Wake Up, America

Damocles said:
And I have explained how it would and could work, in other threads. And yes, I do know that many are not voting shares. However, in almost every case where they are, most throw their votes in the trash misunderstanding their rights and responsibilities as owners as they look for short-term gain.

I will state it again, If you want to take back control of the government the only way you will get it done is if you vote your stocks. Otherwise you have already given power over to the coin-operated government.
Click to expand...

Maybe corporations shouldn't be allowed to dictate public policy. You can't beat them playing by their rules. They make the money. they will trash the economy before they will allow outer party members to buy them out.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Maybe corporations shouldn't be allowed to dictate public policy. You can't beat them playing by their rules. They make the money. they will trash the economy before they will allow outer party members to buy them out.
Click to expand...
Which is my point. Either you change the Constitution or the SCOTUS, or you change the corporation. The easiest one to change is the corporations and we have the power to do it, nearly overnight.
 
Damocles said:
Which is my point. Either you change the Constitution or the SCOTUS, or you change the corporation. The easiest one to change is the corporations and we have the power to do it, nearly overnight.
Click to expand...

It's not in the constitution that corporations must run everything. NO constitutional change is necessary to change trade policy with china, or to return control of money creation to the congress.

Your "buy them out" plan is fantastically ridiculous, yet somehow STILL lacking in vision.
 
Last edited:
I find is amazing that corporations have gained "individual" status advantages in many ways but manage to avoid most all of the "individual" burdens.
 
uscitizen said:
I find is amazing that corporations have gained "individual" status advantages in many ways but manage to avoid most all of the "individual" burdens.
Click to expand...

We should just shut up and feel lucky they keep us inside the global resource distribution network. Where would we be without them? (Fun to think about, eh?)
 
AssHatZombie said:
It's not in the constitution that corporations must run everything. NO constitutional change is necessary to change trade policy with china, or to return control of money creation to the congress.

Your "buy them out" plan is fantastically ridiculous, yet somehow STILL lacking in vision.
Click to expand...
Free Speech is in the constitution and the SCOTUS ruled that political ads and funds are "speech". Thus, you either change the Constitution, the SCOTUS or the source. The easiest to change is the source. Are you being deliberately obtuse here, or do you literally not understand the current atmosphere of politics, or that such funding was determined to be protected?
 
AssHatZombie said:
It's not in the constitution that corporations must run everything. NO constitutional change is necessary to change trade policy with china, or to return control of money creation to the congress.

Your "buy them out" plan is fantastically ridiculous, yet somehow STILL lacking in vision.
Click to expand...
And you don't "buy them out" you simply vote the stock you own, as is your right as a shareholder. Over 50% of the nation owns stocks. Almost overnight we can change the face of politics at the source. Yet you lack the understanding to even go back and read the threads that I speak of, and therefore misrepresent and misconstrue.
 
uscitizen said:
Just get SCOTUS to change its mind has been done lots of times in the past.
Click to expand...
It takes decades to do what could be done in less than two years. In order for them to "chnage their mind" they change the face of the court. Either you start to magically vote for people who are not paid for by the coin-dispensing Corporations and they put in people who are more logical in decisions... or you stop it at the source.

You guys keep wanting to lower the river, it is so much easier to build a bridge.
 
I would have liked to see Ross as president.

Follow the money back to the source and cut it off in a way it will stay cut off beyond the next government administration or CEO.
 
Damocles said:
Free Speech is in the constitution and the SCOTUS ruled that political ads and funds are "speech". Thus, you either change the Constitution, the SCOTUS or the source. The easiest to change is the source. Are you being deliberately obtuse here, or do you literally not understand the current atmosphere of politics, or that such funding was determined to be protected?
Click to expand...
I'm not against ads, Im against certain trade policies, which are detrimental to america's future, and which are ineherently immoral. Trade policy change doesn't require a consitutional change. Trade policy is handled by the governement technically. DId you know that, or are you being obtuse. It's a right wing lie that whatever is good for coroporations should rightfully be the law of the land.
 
Damocles said:
And you don't "buy them out" you simply vote the stock you own, as is your right as a shareholder. Over 50% of the nation owns stocks. Almost overnight we can change the face of politics at the source. Yet you lack the understanding to even go back and read the threads that I speak of, and therefore misrepresent and misconstrue.
Click to expand...


How do you acquire stock to vote with? You BUY it. You are advocating buying them out.

The nature of your solution indicates your acceptance of the premise that there should be no legal oversight over corporations. I reject that premise.

Instead of passing child pornography laws, let's just buy into the porn producing corporations and vote that they not use children. Want to clean up the environment? Buy your way into a corporation and use your new corporate influence to change their policy.

In your model of the world, where corporate shares are the only form of franchisement, anyone who is not a shareholder effectively has no say.

Your plan sucks.
 
Last edited:
AssHatZombie said:
I'm not against ads, Im against certain trade policies, which are detrimental to america's future, and which are ineherently immoral. Trade policy change doesn't require a consitutional change. Trade policy is handled by the governement technically. DId you know that, or are you being obtuse. It's a right wing lie that whatever is good for coroporations should rightfully be the law of the land.
Click to expand...
Man, you are being deliberately obtuse! Those who pay for the ads buy the attention of those in charge.

If you actually paid attention and voted against those who waste your share's dollars on those ads you could quickly change the nature of such.

But heck, you want to pretend that those ads get them nothing but 30 seconds on TV so you can say stupid crap like this?!

Come one, AHZ, I know you can do better than this!
 
AssHatZombie said:
How do you acquire stock to vote with? You BUY it. You are advocating buying them out.

The nature of your solution indicates your acceptance of the premise that there should be no legal oversight over corporations. I reject that premise.

Instead of passing child pornography laws, let's just buy into the porn producing corporations and vote that they not use children. Want to clean up the environment? Buy your way into a corporation and use your new corporate influence to change their policy.

In your model of the world, where corporate shares are the only form of franchisement, anyone who is not a shareholder effectively has no say.

Your plan sucks.
Click to expand...
I guess I'll repeat it again, (I wish I could say it slowly... But what I'll do is just ask you to read, then repeat...)

AHEM:

More 50% of this nation already owns that stock.


Now I'll ask you: What part of that sentence means that it needs to be bought? It already HAS been.

Then I'll tell you: Most of those that can never vote their stock because they do not realize how important it is.

Now... Follow the shampoo bottle.
Click to expand...

Rinse and repeat...

So, don't attempt to call something that people already own a "buyout"....

Again, repeat that last sentence.
 
Much of that 50% is in 401K's that no owners vote.
And the republicans want to put even more in that type of thing with their SS plan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top