Hogwash, Mr. President

Dune said:
Jack Abramoff, Kenny Boy, Haliburton, Good job Brownie, Blackwater, Clear skys, No Child left behind, War for Oil, Neal Bush, John Roberts, Dick, Hank Paulson, Lehman Bros.
Click to expand...

Don't forget the felon...

“You’ve got to understand, we are ideologues,” Tom DeLay once told a journalist. “We have an agenda. We have a philosophy. I want to repeal the Clean Air Act. No one came to me and said, ‘Please repeal the Clean Air Act.’ We say to the lobbyists, ‘Help us.’ We know what we want to do and we find the people to help us do that. We go to the lobbyists and say, ‘Help us get this in the appropriations bill.”

It was a stunning admission. Lawmakers, DeLay was basically saying, relied on paid lobbyists to get bills passed, not the other way around. The federal government was so complex, the challenges of leadership so difficult, that lobbyists were more likely to get things done than the people’s representatives. And DeLay, because of his “ideology,” was happy to play along. The age of K Street had arrived. The Republicans were just along for the ride.

from The K Street Gang
 
Bfgrn said:
Corporations are not evil, so you will have to try another polarized ignorant argument.

But they are not human beings either, and they don't deserve the same protections under the law. You can spinelessly blame 'both' sides...but the recent Citizens United Supreme Court ruling CLEARLY delineates that liberals are the protectors of the republic and conservatives will be complicit in the demise of that republic.

It stems from the gross ignorance on the right. The false belief that our founding fathers were 'free marketeers'...they weren't...
Click to expand...

And the redistribution of wealth is what the Founding Fathers intended?

I am not saying either side is completely wrong. You are the one who wants everyone in these nice neat categories of right or left. I want shit fixed. And so far all I see are two bullies picking fights with each other and ignoring the populous.

No, corporations don't deserve the protections afforded individuals. I have never said that they did. And regulations that provide protections for the population, within reason, are not what I am arguing against. But protecting idiots from themselves is not the answer either. If some dumbass making minimum wage applies for a credit card with a 27% interest rate,then runs up thousands of dollars worth of debt buying shit he can't afford, it is not the gov'ts job to punish the credit card company.

And the idea that you want to take money from corporations to distribute it to the masses sounds very noble. Until you look at the logic and realize that it is armed robbery. And that it shreds the profits, which are the foundation of the stocks people have in their retirement accounts. And that it stops raises and expansions (new jobs) by those corporations. And that it will force the corporations to raise prices to continue to make profits, which in turn puts more of their products beyond the reach of the people.

You mean well, but you are simply shooting the cow that gives you milk. Taxing corporations and businesses is nonsense. Businesses do not actually pay those taxes. They are factored in to the cost of doing business. When the costs go up then the prices go up.
 
WinterBorn said:
And the redistribution of wealth is what the Founding Fathers intended?

I am not saying either side is completely wrong. You are the one who wants everyone in these nice neat categories of right or left. I want shit fixed. And so far all I see are two bullies picking fights with each other and ignoring the populous.

No, corporations don't deserve the protections afforded individuals. I have never said that they did. And regulations that provide protections for the population, within reason, are not what I am arguing against. But protecting idiots from themselves is not the answer either. If some dumbass making minimum wage applies for a credit card with a 27% interest rate,then runs up thousands of dollars worth of debt buying shit he can't afford, it is not the gov'ts job to punish the credit card company.

And the idea that you want to take money from corporations to distribute it to the masses sounds very noble. Until you look at the logic and realize that it is armed robbery. And that it shreds the profits, which are the foundation of the stocks people have in their retirement accounts. And that it stops raises and expansions (new jobs) by those corporations. And that it will force the corporations to raise prices to continue to make profits, which in turn puts more of their products beyond the reach of the people.

You mean well, but you are simply shooting the cow that gives you milk. Taxing corporations and businesses is nonsense. Businesses do not actually pay those taxes. They are factored in to the cost of doing business. When the costs go up then the prices go up.
Click to expand...

Don't preach to me about business and profits. Especially in a dismissive tone when you have such a naive understanding of profit and prices. As you said: "Corporations have just one job, and that is to make a profit."

I'll take that farther...corporations are bound by LAW to maximize profits for their shareholders. So the premise that they will raise prices because of taxation and costs as some punishment to consumers that don't suck their dick is bullshit. IF they could raise their prices this minute, they would do it. But the market place and competition won't allow it. And if a bunch of corporations get together to collectively raise prices, it is called collusion, which is against the law.

Corporations are great, but they must be fenced off from the political process, held personally liable for any harm they cause and be strictly regulated...just LIKE our founding fathers did.
 
Bfgrn said:
Don't preach to me about business and profits. Especially in a dismissive tone when you have such a naive understanding of profit and prices. As you said: "Corporations have just one job, and that is to make a profit."

