It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Corporations are a bigger threat to you than the gov...

page: 5
46
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by stormson
 


The government is the problem. The government belongs to the royal families, secret societies, to big corporations including the banks, to hidden alien entities, to the elite. period.

Its like having a paid off jury that has decided the verdict in advance in a mock trial.

I am sick of the two party dictatorship, the msm that lies constantly, the zombies that vote in this fake democracy.

Take this to the federal reserve and deposit it there.




posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   
First of all, people need to understand that we do not live in a free market capitalistic economic system, although the corporatism is cleverly disguised as such. It's quite simple really - capitalism and free market ideology is all about competition. Through competition, companies and corporations would have to heed the demands of the market place - the people - a truly democratic process. Some would argue that this is the case in our society, that we vote with our dollars and can easily sanction those who do not play by our rules. In competing, the quality of products would rise while the price drops. The problem is - and it's documented brilliantly by men such as David Cay Johnston in his book Free Lunch, which everyone should read - corporations such as Wal Mart, Cabelas, major league sports, and hundreds of others receive tax payer funded subsidies from the federal government on a regular basis. This means that these businesses do not need to pay any fealty to the consumer for they make their profits, and then some, through this process. This is why corporate power has such a stranglehold on our governmental process, they can legislate themselves free monies and gifts. Adam Smith referred to them as "bounties", and whenever these subsidies, or bounties, are at play the corporation will always attempt to secure payment through these means instead of making decent products at affordable prices. This effectively subverts the whole market place and economy.

I myself am a conservative libertarian and I'll never understand how other so-called conservatives can complain about waste and fraud and welfare abuse without first mentioning the billions given away, for free, to these companies. There's no doubt that social welfare programs are abused and taxpayer money is wasted on lazy people, but just as corporations and government are not inherently evil, neither are social programs designed to feed, cloth, and house those who are not able to do such things for themselves. Everyone on all sides seems to want to throw the baby out with the bath water. The food stamp statistics are telling, as a large majority of those receiving these benefits work and many others are children or disabled, despite the fact that EBT and SNAP benefits are used as another way to make profits by companies like Wal-Mart and JP Morgan. The fact of the matter is, even as a conservative, I support social welfare programs because they do more to help a society than burden it when run correctly and legitimately. No ones going out to by an iPhone or a TV when they're starving to death and have no place to sleep.

Now, I don't blame corporations for making money. However, I do blame them for making money off of the misfortune of Americans, for profiting in spite of the suffering their actions cause Americans, and particularly the middle class. In recent years this has become more and more the case. We, as a people, must ask ourselves what it is we want from our society and the business leaders therein. Is the sole motivator really to make as much money as possible? Do we really want to worship wealth as the end all, be all, and the most important thing one can do, become wealthy? And does this motivation really help support a society or make it prosper? I think that question can be answered just by looking at our world today. Companies like GE and Exxon used to be American companies. Now they are American-based transnational corporations, that quite frankly have no loyalty to the United States of America nor it's people. This is described eloquently by researchers such as Chris Hedges and Sheldon Wolden, whom Hedges often quotes. Wolden, in his book Democracy Incorporated, describes inverted totalitarianism as what we are now experiencing, in which corporations and their lobbyists - who essentially dictate our laws - pay no fealty, no patriotism, no loyalty to America despite proclaiming that they do. Despite making commercials about how much they love America and how patriotic they are in reality they are shipping jobs overseas, raking in record profits while real wages gradually drop, pay NO taxes in many cases which means not giving back to the communities in which they operate, polluting and destroying the environment, and as previously stated all the while receive billions from us, the tax payer, thanks to their representatives in DC disguised as our own.

