Corporations Are Not All That Bad

[BurtWorm]

I've been asked to start a thread with this title by a winger to see how well DU responds to it. In the spirit of making a go of it, I'll even add that Air America seems like a "not all that bad" corporation (setting aside their running minority community radio stations off the air).

So do you agree or disagree?

[kaitykaity]

1. If they follow the rules, pay their taxes, don't

pollute, act fairly in the market--all the things they
don't do now, then yeah you might have a point.

It's not the corporations themselves--it's the law of
corporate personhood that's causing all the problems.
That and Reagan's legacy of deregulating everything.

How's that?

[alonso_quijano]

14. True

I'm not even opposed (in principle, not in the way it's typically practiced in America Inc.) to corporate welfare: if a large business enterprise (or, more likely, entire industry) is vital to American security and interests, then, yes, the government should step in when that enterprise or industry is in danger of collapse. It shouldn't step in just to overcompensate some already-overcompensated, job-slashing CEOs, though, which is what corporate welfare has come to mean.

Of course, that same industry (and all others) must be willing to step up and pay their fair share in good times, which is something that I have yet to see happen.

[Goldmund]

2. I hate America.

On Edit: had to throw a bone to your wingnut friend...

[Shakespeare]

6. Thanks, I just sprayed Coke all over my monitor.

We're liberals, therefore we must hate America.

(except that we don't)

[Goldmund]

9. Sorry

http://www.ehow.com/how_940_clean-computer-monitor.html

[BurtWorm]

20. That was so thoughtful of you!

:toast: I'll see how it went over and get back to you. ;)

[WilliamPitt]

28. My mom was a corporation for a while

while she ran her own business. So yeah, I can get down with that. My take is pretty straightforward:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/062104A.shtml

[Taylor Mason Powell]

39. Aha, then your mom is EVIL.

EEEEEEEVIL!!!!!!

Which makes you the spawn of Satan, I guess. :-)

[Taverner]

3. Costco treats their workers and customers well

Pro-union, pro-customer and a great deal at the same time. The CEO when creating the company actually went out of his way to make sure the employees were unionized, and well taken care of.

[KuroKensaki]

4. It depends on the corporation

Some are run in the interests of profit and public benefit. Some are run in the interests only of profit.

Air America's a good corporation, so's Ben and Jerry's, hrm.. um... little help?

[Shakespeare]

5. Disagree (with qualifications)

I won't say categorically that they're all totally, completely bad....but a great number of them are really, really bad.

http://www.thecorporation.tv/about/

[sangh0]

7. Corporations are amoral - neither good nor bad

They are also a legal fiction and should not be entitled to rights.

[Kenneth ken]

61. excellent answer

I wish I'd said that!

:thumbsup:

[NC_Nurse]

8. Like anything else, there are always exceptions to blanket

statements like this one. There are noble corporations out there, and there are the "evildoers". Our pResident seems to have sided with the latter group.

The more greedy, unethical and sleazy they are, the more likely they are to be linked to this administration it seems.

[Eric J in MN]

10. Air America is a private company, not a public corporation (nt)

nt

[BurtWorm]

21. Okay, so maybe corporations ARE all bad!

;)

[MUSTANG_2004]

32. But it is a corporation

Public/private is who owns it and how the stock is handled. That's a separate issue over whether it is incorporated.

[Eric J in MN]

67. I guess it depends on which definition you want to use, but

I guess it depends on which definition you want to use, but usually when people use the term "corporation," they're talking about companies you can buy stock in.

You can't buy stock in Air America.

[BlueEyedSon]

11. Corporate cronyism/welfare is not free market capitalism.

Taken to its extreme, it's fascism.

End of rant.

[Taylor Mason Powell]

12. Corporations are neither "good" nor "bad."

A corporation is simply a legal fiction. A way to construct a business.

Now, the law that has developed regarding the corporation's rights and liabilities has led to results which are very arguably harmful to society.

For example, a corporation's officers and directors are under a LEGAL DUTY to do what is in the best interest of the corporate bottom line, regardless of how any particular action may affect the workers, the environment, etc. But then again, Congress can pass workers' rights laws and environmental protection laws, and the corporations would have to abide by them.

