Replace corporation with  union and resubmit.

.

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Eric Roberts
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> We did have limitations and the Roberts supreme court just eliminated them.
> Congress should have started impeachment proceedings immediately after the
> Citizens United ruling.  That was unabashed politics at it's worst.  I do
> think the only way to make sure we have restrictions that stick is to make
> sure they are in an amendment.  Corps have WAY too much power because they
> have access to WAY more money that the average Joe does and thus they have
> WAY more influence on the political process than we do.  I think they should
> not be able to donate anything to the political process.  Corporations are
> not people...I think that the concept that they are is completely
> ridiculous.  They can't serve in office, they can't serve in the military,
> they cannot be put in jail or be executed for crimes, and they cannot do
> anything a living human can do.  Should they have rights and
> protections...sure...we don't want to see abuses coming from the other side
> either, but they do not have free speech, the do not have a right to
> influence politics.  That right there is a no brainer to me.  If a company
> can donate money to a candidate and any of the employees can donate to a
> candidate, then that is double dipping.  Plus it is not right that a
> corporation should be able to donate since it is made of many individuals
> and I would be highly surprised to find many situations where everyone in
> the company agrees.  I think the same should apply to unions and other
> organizations.  That is why I am all for public financing of elections.  You
> get x amount of dollars to spend and that is it.  Not donations, no personal
> funds, everyone is on an even playing field and no one has a financial
> advantage because they are independently wealthy or their donors are
> wealthier than their opponents.  No PACS or other groups that can run ads or
> sponsor events that would offset costs...everything has to be financed from
> the amount given to a candidate.  This would stop swift boating and other
> reprehensible tactics.  The other thing that needs to be added into the
> equation is accountability.  If a candidate makes a statement and it is a
> false statement, there needs to be legal liabilities.  Mudslinging is one
> thing, but when you start making shit up, that is another.
>
> I am not sure I would want to live to see that because that sounds like a
> lead in into the Terminator  ;-).
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Munn [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 01:19
> To: cf-community
> Subject: Re: So this Wisconsin Thing
>
>
> That's why we need a Constitutional amendment limiting the power of
> corporations.
>
> Let's step back for a second and consider why the current situation is
> unsustainable, and how the current trajectory of our economy reveals a fatal
> flaw in our current incarnation of capitalism and free markets.  By
> definition, corporate managers and boards are duty-bound to maximize profits
> for their shareholders.
>
> The natural outcome of this situation is the elimination of most US-based
> labor. It will happen, and it will happen this century. Ray Kurzweil has
> calculated that technology is now advancing exponentially across all fields,
> and he figures we'll come to the Singularity in 2045. He figures by then
> machines will be able to design and build newer, even more sophisticated
> technology on their own and us slow-thinking humans will be left in the
> dust. Assuming the availability of resources for all of this technological
> growth, robots and AIs could run everything in just a few years.
>
> Bear with me for a second, even if you don't buy Kurzweil's argument. The
> end result of our current capitalist system would be that, while humans
> would technically have no need to work at all since machines could do
> everything for us, only shareholders in the surviving companies that owned
> the technology would benefit from such stunning advances. They would have
> all the money, all the resources, and everyone else would have nothing.
> Nothing, that is, except the votes to elect a government that will use those
> technologies to provide most everything for everyone. Science fiction? I
> wonder. I hope I'm still around

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:334617
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm

Reply via email to