Tim Daneliuk wrote in
:

On 08/17/2012 10:12 AM, Han wrote:
Jack wrote in :

On 8/16/2012 3:35 PM, Han wrote:
Also, when
companies pay their CEOs more than they pay in taxes, something is
amiss, I think.

Companies don't pay taxes, people do.

Then companies should not be allowed to make political contributions.

Fine. Then neither should unions, PACs, the AARP, or any other
lobbying group. Similarly, groups like MoveOn, AlterNet, and so
forth should not be permitted to raise funds in support of any
political action. 'Sound good to you?

Yes. It should be a level playing field. BUT, what I object to is the
fact that currently much of the election hoopla is via advertisements etc
that do NOT disclose the individuals and groups supporting them. I think
it should be disclosed whether the money for the ad came from Adelson or
from AFLCIO.

What you're not getting here is that one of our fundamental natural
rights is to "associate" as we wish. Why is OK for an individual
to do something, but not for a bunch of individuals with common
goals and interests to do the same thing? A corporation is not some
faceless entity. It has owners - owners that have a shared set of
economic ambitions and owners that often have to act politically to
support those ambitions. And, BTW, these owners are not typically
the hated eeeeeeeeevil rich people, but more usually they are
investment and retirement institutions working on behalf of millions
of the average folks.

I don't think that (much as I'd want to) we can overturn the SCOTUS
decision that corporations are people (which I disagree with, as
previously noted, but it is now the law of the land). But it isn't right
that people can freely associate in claok and dagger groups that don't
reveal their identity.

So, the neverending attack on corporations is both morally malignant
and harms the middle and lower classes primarily....

Let the corporations be good citizens, rather than enrichment vehicles
for greedy executives.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid