Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

(Not so ) New Patriotism: In 2002, a majority of the top 100 economies were

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-13-10 10:51 AM
Original message
(Not so ) New Patriotism: In 2002, a majority of the top 100 economies were
corporations, not countries or states. Wouldn't be surprised if it's a larger percentage now in 2010.

So...just as there's a day in May that people acknowledge as the point in the year in which we stop working to pay for taxes, what is the day in the year when we stop working to pay stockholders of corporations? More to my point about patriotism: HOW MUCH OF OUR WORK TO PAY FOR TAXES ENDS UP GOING TO CORPORATIONS ANYWAY?

How much of government work has been privatized?

How much time do our representatives and government employees spend on making sure corporations like BP make record profits?

Who are the real constituents of elected and appointed officials....the electorate or stockholders?

How much of our commons (environmental resources, mineral rights, air rights, patents on life, timber rights, education, etc) do we give away so that corporations can profit? BP got the gulf recently, that's pretty significant.

Which representatives believe that America's strength lies in making a few of us really, really wealthy and powerful?

How much effort do our reps give to diverting our tax dollars to subsidize industry to hide the real cost of goods? We know that the real cost of gasoline would be more like 10 bucks a gallon if we add in externalized costs of the military, clean ups, subsidized drilling and exploration, etc.. Same for factory farms, mining, etc.

I'm not sure yet I'm advocating for nationalization of industry. But I'm just reading about how we've continued to "enclose the commons" in every way possible (including allowing patents on living things and allowing entire ecosystems to be given away) giving private interests more and more every year worldwide which leads to greater economic and sustenance gaps and larger and larger profits for fewer and fewer people. Seems like costs ought to be more appropriately assigned and seems like our elected and appointed officials ought to be cut off (lobbying, revolving doors, campaign finance) from the revenues that are generated by giving away the commons. These are much more easily accepted and logical solutions than nationalizing industry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-13-10 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
1. So...maybe not nationalization of industry, but re-nationalization of our government and
our reps is what we need.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC