Now that the White House has released a copy of the original certificate, perhaps we can get back to the real issues.
PS I was amused to read that Trump has 'had a go' at Robert DeNiro, I mean, which of the two has contributed most to American life?
Printable View
Now that the White House has released a copy of the original certificate, perhaps we can get back to the real issues.
PS I was amused to read that Trump has 'had a go' at Robert DeNiro, I mean, which of the two has contributed most to American life?
I agree there but when you have this big ass corporations with major pull in both parties there really isn't much than can be done.Quote:
Originally Posted by TJ347
On BBC news tonight Trump was still trying to deny it in the face of the evidence. Obama's quiet dignity in the face of all this stupidity and barely coded racism is an object lesson to these right wing mischief makers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
I don't blame corporations one bit for advancing their agendas. I blame the voting public, because we don't do the due diligence before pulling the lever for whatever candidate we choose. Instead, we vote Republican or Democrat so as not to "waste" our vote, when in actuality we're simply joining millions of others in wasting our votes because we don't consider third party candidates viable even when we agree with their message. This is one area where the Brits, among others, do far better than we do. We continue to hold the lead in dentistry, however. :party:Quote:
Originally Posted by Silcc69
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertlouis
Quiet dignity? You're fucking kidding....right? He played this game for political reasons....that's why he defended the release in court. Then when the polls seemed to suggest Trump was getting some traction...rightly or wrongly, he played his card and lectured us about silliness...then flew to Chicago and talked to Oprah about this "silliness" then onto 2 fund raisers in NYC and joked to his sycophants about the silliness. It's called pandering to his base. That's not being quiet, and certainly not dignified. But perhaps you have a different dictionary than me. What was that degree of yours in again?? LOL
Look...it's fine by me if you like the guy, but he's a politician first last and always...they're never quiet and rarely dignified.
Former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura said don't vote for either the Republicans or the Dems. Both are merely opposite wings of the same party. And both serve power. They serve the most dominant institutional power structure in our society: corporations.Quote:
Originally Posted by TJ347
And it's completely understandable why corporations would want to -- and do -- control public policy: to serve their interests. Completely understandable. Not, obviously, desirable. But understandable. It isn't desirable because people and corporations have different interests. People want taxes on corporations to go up. Well, that is simply not in the interest of corporations. And, again, to repeat: corporations, as a power system, are going to do everything they can to make sure that government policy serve their very narrow interests.
As for corporations, well, they're carrying out their institutional responsibility, their actual legal requirement: maximize profit(s).... That's the only function of a corporation. It isn't concerned about communities, clean air, clean water etc. etc. etc.
So, I don't fault corporations for pursuing their own interests. BUT in a supposed democracy, well, those interests of people and corporations come into conflict.
Really Ben, there is more to the USA than corporations, which employ thousands of taxpayers and whose profits are the core of the pensions that most elderly people with a pension live on. The large scale capitalist enterprises that you see today emerged in the last quarter of the 20th century -Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Morgan -you know the names. And yes, they grew and grew and grew -and then it was your own govt that used anti-trust legislation to reduce their influence -hence the break-up of Rockefeller's Standard Oil empire (known at the time as 'the Octopus') in 1911.
These days, corporations, if they are smart, find ways of reducing -legally-their tax bill, which is why the fed is looking at ways of closing legal loopholes. And yes, even the demon oil companies have environmental policies which usually work, have reduced carbon emissions in their installations more successfully than many others, and yes, Greenpeace members are also shareholders in Exxon, Shell, BP, Total et al. If things go wrong, look at the regulatory regime for answers, and not just in energy.
Democracy in the USA is there to bring corporations to account, why not use the powers you have instead of just concocting a conspiracy theory?
The United States is not a democracy, it's a republic. That's the first thing people in this country need to learn. The second is that these big, mean corporations that control our lives are comprised of many "little" people; they aren't monoliths over which there is little or no control. Do you know anyone who holds stock in IBM, Verizon, Google, Bank of America or so forth? These are the people whom the corporations serve. "We have seen the enemy, and he is us."Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben
Now, I'll be honest... I hold shares in a company that has apparently engaged in rather questionable business practices, is heavily criticized by the liberal media, and may not operate in what the majority of the American population would consider "their" interests. If enough people holding stock in this company complained about these issues its executives would most certainly change its policies to appease us, but most won't say anything because they earn a good dividend. My point is that the interests of corporations and people only come into conflict when some of the people aren't shareholders. If you want to bring corporations in line with your wishes, your best option is to buy shares. Otherwise, the two shares old Aunt Millie has is going to make a single word from her far more important to Frontier Oil than a twelve hour speech from an environmental activist the company doesn't have to care about. But anyway... What's Trump stock doing these days?
When the board of, say, GM get together, well, that's a conspiracy. Meaning: scheme or plot. They are, in secret, laying out what they will be doing or attempting to do. That's understandable. The institution is designed that way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
It could change. It could be completely democratic. It could be completely controlled by the shareholders [and a lot of shareholders aren't happy with the exorbitant salaries that CEOs are pulling down] and the people that work in them. But, by design, it isn't. Again, understandable. Corporations are autocratic institutions. Top-down. Decisions are made from above. And handed down. Very orderly, very monocratic.
My point being: we can't have a meaningful democracy if corporations are going to use government [and in a meaningful democracy people and the government are identical] to serve their own interests.
Like the banking sector. We should, well, concede that they've a valid defense. Their task is to maximize profit and market share. In fact that's their legal obligation. If they don't do it, they'll be replaced by someone who will.
These are institutional facts. As are the inherent market inefficiencies that require them to ignore systemic risk: the likelihood that transactions they enter into will harm the economy. They know full well that these policies are likely to tank the economy.
But these externalities, as they are called, are not their business; and cannot be. (Again, the CEO has to ignore the cost to others. He or she has to externalize the costs and internalize the profits. Again, a legal requirement. The CEO cannot concern himself or herself with the, to quote Adam Smith, "grievous effect on others."
Adam Smith said that the "principal architects" of policy in England (18th. century England) were the merchants and manufacturers, today corporations, and will use state power to serve their own interests however, again, grievous the effect on others, including the people of England. (Take, say, the offshoring of jobs to China. I mean, corporations have to do it. To increase investor return. But it will and has hurt millions and millions of Americans. And will continue to do so. But that isn't a corporations concern. They have to offshore jobs. Cheaper labor means higher profits. It's very understandable.)
Anyway, people in corporations ARE NOT bad people. But for institutional reasons they have to pursue these policies.