My point is only that there is nothing necessarily inherent in the corporate form itself which automatically forces a corporation to be evil or to refrain from being good citizens. Some corporations in fact are good citizens.

Everyone should go see the documentary film "The Corporation," or rent it when it comes out on video/dvd. It's very interesting and educational.

[hiphopnation]

19. But corporations

have been afforded more and more rights over our history. It wasn't always that they enjoyed some of the liberal laws that they do regarding thier "citizenship".

A corporation can break certain laws and suffer lesser penalties than if a person were to break essentialy the same laws. Waddup wit dat?!?!

This is part of the reason that corporations, especially big ones with super fancy lawyers, are percieved as eeeeevil, IMHO.

No?

[Taylor Mason Powell]

36. Well, that's true...

It is part of the reason. The thing about corporation "breaking certain laws and suffering lesser penalties," is true to an extent. But you can't put a corporation in jail, is the problem. And many (if not most) crimes require intent, which is hard to conceptualize, much less prove, when you're talking about a corporation. Mostly you're dealing with negligence. When Sara Lee made those hot dogs a few years ago and some horrible bacteria got into the process and some people died (help me out here people!), was that murder? I would guess that Sara Lee didn't intend to kill anybody - bad for business. Sounds more like negligence. Which is terrible, and Sara Lee should pay for that, (and they probably did). But my point is, prosecuting the corporation for homicide? How does that work, exactly? (I have actually done some checking on this in relation to a moot court problem, and it turns out that in some states a corporation can be criminally charged. But the punishments are generally the same as those in civil court, i.e. huge fines, etc.)

I'm for revoking a corporate charter for deliberate malfeasance, maybe even certain instances of gross negligence. The "Death Penalty" for corporations, if you will. Or some sort of "Three-strikes-you're-out" law. Although this means that potentially hundreds or thousands of people could lose their jobs. But in general, if they have some of the same rights as persons, I agree that they should have some of the same duties and liabilities. But a corporation is not capable of forming an intent in the criminal sense. (This doesn't mean they can't be sued to high heaven, with extravagant punitive damages!!)

The main problem as I see it not so much "corporate personhood," which sounds terrible but isn't really as significant as people make it out to be. Rather, it's what I mentioned above, i.e. the legal duty to advance the bottom line at the expense of everything else. This is to me the main reason why corporate behavior needs to be heavily regulated, and why the governmental agencies in charge (the SEC, for example) need to be vigorous in their enforcement of these laws.

Ultimately, I see it as an issue that's more political than legal in nature. Proper legislation and enforcement would serve to correct many if not most of the problems we identify as being inherent in the Corporate form, and so we need legislators and executive-branch types who understand these issues. In other words, we need to elect more liberals. (Yeah, I know. Flame away!)


/windbaggery

[MUSTANG_2004]

57. No legal duty to advance the bottom line

"Rather, it's what I mentioned above, i.e. the legal duty to advance the bottom line at the expense of everything else."

Actually, that's a misconception. Corporate officers have a legal duty to maximize shareholder returns when selling the company, but apart from that, they don't have a legal duty to increase the bottom line as long as they are acting in the best interest of the company and not for themselves personally.

In other words, if Bill Gates says that Microsoft will stop charging schools for MS software in order to increase the number of people educated with MS products, that's perfectly legal, even if it means MS makes less money.

Similarly, a corporation can spend additional money to exceed environmental standards if it wants to and the shareholders approve.

[Shakespeare]

22. I included a link to The Corporation in my post.

Definitely worth checking out.

[AP]

13. the free market is a beautiful thing, when it's competitive.

And a good competion requires fair rules and regulations, as any sports fan could tell you.

What we have today is a lack of competition between big corps and small corps and between corps and consumers because the referees are on the side of big corps and capital and hate labor and small corps.

Having said all that, the defining problem in society today is large, uncompetitive corporations run amok with the help of Republicans.

[Taylor Mason Powell]

16. indeed.

It's always amazing to me that these right-wingers are always extolling the virtues of competitive (unregulated) markets, while turning a blind eye to the obvious fact that the game is completely rigged. What use in playing a rigged game? My guess is that the wingers figure, incorrectly, that the game is somehow rigged in their favor.

