commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-28 15:42:54 -0400 · Flag
There’s an interesting article about the emergence of “social capitalism”:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/haydnshaughnessy/2012/01/23/the-emergence-of-social-capitalism-adaptation-or-threat/

Someone commented that the emerging system is more capitalistic and more free than the current notion of “free market capitalism”. Perhaps this is the avenue we’d like to promote.

Responding to what Paul said, we don’t need to replace the corporate legal structure entirely, as it’s the exact same structure used by nonprofit organizations. However, the law needs to be changed so that corporations are obligated not only to their shareholders but to all of their stakeholders, including employees, consumers, and Mother Nature.
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-27 22:38:04 -0400 · Flag
Kirk:
My first reaction to your post is to your depiction of corporations as under the current set-up, corporations are some kind of mindless, immoral monster operating outside the law because that is simply not true. For-profit corporations are in fact run by people who are in fact held criminally responsible for the corporation’s actions.

The problem as I see it is that the people who run corporations are given the wrong incentives under the current economic system. By that I mean that the chief executives and board of directors of a for-profit corporation in the US are REQUIRED BY LAW to place stockholder interests above any other concerns in the decision-making process. In other words, since a stockholder’s primary interest is to make a profit, and management MUST place stockholders’ interests above all others, then guess what, management’s primary duty is to make a profit. All other considerations are secondary.

I see this as out of balance and as placing the interests of the business AHEAD of the interests of the people who work at the business, its customers, its suppliers and the society in which it operates, instead of BESIDE the interests of other concerned parties. I think this country has outgrown this economic model and needs to find a more balanced economic structure.
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-27 19:06:10 -0400 · Flag
People have the ability to act morally and ethically, corporations don’t. A corporation will dump toxic chemicals into oceans, lakes, and streams which contaminate water supplies, or it will fund an unnecessary war for nothing more than profit. A corporation receives no death penalty, or prison sentence for it’s actions, therefor it can not be counted as an American citizen…for it has no conscience. An American citizen must be able to serve a sentence for their crime, and a corporation cannot.
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-26 21:27:44 -0400 · Flag
Get money out of politics now! Does my vote even count? I could donate every penny I make and it doesn’t matter, some billionaire will come along from out of state and buy off the other candidate. I want to throw up.
followed Home 2014-04-26 09:58:44 -0400
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-26 01:30:42 -0400 · Flag
Paul:I question whether America has ever practiced real capitalism. I think there’s a big difference between capitalism and corporatism. But we can’t be sure, can we; because we’ve never tried the pure/non-corporate version. What would it be like; having a lot more companies actually competing with each other?
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-26 00:10:24 -0400 · Flag
The alternative is socialism, but Americans seem not to accept it especially after the whole thing with Russia and all the propaganda our government put out during the Cold War. (Anti-communism in America was all about what the corporations wanted.) Even today, many people I talk to don’t understand socialism/communism and its merits.
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-25 23:06:43 -0400 · Flag
For what it’s worth, I think America has outgrown its need for free-market capitalism and needs to move into a more balanced and mature economic paradigm.
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-25 22:57:23 -0400 · Flag
I don’t think capitalism is “fundamentally flawed” as you say, just twisted here in America. Pundits blab about “free markets” but what they really mean is making it easier for the rich to get richer. A truly free market will be one in which everyone, including the lower class, has an equal opportunity to move up the ladder. What we have right now is plutocracy, not capitalism. It’s capitalism for the rich.

William: The Green Party is not “another corporation”. Never heard of it? Good. They don’t get much publicity because they don’t participate in the campaign finance system that Wolf PAC aims to defeat.
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-25 18:00:40 -0400 · Flag
I apologize for double posting but, captialism fundementally flawed. Certain products produce a GREAT market around this concept, the same DOES NOT go for our governing represenatives that are supposed to MAKE DECISIONS TO BENEFIT THE COUNTRY AS A WHOLE not themselves or what they personally think is right.
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-25 17:54:58 -0400 · Flag
This needs to be reworked with specific details for it to be perfectly effective.
PEOPLE OF ANY FINANNICAL STANDING SHOULD HAVE AN EQUAL VOICE / IMPACT. That means if they are rich OR poor because MONEY does not determine INTELLIGENCE.
I could be a polatician but, I choose otherwise because I have to focus my career / dreams BECAUSE of this it’s very difficult to be heard at all. THERE NEEDS TO BE AN EASIER WAY FOR PEOPLES IDEAS / VOICES TO BE HEARD, IF PEOPLE ARE TAKEN SERIOUSLY / MONITORED THERE WOULD BE NO “TROLLING”.
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-25 03:48:35 -0400 · Flag
Kyle: I suggest roll all that cynicism into a little ball and stuff it way down deep inside where it can’t be seen. If all that repressed energy becomes overwhelming you could try chanting something about hope and change while imagining a world where political corruption is a punishable crime by constitutional mandate. If that doesn’t work; there’s always the long walk off a short pier.
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-25 03:36:15 -0400 · Flag
Aidan: Are you seriously suggesting that the solution to corporate corruption is another corporation? A green one?
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-24 23:23:58 -0400 · Flag
Kyle, there’s an entire political party that’s not entirely rich elites:
http://www.gp.org/

Right now, as a matter of policy, Green Party candidates don’t take corporate donations. I would imagine that after the campaign finance amendment is passed, they will have a greater chance of getting their people into elected office.
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-24 23:11:35 -0400 · Flag
I definitely think something needs to be done if we intend on ever trying to “fix” America. People have brought up some valid points, however, in opposition to this amendment. Once we remove the enormous pool of money that is the corporation, isn’t it likely that the only people that could possible run for office at that point would be the already rich elites with their own personal wealth behind them? Furthermore, how can this amendment actually be enforced? If the Supreme Court is also corrupt (which it looks like it is), why would they ever rule anything unconstitutional and how would that ruling matter at all?
published Home 2014-04-24 09:14:18 -0400
published Home 2014-04-21 20:45:58 -0400
@WolfPacTX retweeted @WolfPAChq 2014-04-19 12:15:44 -0400
Proof The US Is An Oligarchy, Not A Democracy: https://t.co/n4YvkaTsYi
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-19 09:25:31 -0400 · Flag
ddkdieiieieos
commented on 28th Amendment 2014-04-18 15:41:34 -0400 · Flag
Aidan,
Article V only requires congress to “call a convention for proposing amendments to the constitution.” Anyone can make any proposal to amend the constitution at such a convention. Unfortunately. I do not see where a convention can be called to debate just 1 predetermined proposal.

The concept of “corporate personhood” is not necessary to make corporate entities suable and capable of suing themselves. It has always been that way. The Founding Fathers never intended that corporations were to be endowed with constitutional rights. They always were legal entities, subject to legislative action and regulation, but never were they intended to have constitutional rights.
← Previous  1  2    5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13    43  44  Next →

We need your help,
you can signup with:




Get Involved Anytime:

Our Pack

Activity

View All