24 replies to this topic

[Phil]

Corporations were considered people in the 1800's, that's been long settled.  What the citizens ruling did was affirm that since corporations are considered people they are afforded the right of free speech as all people are.  The citizens ruling DID NOT confer personhood on corps, that was over a century ago.

It's true that everything we do is controlled by government.  The libertarian view is that we should be allowed to do anything as long as it doesn't impact others negatively.   That does not include polluting water, water doesn't stay on my land, that does not include polluting air or land for the same reason.  There is a need for government, the problem comes when they go beyond protection to control.  One of the things I've quipped before is liberals want government out of the bedroom, conservatives want government out of the board room, libertarians think they are both right!

Like all things there are bad apples in the corporate world and in government.  The vast majority of corps do not impact the government, they are instead impacted by the government in a very negative way.  Not everyone has the clout of GE, etc.  In the end though, it is government that allows that clout.  In the end GE has no responsibility to protect us, the government does.  To the extent that they are not doing that it is their failure, not GE's.

While it's interesting to debate all of this, the world is filled with corporations, that will not go away.  Again, it's that way because it's the only thing proven to work.  Many entities beside corps have unhealthy sway over government, unions for instance.  It would appear the only way to stop this is to make lobbying a treasonable offense.  Then you run smack into the fist amendment.

I don't think there is a way out excepting shrinking government, only if government holds little control over our lives will corporations not be able to use their power to do the same.  If you think corporations own government, then the last thing you want to do is give them more money and more power, since both will flow to those very corporations.  It is personal integrity that is at the bottom of all of this and that's a universal problem, not just corporations or government.  It seems the new morality is not "is this right?" it's "can I get away with this?".

Let's not forget though, First Solar is a corporation, corporations build electric cars, wind turbines, inverters, etc., as well as pump oil.  They all have the same basic marching orders, provide a product that the public wants, at a price that can sell while still providing a profit for those who put up the money to make it happen.  No corporations, no products, no pensions: that's a lose-lose proposition if I ever heard one.

Have we beaten this one to death yet?

[Dingo]

Phil, you are committed to a false separability between the government and the private sector. I just don't buy it although I guess you could talk about some difference in emphasis, but they are even married there, ex. government protecting overseas corporate oil interests, or city government providing tax breaks and parking lots for a football stadium owned by a corporate franchise. I think to a degree it is useful to talk about discrete interest groups like say the MIC(Initially written to include congress until political correctness wrote them out).  AARP, the gun lobby, the Israeli lobby, there are a lot of distinctive lobbies that influence government and include government agents and also have strong corporate connections.

Citizens United extended corporate personhood to a total buy out of congress in my view. Before it was more restricted.

I think the more - less government argument is simply a loser and in fact dishonest. Everybody wants more of the government they like and less of the government they don't like. It's a wash. What's really being argued is I want government to give me what I want and I don't want to have to pay for it. I look at libertarians pretty much the same way, liberty is what I say it is and everything else should be restricted. There is no broad principle in fact. It's funny how Americans love to talk about less government and personal liberty and yet we have more folks incarcerated by a country mile than any other country. Figure that one out.

The material fact is we are all part of a commons called Mother Earth and how we share that commons is the challenge. Conjuring up false distinctions and evocative self-serving mantras is not going to save us. We've got this huge energy free lunch called the sun and even moon driven tides. Lets learn to use them intelligently.

[Phil]

Actually I would be committed to ending the true inseparability of business/government! I am not defending the status quo, I am condemning it.  The question is what do you do about it.  If corporations run government the answer is certainly NOT more government, right?  Giving government more power just gives corporations more power.

Corporations in general are not a problem however, they do not have the clout.  It's the handful of major ones that wield the influence.  It's the "too big to fail" crowd married to an all powerful government that is the bulk of the problem.  As mentioned the only way I see out of this is to use antitrust to break up the too big to fail crowd and shrink government's control over us.  (Yes I'll say it, "starve the beast", I am a fiscal conservative after all! )

Your problem with Citizens is an emotional one not a legal one in my opinion.  People do have free speech rights therefore by law since corporations are looked upon as citizens they have free speech rights.   It's the same with the Martin-Zimmerman case, while the outcome was emotionally unsatisfying the fact is Zimmerman broke no laws. The law is not always "fair", somebody has to lose.

Either we are a nation of laws or we are a nation of emotions, if we devolve into a nation of emotions God help us.  As with M-Z, just because you do not like the outcome does not mean you should be allowed to ignore the law.  In my view unions wielded far more influence than corporations so I have no problem with Citizens balancing the playing field.  By all means if you believe a law is unfair, do whatever is in your power to change it, but ignoring it because it's emotionally unsatisfying is a very slippery slope.   What's fair to you may be unfair to me and visa versa.

I'll agree people want more of the government they like and less they don't like, that doesn't make it right.  If you believe corporations have undue influence over government and government has undue influence over individuals, the only conclusion one can come to is shrinking both if you really want to serve we the people.

You are sorely mistaken about libertarians, we want nothing from government except what is spelled out in the constitution.  Some don't even want government at all! I do believe we do need limited government.

Libertarians are some of the least restrictive people around.  As I've already said, decriminalize drugs and prostitution and you could empty jails overnight, that is a well known libertarian view.  There is a difference between less government and crime though.  No one in their right mind would connect less government with releasing child rapists, murders, etc.  Some people simply don't belong in a free society, people who do heinous acts, people who habitually, break the law by harming others, etc.  There is no civilized nation on earth that doesn't have some incarceration.  As the old saw goes for libertarians, "your right to swing your fist stops at my face!".  Maximum personal freedom does not extend to harming others.

"Conjuring up false distinctions and evocative self-serving mantras is not going to save us. We've got this huge energy free lunch called the sun and even moon driven tides. Lets learn to use them intelligently."   

I agree on both counts.  Demonizing a whole group because of a few bad apples does not further that goal. Again, First Solar is a corporation.

[Dingo]

Phil, on 12 August 2013 - 08:00 AM, said:

First Solar is a corporation.

The sun isn't. It's a commons and the sun drives the whole operation.

As for the rest, it is getting pretty redundant. From my biased perspective, no doubt, I guess you seem to be playing with the levers, faux or otherwise, while I am trying to describe the machine to get the premises accurate. We agree in a few areas but for the most part we are talking past each other. I'm inclined to drop it for now.

[Phil]

The question is how do you harness the sun!    I agree, different personal experiences lead to different world views.