[AP]

52. Exactly. Republicans greates success has been in getting so many

people to mistakenly allign themselves with people who don't care at all about their best interests.

[catzies]

15. Your winger is displaying the classic false dichotomy groupthink

Either/or, black & white, good/bad, right/wrong Manichean thinking is what got us into this mess, if you ask me.

A corporation that exists to sell a product/provide a service is netiher good nor bad until its actions begin to affect others.

Selling a product = good.

Selling a product THAT KILLS = bad.

Selling a product that kills + lying about it = EVIL.

Selling a product that kills + lying about it * government enabling of said corporation / consumers rendered powerless by government enabling = EVIL LYING BASTARD MOTHERFUCKERS.

:)

[BurtWorm]

29. I know. It's rampant over there.

:eyes:

[hughee99]

44. Is selling a product that kills

always necessarily bad or does it depend on the product? Guns are the obviously the example I'm thinking of. Someone has to make weapons for the police and military. If a company were to make weapons for only the police and military, would they be necessarily be a bad company? I think that no product is absolutely good, or absolutely bad, that comes with how they are used by their consumers. The evil part comes into play with how they are marketed. Tobacco has been sold for hundreds of years, for many of them, no one realized that they were bad for you. I wouldn't consider the companies evil in this case. THEN, they figured out that they were bad for you, and didn't tell anyone for many years. This is definately evil. Now, I would doubt that there is anyone in america who hasn't heard that tobacco can be habit forming and a greatly harm your body. The tobacco companies still have to deal with the legacy of their evil, but I do not have too much sympathy for the smoker who just started in the last year or so. They went into it with their eyes open, and it's their right to do put that crap in their body if they want, but I don't believe that anyone is unaware of the danger.

[catzies]

64. We agree that there are no easy answers

and I hope we agree in that it should be "people before profits." :)

[Philostopher]

17. I was going to jump on the semantics ...

but I don't know whose they are.

By that I mean, 'not all corporations are that bad' is something I can hang with. Not all corporations exploit borderline slave labor in third-world countries, crush the unions in this one, use a corporate policy designed to kill local mom and pop businesses and sell lousy products at an inflated price. Only some of them do. There are companies that treat employees fairly, make an effort to give back to their communities and don't rip consumers off at the checkout (or pollute their neighborhoods, or take tax abatements then run as soon as the abatements run out and they're actually obliged to take up their share of the slack), so not all of them suck.

In general, though, corporations gradually have been squeezed into a situation where they have to justify just about anything to keep up the stock price because the stockholders determine policy. Shareholder dividends determine corporate policy, instead of best practices or industry standards. That can prevent many corporations from doing the right thing, or being 'good neighbors' because it isn't the most profitable way of doing business, and therefore results in reduced dividends and unhappy shareholders.

CEOs' salaries are determined by such things, and sometimes they, too share in the profits -- so it's come to many corporations maximizing profits at the expense of community standards and relationships, following laws and ordinances, and paying their dues to the communities in which they operate. Does this reflect the reality of every single corporation in this or other countries? Nah. Does it reflect the reality of the larger number? I'd have to say probably.

[Monte Carlo]

18. Corporations are just legal entities.

There's nothing good or bad about them in and of itself.

The problem is that a lot of the woes of the world can be traced back to monied interests, many of which are corporations.

[Michael Costello]

53. relations of production

That's true. It is just mystification of the reality - that there are people who work, say Hilton hotel workers, who create wealth every day, and then there are heirs who've never worked a day in their life like Paris Hilton, who expropriate value from these workers in the form of massive profits. A corporation is just a mechanism for the idlers to steal from the workers. The important thing is the relation between people, a corporation is at the end of things, just a legal construct. In the US, over 40% of corporate stock is held by 1% of the population according to the Federal Reserve - the control and the lions share of the profit goes to this tiny idle class elite.

[Caution]

23. a better way to put it is:

All corporations are not bad.

Some are. The ones that are typically use their wealth and position in the economy to exert excessive influence in the political arena at the expense of the average citizen in a purely profit motive.

Some corporations are terrific. The one I work for is great, they're bucking the outsourcing trend, they offer terrific benefits and the pay is pretty good, they are very liberal in terms of their policies (domestic partner benefits, extended maternity leave, work from home as needed, flexible hours, etc). And they are a profitable, viable company.