I'll take that farther...corporations are bound by LAW to maximize profits for their shareholders. So the premise that they will raise prices because of taxation and costs as some punishment to consumers that don't suck their dick is bullshit. IF they could raise their prices this minute, they would do it. But the market place and competition won't allow it. And if a bunch of corporations get together to collectively raise prices, it is called collusion, which is against the law.

Corporations are great, but they must be fenced off from the political process, held personally liable for any harm they cause and be strictly regulated...just LIKE our founding fathers did.
Click to expand...

If you don't want me to talk to you like you are naive, don't act naive.

If you raise taxes on businesses, you raise the cost of doing business. Do you actually think they will smile and watch their profits go down? No, they will raise prices to, at least, maintain the same profit margin. When gas prices jump, the prices of virtually everything goes up because the costs of shipping goods and materials rises. Raising taxes will have the same results.

Hmmm, you say the corporations do not have the same rights as individuals, but you want them to be held "personally" responsible?

For what? If their profits go down, do we prosecute the board of directors or fine the corporation?

Write sensible regulations and this won't be a problem. But when the corporation asks for a boon, and the politician (with his hand out for a donation) allows it, don't whine about the evil corporations taking advantage of it.

If you want the corruption to stop, then stop electing people who are funded by the rich corporations and businesses.

And please don't try and make it sound as though raising taxes on corporations that provide our goods, services, and livelihoods will not have an adverse effect on everyone who uses those goods, services or who works for them. THAT is being totally naive.
 
Bfgrn said:
I'll take that farther...corporations are bound by LAW to maximize profits for their shareholders. So the premise that they will raise prices because of taxation and costs as some punishment to consumers that don't suck their dick is bullshit.
Click to expand...

So they are bound by law to maximize profits? But when the costs of doing business go up, they won't raise prices??? WTF?

And its not punishment. You are the one trying to punish someone. I am simply stating the facts of business.
 
WinterBorn said:
So they are bound by law to maximize profits? But when the costs of doing business go up, they won't raise prices??? WTF?

And its not punishment. You are the one trying to punish someone. I am simply stating the facts of business.
Click to expand...

Companies are in business to make money not spread the wealth or create social justice~
 
WinterBorn said:
So they are bound by law to maximize profits? But when the costs of doing business go up, they won't raise prices??? WTF?

And its not punishment. You are the one trying to punish someone. I am simply stating the facts of business.
Click to expand...

The facts of business and corporations is to MAXIMIZE profits...TODAY, not tomorrow. If they CAN they WILL, if they CAN'T they WON'T. If the gas station on the corner could charge $100 per gallon, they WOULD. When costs go up, some businesses can raise their prices, some try and some can't. It is not that simple. There are other factors that overpower cost alone.
 
Ice Dancer said:
Companies are in business to make money not spread the wealth or create social justice~
Click to expand...

You're right...that is why corporations must be fenced off from government and should have NO say in how our government is run...they are toxic to any form of justice in a civil society.
 
Bfgrn said:
The facts of business and corporations is to MAXIMIZE profits...TODAY, not tomorrow. If they CAN they WILL, if they CAN'T they WON'T. If the gas station on the corner could charge $100 per gallon, they WOULD. When costs go up, some businesses can raise their prices, some try and some can't. It is not that simple. There are other factors that overpower cost alone.
Click to expand...

When costs go up businesses either raise their prices or their profit margins go down. That is a simple fact.

If profits go down, businesses will expand less, give fewer (if any) raises, and look to cut costs elsewhere, which results in layoffs.

Or they raise prices. If the costs go up for all the businesses, then they will all raise their prices. When the cost of gas goes up, the cost of milk will follow. Otherwise the companies that have slim profit margins will have no profit margins, and will go under.
 
Bfgrn said:
You're right...that is why corporations must be fenced off from government and should have NO say in how our government is run...they are toxic to any form of justice in a civil society.
Click to expand...

Then the politicians need to stop begging for money from those same corporations.
 
WinterBorn said:
Then the politicians need to stop begging for money from those same corporations.
Click to expand...

I agree. But the two parties have completely different ideas...

House passes bill to end public funding of campaigns

The U.S. House passed a bill today to end public financing of presidential campaigns, but the bid to kill a system considered outdated by some Republicans could end there.

The vote was 239-160. Ten Democrats supported the measure and one Republican voted no.

The Obama administration is "strongly opposed" to the bill and wants to see public financing for presidential campaigns "fixed rather than dismantled."

Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., sponsor of the measure says the Watergate-era program of taxpayers helping to pay for presidential campaigns is "obsolete."

Instead, the bill seeks to have presidential candidates rely on private funds for their campaigns and transfer the remaining balance in the Presidential Election Campaign Fund to the Treasury to help pay off debt.

Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., said Republicans are trying "to further erode whatever protections our government has left against a state of democracy for the highest bidder."

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/01/house-presidential-campaign-financing-/1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top