(08-11-2011 02:07 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:04 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  I always wondered if the fact that their own retirement portfolios are invested in the very companies and industries that the left hate so much ever crossed the minds of some that protest the loudest against them. Whether it is big oil, big pharma, banks, etc., most Americans with even a mutual fund are invested in those and yet they rail against corporations, likely without thinking at all.

They should at least be ideologically consistent and dump all their investments in those evil corporations. Buy stock in the government and see how much of a great ROI it really is.

That's ridiculous. You can dislike something and still participate in it if it's your best option. I think the road I drive on to work is **** and full of potholes, and I complain about it all the time. Doesn't mean it's not the best option available to me or that I wouldn't like it fixed or changed.

What needs to be fixed or changed regarding corporations? If something is your best option, why then protest against it?

You DO understand that the "Corporations are people" phrase is about the LEGAL (and tax) treatment of corporations.

The main issue isnt that he said corporations are people it's that he sounded like an entitled douche as he was saying it. The supreme court says that corporations are bascially people so legally they are. Although, I believe that corporations are legal entities not people. You can kill a corporation and not go to jail.

(08-11-2011 01:59 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  Those mostly anonymous shareholders are not making the majority of the decisions, which is what really matters.

So what. The shareholders have put their faith in the directors and the officers. The bottom line is that when the gov't "goes after" corporations, they are only hurting those of us who invest in the markets.

(08-11-2011 02:13 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:07 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:04 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  I always wondered if the fact that their own retirement portfolios are invested in the very companies and industries that the left hate so much ever crossed the minds of some that protest the loudest against them. Whether it is big oil, big pharma, banks, etc., most Americans with even a mutual fund are invested in those and yet they rail against corporations, likely without thinking at all.

They should at least be ideologically consistent and dump all their investments in those evil corporations. Buy stock in the government and see how much of a great ROI it really is.

That's ridiculous. You can dislike something and still participate in it if it's your best option. I think the road I drive on to work is **** and full of potholes, and I complain about it all the time. Doesn't mean it's not the best option available to me or that I wouldn't like it fixed or changed.

What needs to be fixed or changed regarding corporations? If something is your best option, why then protest against it?

You DO understand that the "Corporations are people" phrase is about the LEGAL (and tax) treatment of corporations.

Because your best option can still be ****.. and can still be improved. I mean.. WTF.. why in the world would I accept something if I think it can be better? That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Talk about un-American, FFS. If something isn't good, you don't just take it, you go out and try to figure out a way to make it better.

(08-11-2011 02:13 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  You DO understand that the "Corporations are people" phrase is about the LEGAL (and tax) treatment of corporations.

Yeah...that's exactly what Willard meant...you run with that...LOL

And MHB, when did I ever say I was protesting against corporations? I only hate the fact that corporations pretty much run this country with their lobbying and influence on our elected officials...yes, I am counting corporations heavily influenced by unions too!

(08-11-2011 02:11 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:08 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:06 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 01:59 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  Those mostly anonymous shareholders are not making the majority of the decisions, which is what really matters.

Publicly traded corporations, those that have many anonymous shareholders are not by any means the majority of corporations!

I work for a $300 million Privately Held Company. In fact, the employees own 42% of it. Out of Every $1 of Net Income, the Federal Govt gets $.35, and then $.27 goes into the employees pocket via an ESOP (We have less than 400 employees). Think about that....we are doing the work, and paying personal income taxes, and then the government turns around and taxes the additional benefits of our labor. They end up taking more than we get to keep. You increase the taxes, and the employees get even less.

If they are working for the company, they aren't really anonymous, now are they? I find it hard to believe this situation is what miko was referring to anyways.

I'm not miko.

No ****.. my original post was a reply to him though. If you're post isn't relevant to what me and Miko are discussing, there's no need to reply to my post.

If you think the concentrated few that run these large companies, are speaking for the vast majority of their employees, I have a bridge to sell you. It's as simple as that. If you really believe that, good luck.