In other words, they ain't Halliburton.

[OutOfIraqNow]

24. Yes They Are

I've been a lurker here for a while, so you'll have to excuse me as this is my first post; and I understand that of all the topics that I could have picked to do it in (nothing like starting with style), however,,, here goes:


Yes Corporations are bad.

It is unreasonable for these executives to make MILLIONS of dollars a year, all of which tax-free.

Why can't I get good health care coverage without having to pay up the ass for it? Why can't they pay their fair share to make sure their workers are healthy? After all, aren't' healthy workers happy workers?

Why do I have to choose which bill I'm not going to pay because I can't afford it, while the Ken Lay's of the world have to choose which sailboat they want?

[Taylor Mason Powell]

43. Hey come on, now, choosing a sailboat is HARD WORK!!

:-) Welcome to DU.

Seriously, though, it seems your beef is with the actions of certain corporations, not with ALL corporations or with the CONCEPT of the corporation.

[newyawker99]

55. Hi OutOFIraqNow!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[patdem]

25. There are two ways to pronounce that ...all corporations are not ALL

that bad or corporations are not all that BAD? Most corporations in America are really family owned business'..and they are hardly bad at ALL! it is the corporations who ARE BAD that give the word 'corporation' a BAD name!!!

[Mr. Sinister]

Private vs. Publicly held

Private company's often reflect the owner's ethics
or lack thereof. Many privately held companies
can share a founder's commitment to fairness and
ecological responsibility. Publicly held companies
are responsible to shareholders and are usually
driven by a bottom line mentality that can lead
to a range of behavior from the merely mercenary to the
outright criminal. As other posters have noted,
the person-hood of corporations have wreaked much
havoc as well as the public corporations' lack of
individual responsibility and the contention between
long term vision vs. short term profits.

[newyawker99]

56. Hi crashsf!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[TexasBushwhacker]

26. I would remove the word "that" and rearrange the words

Not all corporations are bad. I think they good from very good to very bad and everything in between.

For example, Malden Mills in Lawrence, Massachusetts, the company that makes Polartec fabrics and others, did something truly mind boggling in this day and age. In 1995 there was a fire that destroyed the entire mill. The president and owner, a grandson of the founder, could have taken the insurance money and just closed the doors of the business. He is an old man. But he felt committed to the community and his employees and decided to rebuild "a state-of-the-art, environmentally friendly facility in the same location." Not only that, he paid his employees for many months during the rebuilding process and continued to pay for all employees benefits through a brief lay off period while the new mill was being built.

I also like this story about SAS shoe factory. The company makes hand-sewn, high-priced walking shoes which retail for around $100 a pair. The company is still operating in Maine, according to workers, because its founder, Terry Armstrong, was raised in these parts. Many employees now choke back tears at the mention of his name. "I tip my hat to Terry Armstrong," said Donna Dunphy, daughter-in-law of the Pittsfield plant's manager. "He said he'll never close this factory as long as he's alive.".

It seemed as if it was all about to change last week, when the staff listened to plant manager Red Dunphy. "I'm thinking, maybe we are going to have to work more hours," said Eleanor Flood, 70, who has worked at the plant since it opened. "Then he reads the announcement - 'As we reconstruct SAS for the needs of the future, we are proud to be able to fulfill a long-standing dream by giving each of you a one-time gift of $1000,' and he stops," Flood recalled. "But if you know this guy, you know there's a punchline coming. ...And he goes, 'For every year of service.'...
"I was standing with this group of ladies, and they all started crying," Flood said, her own voice cracking. "And I said, 'I've worked here 19 years. That's $19,000.' "

Other examples can be found here:

http://www.doomdujour.com/1gmktrin.htm

Obviously there's not room to cite examples of all the bad corporations.

[Hoping4Change]

27. Insist the RW see the highly entertaining documentary

The Corporation before he concludes the "corporations are not all that bad."

To view trailer: http://www.thecorporation.tv/trailer/


P.S. The film is opening in 50 cities in July.

[SheepyMcSheepster]

30. i find nothing wrong with coorperationas as long as they act responsibly.

[RummyTheDummy]

31. Southwest Airlines is a good company

They treat their employees well and have a pretty sound business strategy that paid off during the post 9/11 travel problems.

And if your freeper friend is watching I have a message for him: Go fuck yourself.

[SW FL Dem]

33. I agree somewhat

Many small family businesses are incorporated. Costco is a corporation that treats its employees well and supports Dems. Many charities are corporations.

[lagniappe]

34. Thats like saying minorities are not all that bad...

or gays, or whites, or any other group.

A corporation can be formed by one person. Many small businesses are corporations. Not all people that start corporations do so to achieve wealth and power. Some do it simply because they like working for themselves.

[ulysses]

35. many corporations are perfectly fine.

It's the corporatism we'd be better off without.

[goodhue]

37. corporations are not persons

and should not be viewed as such by the courts or otherwise

[Bandit]

38. I am the CEO and President of a Corporation so no I don't think they are

all bad. Not all Corporations employee hundreds or thousands of people. Mine employees only a dozen and it is quite typical. Corporation status is nothing more than a tool. It is a way of seperating myself from the company so if per chance we were to screw up and someone wanted to sue us it would be the corporation and not myself that got sued. Everything my family owns would not be at stake.

[Cat Atomic]

40. They're not all that *good* either, which is why

they must be regulated.

Corporations aren't morally good or bad. They're businesses. They'll follow the buck as far as the law allows them to.

[Yavin4]

41. It's The Simple-Mindedness of Conservatives That Get Me

To conservatives, it's always, Good vs. Evil. They don't understand nuance at all. Corporations are not bad. In fact, there are many great corporations in the world. What's bad is a government that allows them to act as they please without any responsibilities. Letting WalMart, the largest employer in the U.S., get away with not giving their workers health benefits is wrong. Letting Halliburton profiteer off the war is wrong. Letting corporations skate on taxes is wrong. And the topper, after giving corporations massive tax breaks and incentives, they go offshore to hire workers!

But it's not the corporations fault. It's the government's responsibility to make sure that corporations act responsibly.

[ContinentalOp]

42. Here's one way to think about it.

If I have to choose between a large corporation or a small business I would say the small business is better. Republicans HATE small business! They give lip service to businesspeople and try to portray liberals as anti-business but the fact of the matter is their policies destroy small businesses in this country.

Republicans give tax breaks and business incentives to the biggest and most powerful of corporations while pushing a bigger tax burden down onto small business owners. When Bushes tax cuts for the wealthy make state and local taxes, property taxes or sales taxes go up who do you think gets screwed? Certainly not the big offshore corporations with their profits hidden in the Bahamas.

Republicans are no friends of business and I don't think it's even accurate to say they like corporations. They favor A FEW big corporations that are their buddies and biggest donors and they work to pass laws that benefit these few people exclusively. And as a result the entire US economy suffers. More people lose their jobs, disposable income drops, the economy slows to a crawl, and local businesses are forced to shut down. In the end the only companies left standing will be WalMart, the defense contractors, oil companies and other energy monopolies.

[Taylor Mason Powell]

45. "Republicans are no friends of business."

Very true. Great post!!

[ContinentalOp]

47. Thanks,

We need to respond to the ridiculous right-wing propaganda that tries to cast Republicans as the friend and savior to businesses and the Democrats as the anti-commerce villains. The simple fact is that Democratic administrations have better economies and a good economy is better for everyone's business.

[Kanary]

46. To me, what's really underneath this is the belief that ALL of

Capitolism is *good*, and all of Socialism is *bad*. I'm willing to bet that's what's trying to circulate in those brain cells.

NO "ism" is all good or all bad......... including Capitolism and Socialism. Capitolism with no regulation allowed to run rampant does what we are seeing............ it *becomes* the government. THen we are no longer self-governing, but the country is run by corporations.

In the same way, there are positives and negatives about Socialism.

The problem is, as our founders clearly outlined, PEOPLE have to come first -- everything must be decided in terms of the benefits or harm to PEOPLE.

We've become so accustomed to thinking in terms of what's good for business is good for the country that we can't see beyond that anymore. Our founders are spinning in their graves.

