Vulture Capital and Predatory Politics »
Posted By Radiofreeeuropa 6 months, 2 weeks ago in Political NewsA call to outlaw lobbyists and implement President Franklin Roosevelt's Bill Of Economic Rights. A case study of of one incident of lobbyists subverting the the will of the people. With names named.
A "law" with a name that defines charlatanism, which allowed vulture capitalists who amassed profits overseas to inexpensively bring that money back into the States sans taxes.
Read Full Story at shoelessandbibleblack.blogspot.com »
859 Views Share Story 72 Comments Report
Submitted By:
Radiofreeeuropa
All progress comes from unreasonable people.
Rats live on no evil star!
Wasilla: All I saw...
Sorry, just palindroming around with terrorists.
Are you still ...
Other Related Articles:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 72 (view all)
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here are the co sponsors for this farce of a bill:
Reply
The Hall Of Shame-
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:HR045...-
100%
flyonthewallzz6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h108...
Reply
This site puts R's and D's after the names.
Handy for dumb flies like me.
-
-
-
100%
hyperbola6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well Radio, I suggest to you that we are simply undergoing the fate of all military empires. What we have been applying to foreign countries is now coming back to roost in the home population: torture, economic corruption, state propaganda, ....
Reply
And it is rooted very deep, including in places where Obama has been paying off corruption with trillions of taxpayer dollars (e.g. Goldman Sachs).
Wanted for War Crimes: Henry Kissinger
... He serves his consulting firm, Kissinger Associates, serves as a sort of private National Security Adviser and Secretary of State to about 30 major corporations around the world, such as American Express, Freeport-McMoRan Minerals, Chase Manhattan Bank, Volvo ... Walter Isaacson on Booknotes
According to the new book Kissinger, by Walter Isaacson, published in 1992 by Simon & Schuster, ASEA Brown Boveri (page 733) had a contract or project arrangement with Henry Kissinger’s money-making consulting firm, Kissinger Associates, in 1990. According to this fascinating book, Kissinger started his consultancy in July 1982 with “$350,000 lent to him by Goldman Sachs and a consortium of three other banks.” Some of the people Kissinger hired to work for him were Brent Scowcroft, former national security adviser, and Lawrence Eagleburger “who was lured aboard as president in June 1984 after serving as undersecretary of state”. Both Snowcroft and Eagleburger left Kissinger Associates in 1989 to join President Bush’s administration. Kent Associates is a subsidiary of Kissinger Associates. On pages 733-734 a list of some of Kissinger’s corporate clients include, aside from ABB: Shearson Lehman Hutton, Atlantic Richfield, Banca Nazionale del Lavora (BNL) “a Rome bank that made illegal loans to Iraq”; Fluor; Hunt Oil; Merck & Co.; Union Carbide. http://www.workonwaste.org/wastenots/wn218.htm .....
http://www.zpub.com/un/wanted-hkiss.html-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I can not disagree with this, but would like to point out that Obama is a "do it within the existing system" believer. And that he is doing what the vast majority of economists are suggesting is necessary. I think it is a mistake, in the sense that now would be a good opportunity to bring back anti trust laws and break these financial institutions up so they are not " too big to fail".
Reply
But Kucinich was likely the only candidate who might have taken that approach, or Ron Paul.
Obama isn't doing anything I wouldn't expect from his actions since the collapse, he was on board from day one for bailing out these institutions...a point on which I question if not disagree. However the information you present is so.
-
-
100%
tadair9196 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
i would agree that you have to separate corporations from the state, just like we (supposedly) separate church from state.
Reply
i was initially very eager to read this article when this article began by lambasting lobbying. then the suggestion came for an "economic bill of rights" which made a bunch of guarantees.
this is very sad. what a mockery of the words "bill of rights" that was.
For anyone who is still confused, the bill of rights was written to *restrict* -- NOT grant government powers. If any economic bill of rights was ever written it would need to be what corporations *can't* do in relationship to the government. And it can start off by finally admitting that "Corporations are not people."-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well this Bill of economic rights was Franklin Roosevelt's Idea, Though I acknowledge they are separate issues, at least in my mind they are connected. If you look at the history behind that speech in 44, he was suggesting that "vulture" capitalists were directly responsible for the '29 crash that precipitated the economic collapse worldwide which lead to both Communist regimes and Fascists ability to appear as viable ways out of the collapse...and in a sense they both were yet as history has taught us, the human cost was too high. Roosevelt was speaking of protecting citizens from another fleecing, and truth be admitted if his anti trust laws had not been dismantled there would be no corporations"too big to fail". I maintain that despite the "class traitor" label the wealthy elite put on Roosevelt, that it was he alone that saved capitalism from disappearing in this country, you'll find a great deal of the wealthiest of that era were quite fond of fascism and actively sought to bring it here. Communism was quite appealing to the masses who had just been raped by the Vultures.
Reply
If Roosevelt had not lead the nation in way that valued human endeavor before profits, that restored dignity to the ravaged workers, you can be sure that would have been the end of capitalism here.
The notion that corporations have the same (or greater) rights than humans was stuck into a bill in the 1800's by a clerk, not a supreme court justice. It was a sleight of hand as that clerk (I can't recall the name...maybe someone else on propeller can help out.) had formal ties to the Railroad industry...the beginning of Vulture capitalism.
Originally Corporations were regulated by the states, they had to have a state issued charter in the state where they conducted business and it could be revoked if they were deemed to be poor citizens. As you know, Jefferson and many other of the founders did in fact see the danger of "monied corporations" who he claimed sought to co opt government. He "hoped to crush (them) in infancy."
Whether you agree government (which is really us, you and me- they can't govern without our consent and by our silence and inaction we provide consent) should protect workers and families from Vultures as Roosevelt suggested in his economic bill of rights or not, the issue is the wholesale corporate takeover of the legislative process through lobbies. Which if ended, would go a long way towards improving everyone's lot, "bill of economic rights" or not.
-
-
86%
cowboygrandpa6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA
Reply
"To regain our Constitutional freedoms, we must establish and insure equitable economic principles. We can begin by implementing the Second Bill of Rights suggested by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in his State of the Union Address in January, 1944.
Roosevelt's remedy was to create an "economic bill of rights" which would guarantee:
"The right to a useful and remunerative job"
"The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation"
"The right of every family to a decent home"
"The right to adequate medical care and opportunity to enjoy and achieve good health"
"The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment"
"The right to a good education"
Roosevelt stated these rights would guarantee American prosperity and security, and that America's place in the world depended upon how far these and similar rights were carried into practice. He was dead right."
How sad that the ones so in love with money and power for themselves have never figured this out !!!!
The one with most doesn't take it with them when they die, in fact they are going to find that for the short time they had it here on earth they will suffer for an eternity.
To bad man can't seem to see that his fellow man deserves to be treated with love and respect. Not hatred and spite.-
rally-monkeyComment removed: Abusive12 Replies
-
55%
tadair9196 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
are you really so self-righteous to think that somebody owes you a home for merely being born in this country? do you really think somebody owes you a job?
Reply
the only inherent right you have is freedom.
that is, the freedom to _not_ have to hire people who is not up to the job. Freedom to _not_ be forced into building houses for others who could not afford one on their own.
Sadly, your utopian view of this world runs contrary to freedom because it forces others to be your slave. And you to be the slave of others.
-
-
100%
flyonthewallzz6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Section 335 -
Reply
Allows whaling captains recognized by the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission to claim a charitable income tax deduction up to $10,000 for certain expenses incurred in support of Native Alaskan subsistence whaling. Directs the Secretary to issue guidance for the substantiation of this tax deduction.
Section 419 -
Excludes from gross income winnings paid to a nonresident alien resulting from a legal wager initiated outside the United States in a pari-mutuel pool on a live horse or dog race in the United States.
Section 704 -
Allows a seven-year recovery period for the depreciation of any motorsports entertainment complex placed in service before January 1, 2008. Defines "motorsports entertainment complex" as a racing track facility which is permanently situated on land and which hosts one or more automobile racing events open to the general public in a specified 36-month period.
Section 907 -
Allows a tax deduction for the entertainment expenses of certain directors, officers, or owners of companies to the extent that compensation for such expenses is includible in the gross income of such individuals.
Section 332 -
Increases the draw weight for a taxable bow from ten to 30 pounds or more for purposes of the 11 percent excise tax on bows and arrows. Reduces to 11 percent the excise tax on archery equipment, including quivers or broadheads. Imposes an excise tax of 12 percent on arrows.
(This bow and arrow thing just keeps popping up!)
Section 336 -
Qualifies certain noncommercial aircraft for the 50 percent bonus depreciation allowance.