(08-11-2011 02:27 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  If you think the concentrated few that run these large companies, are speaking for the vast majority of their employees, I have a bridge to sell you. It's as simple as that. If you really believe that, good luck.

What is the purpose of a corporation?

It's simple....to build shareholder/stakeholder wealth by making $$$.


By talking about these "large companies" you are really talking about the minority of corporations anyway. Of course if you punish the evil GE's of the world, then you also catch the mom and pop bakery in the crossfire.

(08-11-2011 02:05 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 01:59 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  Question for Mr. Redwingtom....What organization pays you for your time and effort?

It's just stupid to suggest a corporation is a person.. it's comical.

Go ***** to the USSC.

(08-11-2011 02:27 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  If you think the concentrated few that run these large companies, are speaking for the vast majority of their employees, I have a bridge to sell you. It's as simple as that. If you really believe that, good luck.

Wrong. They are speaking for the vast majority of these people. If they weren't, then the shareholders would vote the board of directors out and replace them with new people. Also, if you despise the moves that the CEO is making for a publicly traded company, you can vote with your feet by selling your shares. Alternatively, if your mutual fund invests in companies that you don't like you can cash out and invest somewhere else.

This is very simple and fundamental stuff here. I'm amazed that you cannot grasp these concepts.

(08-11-2011 02:40 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:27 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  If you think the concentrated few that run these large companies, are speaking for the vast majority of their employees, I have a bridge to sell you. It's as simple as that. If you really believe that, good luck.

Wrong. They are speaking for the vast majority of these people. If they weren't, then the shareholders would vote the board of directors out and replace them with new people. Also, if you despise the moves that the CEO is making for a publicly traded company, you can vote with your feet by selling your shares. Alternatively, if your mutual fund invests in companies that you don't like you can cash out and invest somewhere else.

This is very simple and fundamental stuff here. I'm amazed that you cannot grasp these concepts.

It's simple....he needs dim talking points.

(08-11-2011 02:20 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:13 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  You DO understand that the "Corporations are people" phrase is about the LEGAL (and tax) treatment of corporations.

Yeah...that's exactly what Willard meant...you run with that...LOL

And MHB, when did I ever say I was protesting against corporations? I only hate the fact that corporations pretty much run this country with their lobbying and influence on our elected officials...yes, I am counting corporations heavily influenced by unions too!

Actually the protest comment was more aimed at H84.

I will somewhat agree that corporations have too much influence in our national politics via crony capitalism. The only connection government should have with business has to do with creating good conditions for business to flourish and having a few good common sense regulations - i.e. safety issues for both workers and consumers. Any oversight needed when a business enters into a contract with the government is OK. Things have indeed gotten too cozy between big business, big banks and government.

As for the Romney quote and article, I didn't even bother reading it, as it is I'm sure, the usual Puffington Post leftist drabble, the usual anti-corporation crap that dimwits engage in.

(08-11-2011 02:27 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  If you think the concentrated few that run these large companies, are speaking for the vast majority of their employees, I have a bridge to sell you. It's as simple as that. If you really believe that, good luck.

Well, in any large group of people working towards a common goal there are always some malcontents. You were probably hired to perform a specific function for the company and I doubt that sharing your opinion of how the company is being run was part of that job description. In other words, you work for them. They have a company PR spokesman and it isn't you. You want to run the company and make the decisions, move up the ladder. Or find a different job. Or, here's a thought - start your own company so you can be boss (and have those that work for you run you down behind your back because they don't like how YOU are doing things).

You are pretty naive if you think that a company must speak for its employees. It speaks for the business venture.

(08-11-2011 02:54 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:20 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:13 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  You DO understand that the "Corporations are people" phrase is about the LEGAL (and tax) treatment of corporations.

Yeah...that's exactly what Willard meant...you run with that...LOL

And MHB, when did I ever say I was protesting against corporations? I only hate the fact that corporations pretty much run this country with their lobbying and influence on our elected officials...yes, I am counting corporations heavily influenced by unions too!

Actually the protest comment was more aimed at H84.

I will somewhat agree that corporations have too much influence in our national politics via crony capitalism. The only connection government should have with business has to do with creating good conditions for business to flourish and having a few good common sense regulations - i.e. safety issues for both workers and consumers. Any oversight needed when a business enters into a contract with the government is OK. Things have indeed gotten too cozy between big business, big banks and government.

As for the Romney quote and article, I didn't even bother reading it, as it is I'm sure, the usual Puffington Post leftist drabble, the usual anti-corporation crap that dimwits engage in.

Then go pull up the same freaking article on the web somewhere...it's all over the place! I thought only liberals attacked the source?

(08-11-2011 02:20 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  And MHB, when did I ever say I was protesting against corporations? I only hate the fact that corporations pretty much run this country with their lobbying and influence on our elected officials...yes, I am counting corporations heavily influenced by unions too!

True or not, your hatred is better directed to those elected officials.

Sorry, but I feel dumber every time I read anything on that site. Not interested in some hit piece on Mitt and no, he is not my guy. He is a typical politician, finger in the air trying to determine which direction the wind is blowing. The only thing he may have on the others in the race is that he actually probably understands how the economy works.

I just don't trust his "courage of convictions." Wobbly.

(08-11-2011 03:06 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:20 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  And MHB, when did I ever say I was protesting against corporations? I only hate the fact that corporations pretty much run this country with their lobbying and influence on our elected officials...yes, I am counting corporations heavily influenced by unions too!

True or not, your hatred is better directed to those elected officials.

Don't get me wrong, I don't much care for them either...but Citizen's united didn't much help things. Unless you are Mitt. How odd...well...NOT!

(08-11-2011 03:06 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:20 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  And MHB, when did I ever say I was protesting against corporations? I only hate the fact that corporations pretty much run this country with their lobbying and influence on our elected officials...yes, I am counting corporations heavily influenced by unions too!

True or not, your hatred is better directed to those elected officials.

Why is it that we expect our kids to say no to drugs but not our politicians?

(08-11-2011 03:02 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:27 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  If you think the concentrated few that run these large companies, are speaking for the vast majority of their employees, I have a bridge to sell you. It's as simple as that. If you really believe that, good luck.

Well, in any large group of people working towards a common goal there are always some malcontents. You were probably hired to perform a specific function for the company and I doubt that sharing your opinion of how the company is being run was part of that job description. In other words, you work for them. They have a company PR spokesman and it isn't you. You want to run the company and make the decisions, move up the ladder. Or find a different job. Or, here's a thought - start your own company so you can be boss (and have those that work for you run you down behind your back because they don't like how YOU are doing things).

You are pretty naive if you think that a company must speak for its employees. It speaks for the business venture.

Yeah, I work for them to do a task. I don't have a problem with this system. But I also don't need them to speak for me politically either.

(08-11-2011 02:47 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:40 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-11-2011 02:27 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  If you think the concentrated few that run these large companies, are speaking for the vast majority of their employees, I have a bridge to sell you. It's as simple as that. If you really believe that, good luck.

Wrong. They are speaking for the vast majority of these people. If they weren't, then the shareholders would vote the board of directors out and replace them with new people. Also, if you despise the moves that the CEO is making for a publicly traded company, you can vote with your feet by selling your shares. Alternatively, if your mutual fund invests in companies that you don't like you can cash out and invest somewhere else.

This is very simple and fundamental stuff here. I'm amazed that you cannot grasp these concepts.

It's simple....he needs dim talking points.

I can despise the motives of the company and still enjoy making money off of them, if anything I'm more likely to invest in them. That way at least I'm benefiting from their actions.

As long as the system isn't changed, I have to play by the rules. Under those rules, that's the best way for me to personally make money right now. That doesn't mean I don't have problems with the company or system, or can't want the system to change. Until that system changes though, I'm going to play the current system to the best of my ability. I'm amazed that you can't understand this, it's very simple.