Kanary

[OnionPatch]

50. This is the thing that scares me

about corporations...the fact that profit comes before people. I have no problem with capitolism per say but shouldn't business also have a purpose other than mere profit? Like creating the means to make a living for some and providing a needed service to the public? It's sad that so many corporations tend feel they have no responsibility to be good citizens and operate with integrity. Therefore we need to keep them regulated and keep our eyes on them. These Republicans should listen one of their old Republican heroes, Abraham Lincoln:

"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."
-- U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864
(letter to Col. William F. Elkins)

[Kanary]

63. O.M.G.! I don't remember seeing that quote before.......

No wonder Lincoln always looked so sad. The life of a prophet is a terrible burden.

**** I don't even know what to say........ that quote has shaken me.

"by working on the prejudices of the people........." INDEED.

What is so very unnerving is that even those of us who consider ourselves "enlightened" don't see our *own* prejudices, and how we have swallowed whole so many of the assumptions of this society.

Thank you for posting....... I think........ :) That really is heavy.

Kanary

[sendero]

48. I'm incorporated....

... and I don't think of myself as "bad". Well, not in the context here anyway :evilgrin:

Corporations are simply a tool. Like any tool, they can be used for good or for ill.

[TexasSissy]

49. Well, the sentence doesn't really mean anything, so how can

anyone agree or disagree w/it? I mean, "not all that bad"? Bad as what?

Might as well say, "Corporations are not all that good." Good about what? To whom?

There's no reference.

But my response would be:
Corporations are neither good nor bad. Those are qualities that people have. Corporations are legal entities. They are not people.


(Maybe the fact that your friend ascribes people qualities to corporations says a lot about your friend, n'est pas?)

[Skittles]

51. tell your winger friend to f*** himself

nt

[KoKo]

54. Burt Worm, since when are you doing favors for "Freepers?"

I'm shocked....shocked I tell you!

[SarahB]

58. A corporation is neither good nor bad.

A public corporation is an entity set forth which has a primary purpose of making money for it's shareholders (granted the larger shareholders get the most benefits, but I digress there). I do not believe in a communist society (as in the government holds the means of production), but I do believe that because the interests of a corporation may not necessarily reflect the greater interest for society as a whole, certain protections must be there to safeguard the public and the corporations must pay their fair share of taxes as do we all.

I also, unlike most neo-con types, believe in a market driven economy to the extent which companies either fail or succeed based of consumer demand and quality of what they sell/produce, etc. Too often, companies are given sweetheart deals, no-bid contracts, unfair tax breaks, and other things which interfere in TRUE competition. This tactic is corrupt, sleazy, unfair, and bad for our economy based upon a strictly economic standpoint.

[IronLionZion]

59. It's the crooks that mess it up

greed is powerful motivation to cheat and throw ethics out the window.

The corporations themselves are not bad at all. I work for one and so do many others here on DU.

[Kenneth ken]

60. it's an overly broad statement

small wonder a winger would think it a valid comment.

You can however, re-arrange the words, thusly:

Not all corporations are that bad - and it becomes an acceptable phrase.

DemocraticUnderground, after all, is a corporation. I support it by buying it's product. But I don't pay to advertise for it.

It would (probably) be a good rule of thumb to say that the more net profit a corporation generates, the worse it is for people, countries, and the world.

[NightTrain]

62. Are you aware that Air America is a not-for-profit outfit?

Not sure they planned it that way, but AAR is apparently a non-profit.

[welshTerrier2]

65. corporations are not all that bad ... they're worse ...

corporations are faced with a choice between rewarding labor and rewarding capital. of course, the choice does not have to be either black or white.

but look at the history for most large corporations ... examine what you think generally occurs in the following situation ... a corporation hires the very best workers it can find ... the workers are very dedicated and are highly productive ... record productivity ... the corporation pays it lowest paid workers the minimum wage ... this wage is not a "living wage" ... the CEO has seen his pay increase from around 40 times the average worker to 400 times ... at the shareholder meeting, the shareholders are screaming for higher returns ... "why are we paying the CEO all that money ... labor rates are too high" ... the corporation, after realizing billions of dollars in profits, fires all the workers, closes the plant, and moves the company to India ...