It's ironic to me that those in Washington are up in arms every day telling us that they need all these resources and the jurisdiction, and that we must sacrifice our liberties, so that they can protect us from "terrorists" that hate us, to protect the innocent from victimization. And yet while one of us is more likely to die from one of our own law enforcement agents than from a terrorist, millions of us are victimized each day from predatory corporations gouging us at the gas pump, at the bank, at the grocery store, in the hospitals, and so on. No matter your political leanings, no one seems to have their priorities straight.
edit on 21-6-2013 by PatriotGames2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by PatriotGames2
 


The people who respect nationalism should not believe in free markets. Yes we have controlled markets currently but are controlled to the detriment of small business in absolute favor of big business. The massive offshoring and automation that has been happening the past 2-3 decades in america and europe.

Jobs going to asia because its much cheaper there. It is natural for them to do so when we have over-regulated markets against business and zero tariffs. In other words we have no protectionist measures, and we also have had greedy unions demanding more for their employees than what they were worth. I like unions but not corrupt unions.

Wall Street investors "simply" want to maximise their profits which is 101 micro-economics. The government is responsible for macro-economics but they are involved in inside trading schemes and obviously get paid by big business to discourage protectionism.

We have to decide if we want globalism or protectionism. You can't have both! Of course there should be international trade but it should be balanced to promote healthy economies, ie balance imports with exports.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


I agree. As I said, I have no problem with people or corporations making money. That's their job, as you stated, to maximize profits. But like I stated, is this really a great motivator for the type of goals we wish to achieve as a society? Is record profiteering translating into prosperity for all or the middle class, the largest segment of our population? No.

You're correct to summarize this scenario as globalization vs protectionism, I think that's basically what I was driving at. I've studied and researched for years the effects of globalization on the American middle class, and why it's failing despite corporations making record profits over recent decades.

Unions fit right in with what I was saying about inherent evil. I, as well, support unions but not corrupt unions. Just like I like corporate business and government but not when it's corrupt. People may be getting paid more than they're worth, but I think the majority of people are struggling to make payments because wages have steadily declined. More money in the pockets of consumers will be circulated into the economy when they buy products. There has to be some way to make sure employees are paid what they're worth, not too little and not too much.
edit on 21-6-2013 by PatriotGames2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96

Originally posted by stormson
reply to post by neo96
 


people pay for all those social programs thru taxes.

want the 47% that pay no fed taxes to pay? give them a raise!
want the 47% to get off welfare? give them a raise!

btw, corporations take far more money from the gov than the poor people do in the form of tax breaks and bailouts.


Read what you wrote there?

47% have zero tax liabiilty that means that are getting tax breaks, and credits, and BAILOUTS.

Want people to get off welfare?

Stop vilifying corporations that employ people.



The same corporations that lobby for traitorous "free trade" agreements that have gutted the American workforce?

I'd say you're pretty much a traitor yourself if you want to defend these thieving corporations who own our politicians.
edit on 21-6-2013 by supremecommander because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by supremecommander
 


There are way too many laws that primarily affect small and medium business that cannot afford to offshore their operations because of the inherit overhead costs. We don't need more laws, we needs less laws. We need quality over quantity.

I mean we accept we are a capitalist society so we don't want socialism. That means we need to keep jobs here in america and keep americans employed so that everyone can afford to pay fair taxation and stop the welfare complex from destroying the national budget. And stop all these damm war campaigns also. Stop the spying. Stop the police state.

The government needs to work for american citizens not the big banks that enjoy buying government bonds and getting interest on the growing national debt. The banks WANT more spending. It is in their best interest to promote tumultous conditions.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 04:19 PM
link   
The American Revolution was the result of corporate abuse.

100 years later everyone forgot, they were all dead and their memories died with them.

Here we are, back in the same boat again.

Anyone who believes corporations are beneficial had better take some history lessons to refresh their memory.

A lot of long winded smart sounding people here are nothing but corporate shills.

Or maybe just dumb.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by MyHappyDogShiner
 


So why do people want capitalism then? Why do they vote for democrats and republicans that are capitalist orientated? Why did milliions of americans DIE overseas fighting to stop the spread of communism?

