Do corporations have values

Recent Forum Topics Forums The Public House Do corporations have values

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #92118
    waterfield
    Participant
    #92222
    zn
    Moderator

    I want to respond to this, but right now, no time.

    When there’s time!

    #92282
    wv
    Participant

    http://www.latimes.com/business/lazarus/la-fi-lazarus-corporations-are-not-people-too-20181009-story.html

    —————-

    Well, the problem is the ‘big’ corporations. The small ones dont have political power.

    The problems with corporations are two-fold. One is the ‘profit-over-people’ issue. But in small corps that one is probly no worse than with partnerships or sole proprietorships.

    The second problem, and the thing that is LITERALLY destroying the BIOSPHERE (plants, animals)is the fact that Monsanto, Exxon, General Dynamics, Northrup, Goldman Sachs, etc — control/dominate the POLITICAL decisions. They essentially make policy. It…is…a…corporotacracy. I really dunno how anyone can debate that at this point. And its getting worse, not better. (more people are waking up and resisting, but they have less power due to the trajectory of the pro-corporate laws/treaties. The system is making itself bullet-proof.)

    There are better ways to get products made, and set up a government. For starters dont allow any corporation to give money to any political cause. End corporate personhood.
    And nationalize energy, medicine and transportation.

    I know you disagree.

    w
    v

    • This reply was modified 5 years, 12 months ago by wv.
    #92284
    zn
    Moderator

    There are better ways to get products made, and set up a government. For starters dont allow any corporation to give money to any political cause. End corporate personhood.
    And nationalize energy, medicine and transportation.

    I know you disagree.

    And you know I agree.

    To me these are common sense things–both how the problems are defined and the possible solutions proposed.

    #92286
    nittany ram
    Moderator

    There are better ways to get products made, and set up a government. For starters dont allow any corporation to give money to any political cause. End corporate personhood.
    And nationalize energy, medicine and transportation.

    w
    v

    I agree with all that.

    Of course, corps aren’t the only cause of the destruction. Overpopulation is probably just as responsible.

    10 billion people by 2050. There will be no pristine, wild areas left on the planet by then.

    #92308
    wv
    Participant

    There are better ways to get products made, and set up a government. For starters dont allow any corporation to give money to any political cause. End corporate personhood.
    And nationalize energy, medicine and transportation.

    w
    v

    I agree with all that.

    Of course, corps aren’t the only cause of the destruction. Overpopulation is probably just as responsible.

    10 billion people by 2050. There will be no pristine, wild areas left on the planet by then.

    ==============

    True the Corpse are not the only cause of the destruction. But they are the only cause wv-ram bashes-on about, relentlessly 🙂

    w
    v
    “…Does Al Gore know the same facts of American economic life? Of course, but you would have a hard time discerning that from his film. It’s as cowardly in dealing with the corporations as Gore was in fighting the theft of the 2000 election. In the film’s hour and a half, the words “corporations” or “profit” are not heard. The closest he comes to ascribing a link between the rape of the environment and the incessant corporate drive to optimize profits is a single passing mention of American automakers’ reluctance to increase car gas mileage. He discusses the link between tobacco and lung cancer, as an example of how we have to “connect the dots” on environmental issues, with no mention of the tobacco corporations or their gross and deliberate deception of the American people. He states at another point that we must choose the environment over the economy, without any elucidation at all. Otherwise, the film’s message is that it’s up to the individual to change his habits, to campaign for renewable energy, and to write his congress member about this or that. In summary, the basic problem, he tells us, is that we’re lacking “political will”.

    It would be most interesting if Al Gore were the president to see how tough he’d get with the corporations, which every day, around the clock, are faced with choices: one method of operation available being the least harmful to the environment, another method being the least harmful to the bottom line. Of course, Gore was vice-president for eight years and was in a fantastic and enviable position to pressure the corporations to mend their ways and Congress to enact tougher regulations; as well as to educate the public on more than their own bad habits. But what exactly did he do? Can any readers enlighten me as to what extent the man used his position and his power then in a manner consistent with the image and the word of his new film?
    But could Gore be elected without corporate money? And how much of that money would reach his pocket if he advocated (choke, gasp!) free government-paid public transportation — rail, bus, ferry, etc.? That would give birth to a breathtaking — or rather, breath enhancing — reduction in automobile pollution; easily paid for by ceasing America’s imperialist wars.”
    W.Blum

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.