the Chairman of the Board of this corporation is extremely wealthy. he realizes that some of the environmental laws are costing his company millions of dollars every year ... he "makes a few phone calls" and a few well placed political contributions and poof, no more environmental laws ... he also threatens to close down other plants in states that just might be battleground states when the next election rolls around ... very effective ...

corporations put profits ahead of people ... lives are destroyed and entire regions of the country are turned into great rustbelts when companies don't act in the best interests of their communities ... when the free market and the almighty dollar are valued above all else, and in the end isn't that really the only mission of corporations, the results are unlikely to make for a better society ...

if you want to look at corporations with blinders on, you can certainly justify the indemnification of shareholders from risks incurred by the business ... no problem there ... but it is not this feature of incorporation that causes the problems ... it's the flagrant greed that puts money above all else ...

finally, it's almost inconceivable that a question like this would be raised at this time ... look at all the corporate crime we've seen in the last few years ... not many convictions though ... isn't that interesting? we have Enron faking an energy crisis in California ... we have Halliburton receiving special favors from Cheney ... and of course we had just a wee little cost overrun or two in Iraq on some of the Halliburton contracts ... these people should be locked up for the rest of their lives ... don't count on it though ... and don't even get me started on the Carlyle Group ... have a read on this website: http://www.hereinreality.com/carlyle.html ...

our foreign policy has, for far too long, been driven by corporate interests ... we have polluted other countries ... we have dumped our ineffective, even dangerous, pharmaceuticals on them ... we have overthrown their governments and killed hundreds of thousands ... we have sacrificed the lives of our own brave citizens who thought they were "helping America" ... the truth is that most of what passes for foreign policy has been done on behalf of multi-national corporations ...

yes, corporations, not all corporations, really are all that bad ... most are much worse than that ...

[eridani]

66. Corporation licenses to do business should come up for renewal

Yes, corporations can be good citizens. A few years ago I read an article in Chemical and Engineering News about a company somewhere on the East coast that had a tour of its plant for first responders and anyone in town worried about the plant's safety. All the safeguards and backup systems were explained, as well as what the plans were if the worst happened. The CEO asked the organizer how it went, and got the reply "We told them 20 different ways we could kill them all, and they love us!"

Which just goes to show that when corporations include their stakeholders, the stakeholders will back them. More corporations would behave like this if they were subject to stricter public review. For that matter, the same principle applies to all levels of government as well.

As Alastair (Madeye) Moody, Auror (Ret.) and sometime Defense against the Dark Arts teacher always says "Constant vigilance!"

[Deja Q]

68. Corporations do this - this is a fair and balanced analysis:

Invade communities.

Make a lot of people do a lot of things for little money.

Offer the same services small businesses ones do, but at a far lower cost, thereby putting small businesses out of business.

Devalue goods and services despite reporting increasing profits.

Use their wealth to influence political power and structure for their own benefit, at the cost of our own freedoms.

(a "small business" BTW is an entity that both major political parties hype up and then urinate on after the election because the big corporations use the influence of the almighty dollar.)

Tell people that having a job is good and that if we have no job, it's all our fault, no American is entitled to a job anyway (and that HAS been said outright, they no longer bother to put up a front when fleecing and raping us), and we should die.

Is that good or is that bad?

Air America is a small business. Right wing (reich wing) radio is big business. (just to answer your snippet about them.)

[freedomonk]

69. here is the real answer

of course, corporations are not bad. it's stupid to follow any ideology that makes generalistic statements like that.

but, if i may quote howard dean:

corporations have to play by the rules

because let's face it, the reason we have unions, anti-trust laws, and many other regulations, is because unrestricted capitalism will deteriorate into a business monopoly built on slave labor.

what we have in united states RIGHT NOW is a healthy compromize between socialism and capitalism, and we should keep it that way. republicans and democrats are really the same because they try to tilt the system just a little bit towars those ends, but let's face it, both unrestricted capitalism and complete socialism are absolute nightmares as been proven by history many times, that's why we should be proud that our country stays in the middle

that's why it's a good idea to alternate between republican presidents and democrat presidents. because let's face it, when bush administration makes private contractors interrogate war prisoners, i think it's safe to say that privatization has gone a little bit too far right now, and we need democrats in power to make sense of it all