Corporations are the backbone of capitalism. They need to be reigned in just like citizens are controlled. Entrepreneurs and partnerships are secondary elements of capitalism.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 

In the beginning, corporations were kept on a short leash, they had to take care not to take advantage (capitalize) for fear of having their charter revoked.

Anyone who understands what capitalism really is would know there has to be something better, it doesn't have to be communism, socialism or whatever, of course corporations would be against a system which they couldn't exploit so freely as the one in force now.

The corporations are only about capitalism, and they have a lot of us here brainwashed into thinking that's a good way to do business, because it is easier for them to do what they like to do which is to take advantage of everything and everyone to turn a profit.

Corporations must be controlled.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 04:45 PM
link   
I also speak as an American, but let's forget about the USA for a second and look at how corporations and large banks have destroyed the rest of the world.

Whether you're a farmer or someone affected by the Union Carbide disaster in Bhopal, India or a member of a small tribe in Africa displaced by corporate power and without fresh water, your troubles can be attributed to the abusive control these institutions wield over the political process.

Corporations are not evil, but the people running them are. They're most often psychopaths by definition, devoid of empathy for their fellow man. Many of them make products we don't need but think we do, and in the process of mining resources and assembling products they dismiss the intrinsic value of life. Death is just another stat on a spreadsheet.

At the root of all this is consumerism. We consume and consume, and at some point there will be nothing left for us.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by MyHappyDogShiner

Corporations must be controlled.


Yes obviously they should be controlled, but both big parties get an awful lot of financial assistance come election time and then the government is forced to honor corporate money over american citizens who simply cast an ignorant vote.

Get "the small parties" involved in the debates, whether local, state or national elections. Once they get the magic 5% vote they then get matching funds and the media cannot ignore them. Gary Johnson should have pulled through the past time but he got backstabbed like ron paul did. I think we need to overhaul the entire election process and its way past overdue.
edit on 21/6/13 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 

....And corporations claim that campaign contributions by them, are protected under freedom of expression because they are considered persons....

I really do wish I had gone to school for law instead of some medical hoohah that never panned out for me, I would be more than willing to martyr myself fighting the most corrupt, and most powerful non-entity there is.

Zombie Killer.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by MyHappyDogShiner
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 

....And corporations claim that campaign contributions by them, are protected under freedom of expression because they are considered persons....

I really do wish I had gone to school for law instead of some medical hoohah that never panned out for me, I would be more than willing to martyr myself fighting the most corrupt, and most powerful non-entity there is.

Zombie Killer.


Both the first and second amendments have been misinterpreted! Speech and money are different according to most rational folks. Casting a vote is like voicing an opinion via writting. Money is considered an object that purchases something. Money cannot be considered speech!

The second amendment "well regulated militia" which means some controls are necessary. "assault weapons" ban was fraudulent because semi-autos can never be assault weapons, they must always have automatic capabilities.

Most of the time INTERPRETATION is the problem. Our forefathers were wise men and women and we sold them out.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by FyreByrd

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
How can one be a bigger threat than the other if they are one and the same?


Because they haven't always been one and the same. The corruption of the system came from the corporate side to begin with.

It's an important distinction and if we don't keep it in mind we will never be able to correct the system. The OP had some excellent ideas and I would add complete public funding of all elections, with a limited (say 3 month) period for campaigning (not the endless campaigning we have now).


It has been like this for decades and has slowly been growing more and more - now you can list the names of Congressmen, Senators and high ranking government officials that used to work for big corporations. Take a look at Goldman Sachs employees / US officials, same goes for Monsanto, same goes for Halliburton - the list goes on and on and on. The system requires a complete overhaul, your not going to "vote them out" - anyone who can afford to campaign has already been corrupted.

The OP mentions bringing back Glass-Stegall - that is too little too late. The derivative market is a ticking time bomb of hundreds of trillions of dollars - once it goes then good-bye.

