It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
If you say a corporation isn’t a person, than you’re going to screw up the entire economy....
Originally posted by hadriana
There are checks and balances, and the buck doesn't STOP with the SC.
It seems to me the first thing is definitions. A corporations is NOT a person, and needs to be defined that way.
As for this being a partisan fight, it does seem that way to me from listening to various news outlets. The conservative republicans just LOVE this, and the liberals all hate it. I think the republicans won't like it so much when George Soros gets done with them....he said he'd spend his last dime to see America more socialist.
Anyway, we can work to change the definitions of what a corporation IS. It sounds like it is needed if someone is stupid enough out there to think it is a person. That's common sense? Or are we so money blinded we don't even recognize OUR OWN KIND anymore?
Also, maybe we'd do better if there were REALLY strict limits. Like say there's 3 people running for an office. You each have 1 million dollars each - let's see what you do with it.
We might make better decisions and we might end up with a president like Howard Dean or Ron Paul that mended their old suits and stayed with friends instead of the most posh hotel rooms on the campaign trail. In other words, we might elect someone with some REAL money management skills. Might come in handy budget time..
Originally posted by lpowell0627
Originally posted by wiredamerican
This is not treason. They are heroes.
Because they just stripped election funding from government control.
They gave more power to Corporations and Unions.
Corporations and Unions are made out of people.
This is more power to the people. And that is a good thing.
Corporations are run by a very small, often rich, elite group of people that are also responsible for cutting major deals in saving THEIR particular company money in taxes, benefits, worker's comp., etc. You know -- save on the things that the government demands companies pay. The same types of things that we as INDIVIDUALS are required to pay.
So now you have a situation where companies can give any amount of money to candidates in order to get them elected. Said candidate will then be in a "bribe" type situation and need to "re-pay" said contributions once elected.
Notice how nowhere in any of those negotiations are WE -- the common worker that actually makes the company the money to fund said candidate? Further, said company will not be asking the workers -- again, this is YOU and ME -- whom to support. You will therefore be contributing passively to supporting a candidate you may not want elected simply by still working for that company. The more money you make for the company the more money they have to support said candidate.
Have you picked up on the blatant conflict of interest problem yet? Further, all a candidate will need to do to win an election is to go to bed with the largest companies with the deepest pockets. More politicians buying elections. How is that better for the Union? How does that encourage democracy?
These megacorporations have become Frankensteins—moving to own our genes, the plant seeds of life and taking control of computerized artificial intelligence. Their final conquest is far along—the control of government which is then turned against its own people.