Houses of Parliament specify that a Member of Parliament cannot resign from office, but since the law also states that a Member of Parliament who is appointed to a paid office of the Crown must either step down or stand for re-election, the effect of a resignation can be accomplished by appointment to such an office. The second rule is used to circumvent the first rule. Legal fictions may be counterintuitive in the sense that one might not normally view a certain fact or idea as established in the course of everyday life, but they are preserved to advance public policy and preserve the rights of certain individuals and institutions. A common example of a legal fiction is a corporation, which is regarded in many jurisdictions as a 'person' that has many of the same legal rights and responsibilities as a natural person. Legal fictions are mostly encountered under common law systems. Thanks to the asswipe kings One example of a legal fiction occurs in adoption. Once an Order or Judgment of Adoption (or similar decree from a court) is entered, one or both biological (or natural) parents becomes a legal stranger to the child, legally no longer related to the child and with no rights related to it. Conversely, the adoptive parent(s) are legally considered to be the parent(s) of the adopted child; a new birth certificate reflecting this is issued. The new birth certificate is a legal fiction. Corporate personhood A rather significant legal fiction that is still in use today is corporate personhood (see corporation). In the common law tradition, only a natural person could sue or be sued. like I said they abolished our law, with prejudice to th e people and favor to themselves.

Real0ne -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/14/2012 7:10:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: Lobbyists should be outlawed. They shouldn't have "special access to our congressmen and senators. They can sit down at their kitchen table and write a letter to their congressman just like I do and any of us can. Can you still go and visit your Congressional representatives? Or would such "special access" be disallowed? When you visit, can you bring up your concerns about business? Or aren't you allowed to discuss economic matters? Mr Capone inc. . . . We dont like the way you are shooting the place up and something has to be done about it! [image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/stuff/suicide_banker.jpg[/image]

Musicmystery -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/14/2012 8:19:51 AM)
And again, does nothing to address the point. You just like to argue.

kalikshama -> RE: The Corporations That Occupy Congress (1/14/2012 4:00:39 PM)
Montana Supreme Court upholds election spending limits "Corporations are not persons. Human beings are persons, and it is an affront to the inviolable dignity of our species that courts have created a legal fiction which forces people — human beings — to share fundamental, natural rights with soulless creatures of government," Justice James C. Nelson wrote in his reluctant dissent. "Worse still, while corporations and human beings share many of the same rights under the law, they clearly are not bound equally to the same codes of good conduct, decency and morality, and they are not held equally accountable for their sins. Indeed, it is truly ironic that the death penalty and hell are reserved only to natural persons," he wrote. [image]https://www.commondreams.org/sites/commondreams.org/files/imce-images/corporations_russell_0.jpg[/image]

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125