Raising taxes on the rich - without cutting spending? Your going to have to tax "the rich" over 80% to meet current requirements, forget about the fiscal abyss in the upcoming decades as the baby boomers really start retiring. Not to mention, what would be considered "rich" and why would they keep on working if most of their profit would be taken?


edit on 21-6-2013 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Corporations took control of Government the moment laws were passed to protect the shareholder before the employee. Why should a shareholder receive priority over a worker ?

Investing in a company on the stock market is just another form of gambling. instead of gambling on a sporting team, horse or poker machine, they are gambling on a company. Yet name another form of gambling that gives so much protection to its punters as the stock market does with its shareholders.

It is funny though, how the word gambling never gets applied to the stock market or its "investors".

And if a company is not making money on the stock market, then shouldn't those investors [gamblers] lose their bet and money before ANY employee gets made redundant ?

Not to mention that our Superannuation is now tied up in the stock market, and every time the market crashes, our Super gets smaller and smaller. The companies must pay the Super by law, but then force us to put it into the stock market, the market crashes and our Super disappears. But someone, somewhere must end up with that "lost" money, and you can be sure that its either going into the Government coffers, or its going back to the companies with so much red tape that it can never be traced by the average person. The corporations get what they want in the end, but the end is so distorted to the rest of us, the we don't realise we are giving it back to the very people that have to by law, give it to us.



posted on Jun, 22 2013 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by stormson
 


Well I think this is an important topic. Stormson identifies a real fact. Corporate influence in government, we can all agree, exists Stromson believes this is a situation that is unhealthy to the common good. Neo96 thinks this arrangement is okay and proper.

This is the basic dichotomy of our times maybe all times. How does man exist as a social species with it's need for an order, an order that best facilitates success?

Neo96 insists on an order of merit based on performance and acquisition. coupled with a disregard and rebuke for those unable to compete successfully. Hi ho the corporations and those he identifies as the economic generators. He also boils it down to tax policy Those successful in acquisition are paying the majority of the total of what is being returned to the commons, in the way of taxes. Those less successful are not only given a pass on taxation but are in fact benefiting financially through the largess of government.

Stormson takes the little guys side, and rightfully points out that success while admirable, may in too large doses ultimately be detrimental to the majority.

Now here is the question. Is it possible for a society to offer a fairly uniform level of comfort and security to all it's members? Or is it that the effort, in the way of individual contribution necessary to provide that level of comfort and security, can only be generated by this way of rewarding the few while diminishing the many? What we like to call around here free enterprise. Capitalism gone wild.

And don't forget about resources, natural resources, when we argue these questions. Is this efficient and rather miraculous harvesting of the planet about to reach a bleak season? And that monolith, the corporation. has it, by it's amalgam of cooperation and combination, bestrode the planet only to reap the whirlwind?



posted on Jun, 22 2013 @ 02:40 AM
link   
reply to post by stormson
 


Naw, it all starts from the central banks which is the biggest threat, especially the IMF and feds.



posted on Jun, 22 2013 @ 05:21 AM
link   
Solution=Fight Club(first rule of fight club never talk about fight club) get er done!!!



posted on Jun, 22 2013 @ 05:38 AM
link   
Corporate America=America the Corporation,The corporations are just following the blueprint that capital hill has so freely given them!!!
We have all become Passively enslaved
We are much bigger then any Corporation
We look small to each other because We have been programmed to look at the individual, not the group called WE
We can get together and fix this
We All just Need to grow some Testicular Fortitude!!!



posted on Jun, 22 2013 @ 06:35 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 



Corporations are the backbone of capitalism.


Phffffffffffft

Where did you here that nonsense? Do some research,

Corporations are a construct of aristocracy, created by Kings and other aristocrats to undermine the market, and subvert markets and capitalism. A corporation is a form of government, and always has been.

The ancient leviathans at the top of the corporate pyramids are far more communistic than capitalistic. They do not promote innovation or competition, but just the opposite.

The only purpose of the corporate entity is to control the markets, and everyone else.

People talk about government regulations, but insurance companies create more regulations than government.



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join