MEME: Separation of corporation and state

[yurbud]

Somebody else said this in a thread, and it's the best way to frame our attitude toward business.

Like religion, capitalism will flourish best if it cannot BUY special treatment and privileges from the government.

When you have a state religion, laziness and apathy creep into that religion as posers seeking financial gain and political favor start to fill their ranks.

Likewise, with capitalism, when some corporations can rig the rules, the temptation becomes greater and greater to make their profits from gaming the system rather than providing a superior product at a superior price. That's what gives us Halliburtons and Enrons. The first abuses its parasitic relationship with the government to the degree that they can chase off any accountability and whistleblowers. The latter provided essentially no product at all. In the film on Enron, THE SMARTEST GUYS IN THE ROOM, an investor asks the CFO during a conference call what exactly Enron made or did, and the CFO swore at him and hung up.

If a handful of corporations have a "special relationship" with the state, new, smaller, and more innovative companies have less of a chance of elbowing their way into the market, or even supplanting a whole category of product, as is the case with oil.

This is a pro-market message, that, if the DLC was really just moderate, and not whores whistling and lifting their skirts trying to attract Johns, could get behind.

[MelissaB]

1. Agreed

and recommended!


:kick:

[cantstandbush]

45. How about "separation of corporation and church?"

The "church" is one of the biggest corporations in America...and all tax free.

[annabanana]

2. I would very much like to see some DLC Duer's take on this..

If it could be proven that appropriate checks were in place with a fighting chance of their being enforced. . . .

I MIGHT be brought around...

(nominated in anticipation)

[yurbud]

3. thanks

[Mythsaje]

4. Oooh...

Good meme. I like it. It needs to be spread around.

Seperation of Corporation and State.

Excellent!

[yurbud]

5. you could also say this equals fair competition

which would also emcompass predatory practices like Walmarts, and communities give preferential tax deals to attract businesses that never quite live up to their promises.

[annabanana]

7. Wouldn't it be great

if reneging corporations could be KICKED OUT!

They have the "rights" of individuals... let them accrue the responsibilities!

[annabanana]

10. dupe

[KittyWampus]

16. Also Equals A Truly FREE MARKET.

[October]

6. I like this meme

Someone has to question corporations having the same rights and protections as citizens!

[bee]

8. love it! n/t

on edit: rec'd

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

9. Recommended... I'd love to see this used more.

[EFerrari]

11. I misread the subject line as

"separation of corruption and state" -- which would be a good idea, too.

[yurbud]

28. should have put SEPARATION OF CORRUPTION & STATE in your subj. line

[eallen]

12. Speaking as a liberal who favors capitalism: Absolutely!

Capitalism is like a busy genie. As long as it is channeled toward producing consumer goods and services, using fairly acquired labor and resources, it is the most productive and dynamic economic system known, for creating wealth and technology. But give it a crack to exploit the government, or public resources, or enslaved peoples, and it will do so to whatever extent is profitable. It operates efficiently and amorally. Nothing available that can be turned to profit goes unused. That is a double-edged sword, sometimes good, and sometimes bad. We need capitalism, but we also need not to fool ourselves about its nature.

[annabanana]

13. amoral and efficient

like biology. . . . could be good medicine or bad medicine

good viral strain, like yeast
or bad, like ebola

morally neutral

Needs to be evaluated continuously and controlled effectively.

[yurbud]

30. Milton Friedman said that--business is essentially amoral, so...

I doubt he would agree with this part, but if they are amoral, they can only be made to act morally by external forces.

[eallen]

31. Actually, Milton recognizes the need for a legal framework.

You and he might disagree about what the proper framework is. But nonetheless. Related to this, there has been some cross-nation research showing the importance to economic success of a stable legal system that protects property rights, avoids corruption, and defines contracts.

[annabanana]

43. I guess he thought amoral was a GOOD thing!. . . n/t

[ultraist]

14. Very good

Ways to maintain seperation of corporation and state:

Campaign financing laws
Limits on how much corps, who recieve gov contracts, can donate to political groups (to stop the money laundering)
Stricter limits on corp welfare
Increased taxes on corps
Close corp loopholes

Generally, stricter regs on corps and limits on corp donations to political groups

[yurbud]

39. how about END corporate welfare or have serious strings attached

for example, if we give R&D money to drug companies, they should provide those drugs at cost or with set profit margin to medicare patients.

Likewise, no town should give tax breaks or use bond money to build a stadium without being a financial stake in the team equal to the investment.

[KittyWampus]

15. Placing Regulations On Children Is NOT Anti-Child & So Regulating Corps.

is NOT anti-business.

In fact, it ultimately is for their own good. Unregulated, Big Business will simply act without integrity and NEVER take responsiblity for its own actions.