Section 248 -
Allows certain corporations engaged in international shipping activities to elect an alternative system of corporate income taxation based upon the net tonnage of the corporation's vessels.
Section 333 -
Reduces the excise tax on fishing tackle boxes from ten to three percent.
Section 334 -
Repeals the excise tax on sonar devices suitable for finding fish.-
100%
flyonthewallzz6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sorry about all that.
Reply
It makes me think of two guys on a fishing trip.
One says to the other “we could do this more often if I could write off the expense of this trip and half that airplane. And while we are at it: how about this tackle box and fish finder?”
The other guy says “No problem, I kind of feel like going to the race track”.
-
-
rally-monkeyComment removed: Abusive10 Replies
-
rally-monkeyComment removed: Abusive
-
rally-monkeyComment removed: Abusive1 Reply
-
freemansComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
moonstream1Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned2 Replies
-
moonstream1Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
100%
DarkWizard6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Just an observation - but it seems that republicans (here on Propeller) have accepted, as America's fate, irresponsible/corrupt government policies/bills/laws and irresponsible/corrupt big corporations as being the norm. Democrats have not accepted this fate and even when a democratic president and/or congress are in power, it is still not acceptable.
Reply
I don't know why there is such a disparity between parties over what are "givens" in politics and business, but apparently this explains why republicans had little issue with Bush and company turning America in to a neocon playground.-
Neutral
beavith16 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
you accept the opposite. that there is no responsible corporate relationship that gov't shouldn't control.
Reply
its not republican or democrat. its being half empty or half full. you seek your optimism at the altar of gov't oversight.
let me ask you. who oversees the gov't?
what happens when the gov't simply isn't swift enough to see a developing massive problem and respond appropriately? what happens when individuals in one political party benefit (in the short term) from slowing an appropriate response that burns us in the long term?
just what we have now.
so we can junk what we had and install a new version of what we have.
i suppose the democratic majority can continue to dam the darkness and pray for light, but that's getting us nowhere. this is why i'm reluctant to vote democrat. they are great at picking targets for political reprisal, but crappy planners. this process that Bush/Paulson/Pelosi/Reid kicked off and now with Obama/Geithner is continuing with, are hopelessly mired in detail. current market improvement is solely based on traders hoping we can maintain an even keel, when nothing fundamentally has changed.
i'm not slamming republicans or democrats. i'm slamming this idea that change, for changes sake, is some kind of solution.
folks. the emperor is wearing no clothes.
-
-
50%
Icantwait6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My Fellow Americans: Tadair919 and Rally-Monkey had some really good points. When you hear the truth is makes a person, well me, wonder how did all those junk spillers get to think the way they do. America was supposed to be represented by the People, for the People, and Of the People. Not for the Government, By the Government, and Of the Government. We all feel we have the capability to run our own lives we don't need the Government making their stupid suggestions. The Real American
Reply -
0%
Icantwait6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My Fellow Americans: Not all Americans are for freedom. Many would just rather sit back and let the Government tell them what to do every step of the way. These are the people that have very little. Oh! They got the HDTV, IPod, Decent Car, Place to Live, (usually rent free by the Government), a Government check coming in every month, food stamps, free health care, a hoard of children to increase Government Benefits. and that's about it. Self Respect, not really. Criminals for friends, quite often. Searching for a job, never. A negative attitude, goes with the territory. Hope for the future, don't look any further than their can of beer. Takes what the news media tells them as fact, You Bet. Looks at life through the eyes of Hollywood, all the time. Stuck in the Government rut, with no way out. Happy, not completely. Has hight aspirations, they hope to win the lottery. Courage, none. Wants to become rich, afraid to take the proper steps. Thus America is now becoming saddled with these type of individuals. They filter in from down trodden countries, living life as they have in the past, learning how to live off an overly generous America. When this charity giver runs out of money they will shrivel up and die. Why? Because they are parasites and that is what happens to parasites when the host dies. The Real American
Reply
More News
Politics Daily
The Huffington Post
Daniel Levy: Netanyahu's Stubbornness On Settlements Produces American Call For 1967 Borders
Deepak Chopra: India Comes To The White House, All At Once
Geoffrey Dunn: More Palin Lies: The Trooper in 'Troopergate' Breaks His Silence
Michael Shermer: The Coma Man Hoax: Rom Houben's "Communication" Is "Ideomotor" Ouija Board Effect
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.