Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
May 27, 2011 - 11:54pm PT
|
Of course, if you're going to say a corporation isn't a person, for consistency's sake, you also need to say they can't be taxed. Only persons can be taxed.
Where do you come up with that?
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
May 28, 2011 - 01:32am PT
|
One US citizen = one voice, one vote.
It's really not any more complicated than that.
Unless $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ is involved. Then simple logic is abandoned.
|
|
mojede
Trad climber
Butte, America
|
|
|
May 28, 2011 - 02:52am PT
|
The SCOTUS acts, responds, and interprets how it (the nine 'viduals) sees fit on any given day, period--live with it and hope that a ruling of theirs doesn't negatively impact you in a direct way...
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
May 28, 2011 - 02:56am PT
|
Define 'direct way', if you don't mind...
|
|
Patrick Sawyer
climber
Originally California now Ireland
|
|
|
May 28, 2011 - 06:40am PT
|
I think the USSC's worst decision was wrongfully handing the election to Bush in 2000. Yes I know, sour grapes and all and let bygones be bygones, but it still does not make it right just because it happened some 10+ years ago. And look at the mess he got the country in, and it was definitely a partisan vote (on both sides) to elect the bush, and it was Republican justices that 'passed' this current judgment.
Only one word...
...Sickening.
Okay another word... scandalous.
|
|
mojede
Trad climber
Butte, America
|
|
|
May 28, 2011 - 09:54am PT
|
apogee, an example is ROE v. WADE--hasn't affected me in any "direct way" since its decision, like many other (most) SCOTUS rulings...
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
May 28, 2011 - 12:05pm PT
|
So, mojede, are you suggesting that one should 'choose their battles' as to which SC rulings (or perhaps political developments in general) one should give concern towards? To an extent, I would agree, in that it's oftentimes hard to point to direct, tangible examples of how a given development has affected me or my family/friends directly & personally. Getting one's panties in a bunch about every new SC ruling is a great waste of energy and time.
On the other hand, many/most of these political developments affect us all in incremental ways, and occasionally, directly. (Roe v. Wade has had pretty direct effects- millions of women- including some family and friends- have been able to make choices about their bodies that would not have been the case if not for this ruling.) The Citizens United ruling (and the more recent lower court ruling re: federal elections and corporate donations) are a much more incremental example, and yet they strike at the very foundation of our political system, which can't be denied, regardless of which side of the fence you land.
Politics, like climbing, is simply an area of interest that some people choose to pursue- and oftentimes, that pursuit is equally pointless.
|
|
shady
Trad climber
|
|
|
May 28, 2011 - 03:39pm PT
|
On May 19 2011 our elected lawmakers stopped a bill that would end subsidies and tax breaks for oil companies who have earned trillions in profits in the last decade.
Looks as if our lawmakers have earned themselves a bonus contribution...er..I mean voice...bonus voice.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
May 28, 2011 - 03:51pm PT
|
Something for everyone to keep in mind: The SC is accountable, although in the most vague and distant way possible.
GW Bush may go down as a President having the most impact on the country for a century. His SC choices were ideologically pure, and young (as such things go). Particularly Roberts, who has shown himself to be patient, and a master of the process. As Chief, he is in a position to have tremendous influence on what comes out.
To those who say it doesn't matter which party they vote for for President, the MOST important thing that the President does, is appoint SC justices (and other judges). It can affect the law for a generation or more. It is the ONLY reason that I find it hard to conceive of voting for any Repub, ever, for President, nowadays.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
May 28, 2011 - 03:53pm PT
|
"To those who say it doesn't matter which party they vote for for President, the MOST important thing that the President does, is appoint SC justices (and other judges). It can affect the law for a generation or more."
So very, very true.
|
|
thetennisguy
Mountain climber
Yuba City, CA
|
|
|
May 28, 2011 - 05:55pm PT
|
As a conservative Republican, a SEIU Union Steward, and perhaps more of a libertarian, all I have to say to my Republican brothers and sisters is this ... get a grip on history and read all you can that Teddy Roosevelt wrote and learn from his life. It's the life and times of what the Republican Party was once and should be ... and I pray will be ... once again. TR did so much to bust Trusts and greed in corporate American, he did so much to preserve and protect America. He's rolling over in his grave. Today's Republican Party in many respects is a mockery of what he did and stood for especially when it comes to reigning in the excesses and greed of corporations which have sold out America as we once knew it.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
May 28, 2011 - 06:12pm PT
|
^^^^
good post!
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
May 29, 2011 - 12:33am PT
|
This from a self-professed Republican/Independent....bears repeating:
"Today's Republican Party in many respects is a mockery of what he did and stood for especially when it comes to reigning in the excesses and greed of corporations which have sold out America as we once knew it."
|
|
shady
Trad climber
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2011 - 12:20am PT
|
FWIW...
Since these corporations will be sponsoring these candidates with their deep pockets. Perhaps these corporations should be required to reveal who they are, in the ads they sponsor. Thereby giving us the ability to take our money (voice) to the corporations that support the candidate of our choice.
Or have candidates wear corporate sponsor patches and logos on their suits, like NASCAR drivers. Not only during their campaign, but throughout their term.
This may sound funny, and look even funnier, but as soon as that elected official starts saying or doing things we don't approve of, those corporate logos will look like time square billboards.
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
Swimming in LEB tears.
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2011 - 01:16am PT
|
Fatty said Who owns the corportations? Shareholders, who are the shareholders? Well, pension plans (unions, 401k's, defined benefit plans) and the people hired to buy shares and vote at the meetings and individuals (IRA's, the affluent, Schwab/Fidelity clients) and the people (me) who are hired to buy shares and vote. Rise up and have your voices heard.
"Corporatocracy = Democracy"
-Fatty 2010
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2011 - 01:25am PT
|
"Rise up and have your voices heard."
They already did.
Every one of those corporations are comprised of citizens...each of those citizens has a voice through their vote.
One citizen = one vote/one voice
If you had a corporation with 100 people, that's 100 voices. Not 101. Not 10,001.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!