Also, just like a kid, an unregulated corporation will continue to test the limits to see how far it can go in breaking the few rules that do exist.

[yurbud]

21. similar GOP double standard: money attracts good CEOs, but not good

teachers.

regulation is good for schools, but not for business.

and so on.

For Republicans, regulation equals death...

and starve the beast means teachers are the beast too...

[Solon]

17. No, not the answer...

At least not as you put it, not nearly that much. What we need is a government boot put on the throat of corporations, at all times. The problem is two-fold, one, as you point out, some corps get kick backs, tax breaks, etc, simply because of size or "importance". The other problem is not only the lack of oversight, but the lack of punishment as well. There are CAPS on how much corporations can be penalized in certain areas, some of them have MAXIMUMS in maybe hundred of thousands of dollars. Hell some of these corporations make that much in a minute, how is that a deterrent?

To give an example, certain companies REQUIRE the government to operate, these are usually service industries with HIGH overhead and low profit margins in that particular service. An excellent example is the Airline industry, which CANNOT profit at this time, or ever, at least in the past decade, we had them declare bankruptcies once a year, and beg government for subsidies every 2 years. This is ridiculous, and a waste of money and pensions. We should have nationalized this service a long time ago. Hell the government helped start it, so why not nationalize it now? Same goes for the energy and telephone services, government built and privately run? That makes no sense, they should be nationalized, for the obvious benefit as that they would no longer have to make a PROFIT, hence cheaper utilities all around for everyone. Same for the Medical industry as well.

To clarify my first paragraph, we need clear and precise rules and regulations governing businesses. First, corporations do NOT have rights, they are NOT people, therefore the 4th through 8th amendments should not apply to them. Those amendments are for people, not artificial constructs that last till the end of time. Carrying on, to give an example of Enron, in this particular case, obvious case of fraud, all assets should have been seized, not of the company, but those who profited from the ill-gotten gains of the original sale, those profits should have then been dispersed to those were direct victims of the crime in question. At the same time, the government should have filed suit, on behalf of the victims, to seize all the assets of the people in charge of Enron who profited. They should also make such people be forbidden from EVER getting business loans, corporate charters, and forbid any other corporation from letting them onto their boards.

That is just an example, others include revoking the charters of companies that break the law. When Wal*Mart violates the law in regards to overtime pay, stealing time, and using undocumented workers, then the company's charter should have been revoked, and the company put up to auction, all assets, at one tenth the cost, to be bought up by Costco. :)

Those are just examples, but these companies are rabid dogs, and if they can't obey the rules, they need to be euthenized, or put on a tight leash. We need to get rid of the idea of the "Free Market" once and for all, there is no such thing, and there never will be such a thing.

[Tace]

18. I'm With You -- We're All Being Raped By A Bunch Of Souless Hellhounds

[Solon]

24. I think the proper term would be MAULED...

Hell, people die in this country and others every day over nothing more than corporate abuse and systematic greed. It HAS to stop.

[yurbud]

27. yep--if someone doesn't have health insurance it's fairly direct

if their employer doesn't provide it as mine doesn't (even though I work for the county teaching community college), you could drop dead or go broke trying to stay alive.

Don't tell me about medicaid and the safety net. If you have a middle class income, you've got to wipe yourself out before that kicks in.

I went to the emergency room a couple of months ago, and for an EKG and talking to a doctor for two minutes, I was out $650.

[yurbud]

22. corps not having rights fits my meme

I agree with content of what you said.

My point was to connect what we want to say with what people already know, believe, and mostly agree with.

[Tace]

19. I Like This Because It Turns Around The Negative Meme Of Fascism....

and puts the same idea into a positive, easy-to-understand and explain concept. Brilliant, actually, in that simple way that brilliant ideas are.

[tinrobot]

20. Hard to separate...

I do agree that this issue is at the heart of what's wrong with government. The solution, however is not very cut and dried. You cannot "separate" government and corporations that easily.

Any time the government buys something from a corporation, there is an opportunity for abuse. Should the government make it's own pencils, paper, computers, automibiles, etc? Obviously not.

Should the government not promote things that are good for society using the power of legislation over corporations? Should we legislate clean water, fair trade, etc? If you legislate rules that govern corporations, again there's plenty of room for favoritism and abuse.

Even things like the mortgage interest deduction could be considered a special favor to the mortgage and homebuilding industries. It's very hard to draw the line.

In fact, Ayn Rand promoted the separation of corporations and state. In her case, it would be to let the corporations run wild with no interference. Separation does have an upside in that if a company can't get favors, government will be clean(er). In practice, however, if you let the corporations run wild, you're screwed. If you legislate them to prevent them from running wild, then the opportunity for abuse becomes part of the equation.

