Well, now the Chinese government can start a corporation in the US and have unlimited Freedom of Speech to influence our campaigns. Bin Laden can start a US corporation and influence politics. Sure they could have done it before, but with guidelines. Now they can do as much as they want. Israel already knows this as AIPAC is the most influential lobbying group in Washington. How much power will they have now?
As each Presidential election becomes more expensive than the last election, money clearly is influencing politics in the country. A country that was founded on giving the People the right to vote, now is governed not by the vote, but by money. Now, the one with the most money wins, not the one with the most votes. Sure, the one with the most money eventually gets the most votes. If not, they can buy the company that counts the votes and throw the election.
If corporations are given the rights of human beings, then when they merge is that same sex marriage? When they put another corporation out of business, is that murder? Obviously, no. They are not human beings. Corporations are merely a legal construct designed to give a human being some additional perks, like limited liability, etc. But no corporation has ever been born, they are incorporated. No corporation can go to jail. No corporation can get married. No corporation can eat or have sex. No corporation can die, they are merely dissolved. No corporation can serve our country and enter the military or send their child to the military.
Also, if the rich person running a corporation has enough money to influence politics, aren't they given an unfair advantage that the person without money. Most of the People are poor and getting poorer. How will their voice be heard now as the ones with the money control the TV and other news sources.
Showing posts with label corporate power. Show all posts
Showing posts with label corporate power. Show all posts
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Corporate power in America
There are differing perspectives. Corporate powers have expanded over the last 100 years. Workers rights have contracted. Some people think this is good, some people think this is bad.
Manufacturing has moved from the US. Jobs have left the land. The military now has plenty of people to hire. Poverty and hunger are spreading.
Hard fought workers rights, that were won during the first part of the 1900s, have been eroded.
In the media, all I hear is about how unions are bad and are hurting the corporations that hire union members.
I don't hear much about how wages have gone down over the last several decades. I don't hear about how much more poor the People are getting. Sure for a while we didn't complain. Some of us could use their homes as a credit card. It didn't matter that we couldn't afford to buy anything. Some of us were fooled into thinking this was OK, since we could barrow the money to get what we want. I guess we thought that some day, maybe, we would start to make more money. Odd, this isn't the trend. The trend is that we the People will make less money. Yet the myth of more wealth in the future continues.
Now more people are poor. There are more people talking about how hard things are right now. Homes are being taken.
For some people the idea is to empower the employer, the corporations. The claims are that if we give them tax cuts they will hire more people. Well, they might hire more people, but they are in the business of making a profit, not of taking care of their workers. The business of expanding the number of employees and the business of hiring US workers is only done if it will be more profitable.
The truth should be told, instead of this 1984 double speak stuff. The tax cuts are to expand the corporate profits and not to create more jobs, which may or may not benefit the People. This might translate into more jobs as the politicians claim, but there is nothing in the design that actually aims to do that unless the legistlation specificallly mandates more workers.
Think about it. The vast majority of the People are workers. Very few Americans are executives and/or board members of large corporations. No corporation is a member of the People.
So why make policy based on the interests of the corporations. Well, that answer is obvious in the current, corrupted system.
The other perspective is obvious. If you pay the People more money, they will buy more stuff and the economy will do better and then we can pay the People more and then the economy gets better.
Manufacturing has moved from the US. Jobs have left the land. The military now has plenty of people to hire. Poverty and hunger are spreading.
Hard fought workers rights, that were won during the first part of the 1900s, have been eroded.
In the media, all I hear is about how unions are bad and are hurting the corporations that hire union members.
I don't hear much about how wages have gone down over the last several decades. I don't hear about how much more poor the People are getting. Sure for a while we didn't complain. Some of us could use their homes as a credit card. It didn't matter that we couldn't afford to buy anything. Some of us were fooled into thinking this was OK, since we could barrow the money to get what we want. I guess we thought that some day, maybe, we would start to make more money. Odd, this isn't the trend. The trend is that we the People will make less money. Yet the myth of more wealth in the future continues.
Now more people are poor. There are more people talking about how hard things are right now. Homes are being taken.
For some people the idea is to empower the employer, the corporations. The claims are that if we give them tax cuts they will hire more people. Well, they might hire more people, but they are in the business of making a profit, not of taking care of their workers. The business of expanding the number of employees and the business of hiring US workers is only done if it will be more profitable.
The truth should be told, instead of this 1984 double speak stuff. The tax cuts are to expand the corporate profits and not to create more jobs, which may or may not benefit the People. This might translate into more jobs as the politicians claim, but there is nothing in the design that actually aims to do that unless the legistlation specificallly mandates more workers.
Think about it. The vast majority of the People are workers. Very few Americans are executives and/or board members of large corporations. No corporation is a member of the People.
So why make policy based on the interests of the corporations. Well, that answer is obvious in the current, corrupted system.
The other perspective is obvious. If you pay the People more money, they will buy more stuff and the economy will do better and then we can pay the People more and then the economy gets better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)