[yurbud]

25. It's an analogy that gives people a quick hook into what we're thinking

the problem with even well-intentioned Dems is they talk like college professors with facts and causes and proposals, without giving the over-arching value or guiding principle.

Partly, this is because those are so familiar to them, it seems redundant to say it--like patriotism. But if you don't say it, people don't know you feel or believe it.

Democrats have been painted with the anti-business brush, so this is one way to say we are NOT anti-capitalism--just anti-cronyism and feudalism.

[tinrobot]

33. Then I'd suggest a different meme

I agree we get too academic, but we still need to choose the memes carefully.

A separation of corporation and state could very easily be turned on it's head and used to create something where there are no checks on corporate power whatsoever.

I'm all for removing corporate influence from government, but be careful how you advocate it. That's all I'm saying.

[yurbud]

38. I think it depends on the historical moment--like now

[DisgustedTX]

23. Only Bushies MEME

:(

[yurbud]

26. steal it and turn it on it's head, like STARVE THE BEAST

to them, it means starve the state, to us, it means starve the businesses that support the right.

[Wrinkle_In_Time]

44. Not true. Everyone does, including you.

"Only Bushies MEME" is a meme.

Wikipedia definition, in case it helps.

[applegrove]

29. Great idea to discuss. n/t

[porphyrian]

32. Yeah, "moderate" my ass...

They've moderated us republican for the last three major elections.

[Joe Chi Minh]

34. That's more like it.

Government by corporatist cronies = privatising Government: government by the private sector.

[yurbud]

36. privatized gov't=crony capitalism

[Joe Chi Minh]

40. Yep, in a nutshell.

Though perhaps more telling, the other way round.

[yurbud]

42. this is cancer down to the lowest levels of government

[populistdriven]

35. here is your meme as a bumper sticker

now stop by Pearl and get magnetic backing & acrylic spray :)

[yurbud]

37. Nice!

[reprehensor]

41. kick

[Hillgiant]

46. I don't think you go far enough

We need to remove the concept of coporate personhood; that corporations have the same rights as real citizens. Under the current system corporations have almost all the rights of a citizen with almost none of the responsibilites. Have the fat cats stand up and take the risks themselves with their own assets on the line instead of hiding behind the disposable paper tiger of incorporation.

[yurbud]

49. I agree. I was mainly thinking of how to take an esoteric issue and

make it digestible for the average person.

Corporate personhood is repugnant, but it takes more than a few words to explain it to someone before they digest it.

[Dora]

47. END CORPORATE PERSONHOOD TODAY. n/t

[yurbud]

48. somebody should ask about this during Miers confirmation

[dogfacedboy]

50. I posted on that.

I'm 100% behind the idea of the separation of corporation and State.
Regardless of whether anyone likes it or not, it IS capitalism that drives our Nation. The problem is, much of capitalism has become IRRESPONSIBLE. Dirty dealings, tax evasion, and government bail-outs of big business cheat businesses that are properly run out of their potential success. It's been said that part of the genius of capitalism is that some businesses succeed, and some fail. I believe this to be true. If a company is properly run, it will succeed. There should be no special treatment by the government. Cheating employees out of their pensions and other promised benefits should be punishable under the law. It's theft, pure and simple. Decent lawmakers fought for years to get environmental protections into place, and now these are being eroded by lawmakers who are beholden to certain corporations. In our Nation, a corporation has the right to TRY and succeed, but it does NOT have the RIGHT to succeed.
If a corporation can't make it without government "welfare", that's too damn bad. Run a better business.

[izzybeans]

51. What corporate governance? Your market eats its young. What shall

the state do, let it destroy our communities some more?

[Usrename]

52. Yes, I think the time is right for this. The main stream media is #1.

Corportations don't posess a soul, which makes them different from people and not entitled to human rights. Also, no one in this thread seems focused on bribery, which is what it is. And RICO could have been applied to ENRON and assets siezed. We don't need more legislation or regulation, but proper enforcement of the existing laws.

The meme is right on, I think, to get people thinking about law and order and huge gobs of money run amok. Govt by the people and for the people, not by the corporations for profits. I don't even think that it has to be done carefully anymore, with the current awareness of the crony-ism in the White House.

The issue it seems is once again the propagandists in the MSM. If any traction is gained on this issue, the proponents will be painted as Communists/Marxists or worse by the corporate media. They ARE some of the biggests benefactors. Still, if the argument can be made simple enough (i.e. "Dick Cheney thinks corporations are people") then it could be helpful.

Don't 'misunderestimate' the effectiveness of their lying propaganda machine. It will turn any clear message on it's head. Remember, Kerry is a coward and W. is a war hero and the Dixie Chicks are un-American for being embarrased that W. is from Texas.