Corperate State of America

[Old Rocks]

State corperatism, the GOP dream

30 Major U.S. Corporations Paid More to Lobby Congress Than Income Taxes, 2008-2010 - International Business Times

By employing a plethora of tax-dodging techniques, 30 multi-million dollar American corporations expended more money lobbying Congress than they paid in federal income taxes between 2008 and 2010, ultimately spending approximately $400,000 every day -- including weekends -- during that three-year period to lobby lawmakers and influence political elections, according to a new report from the non-partisan Public Campaign.


Despite a growing federal deficit and the widespread economic stability that has swept the U.S since 2008, the companies in question managed to accumulate profits of $164 billion between 2008 and 2010, while receiving combined tax rebates totaling almost $11 billion. Moreover, Public Campaign reports these companies spent about $476 million during the same period to lobby the U.S. Congress, as well as another $22 million on federal campaigns, while in some instances laying off employees and increasing executive compensation.

 

[blastoff]

Since Dims also share in the largesse it's their dream too.

Any other smart thing you'd like to opine on?

 

[DaGoose]

Since Dims also share in the largesse it's their dream too.

Any other smart thing you'd like to opine on?

Corporate Political Giving Swings Toward the GOP

Corporate Political Giving Swings Toward the GOP - WSJ.com

 

[occupied]

The horrible blight of Washington lobbyists is something that should transcend party politics. It is their influence that robs us all of our voice in Washington and fuels many of the wedge issues designed specifically to keep us divided. This needs to be issue #2 right after the economy and forget all the other crap lobbyists themselves decided we should be concerned about.

 

[boilermaker55]

Since Dims also share in the largesse it's their dream too.

Any other smart thing you'd like to opine on?

It is quite obvious that you lack some reading comprehension skills and your vile hatred is sticking out.
No where in the post was a partisan comment made, only you could bring it up.
Lobbyists are a scourge on our goverment. It seems however, you find it fitting for your beloved neo-cons to have it their way with heavy lobbying influence, yet only choose to smit one party.
Nice retort dummy.

 

[WillowTree]

I just saw the head of the seiu on msnbc. 2.1 million members strong and they collect union dues. and she's on there bitching cause congress is debating making the taxpayers pay them extended unemployment. Why don't they curtail the dues or use the dues to help make a paycheck? Instead they choose to spend hundreds of million of dollars getting their politicians elected.. so don't hand me the corporate greed bullshit no more. that dog don't hunt.

 

[blastoff]

Since Dims also share in the largesse it's their dream too.

Any other smart thing you'd like to opine on?

Corporate Political Giving Swings Toward the GOP

Corporate Political Giving Swings Toward the GOP - WSJ.com

Nice article. Now, grab a dictionary and look up the word: share.

 

[blastoff]

Since Dims also share in the largesse it's their dream too.

Any other smart thing you'd like to opine on?

It is quite obvious that you lack some reading comprehension skills and your vile hatred is sticking out.
No where in the post was a partisan comment made, only you could bring it up.
Lobbyists are a scourge on our goverment. It seems however, you find it fitting for your beloved neo-cons to have it their way with heavy lobbying influence, yet only choose to smit one party.
Nice retort dummy.

Hey, lamebrain. From the OP:

Corperate State of America
State corperatism, the GOP dream

So, speaking of comprehension, "the GOP dream" isn't a partisan statement?

 

[DaGoose]

Since Dims also share in the largesse it's their dream too.

Any other smart thing you'd like to opine on?

It is quite obvious that you lack some reading comprehension skills and your vile hatred is sticking out.
No where in the post was a partisan comment made, only you could bring it up.
Lobbyists are a scourge on our goverment. It seems however, you find it fitting for your beloved neo-cons to have it their way with heavy lobbying influence, yet only choose to smit one party.
Nice retort dummy.

Hey, lamebrain. From the OP:

Corperate State of America
State corperatism, the GOP dream

So, speaking of comprehension, "the GOP dream" isn't a partisan statement?

Before you start recommending that people grab dictionaries why don't you and the OP learn to spell CORPORATE? Or is using a spell checker beyond your comprehension?

 

[blastoff]

It is quite obvious that you lack some reading comprehension skills and your vile hatred is sticking out.
No where in the post was a partisan comment made, only you could bring it up.
Lobbyists are a scourge on our goverment. It seems however, you find it fitting for your beloved neo-cons to have it their way with heavy lobbying influence, yet only choose to smit one party.
Nice retort dummy.

Hey, lamebrain. From the OP:

Corperate State of America
State corperatism, the GOP dream


So, speaking of comprehension, "the GOP dream" isn't a partisan statement?

Before you start recommending that people grab dictionaries why don't you and the OP learn to spell CORPORATE? Or is using a spell checker beyond your comprehension?

Actually, I forgot to (sic) it after copy and pasting, as I usually do if you check around. Now, back to that share thing...

 

[paulitician]

GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt is this current President's "Jobs Czar" for God's sake. GE pays no Taxes and has Outsourced Thousands & Thousands of American Jobs. So how the hell did Jeffrey Immelt become a "Jobs Czar?" This President is merely a GE employee. He works for numerous other corporations as well. His followers have been so duped. They especially need to see 'The Obama Deception.' Obama/Bush? They both work for the same Bosses.

 

[westwall]

It is quite obvious that you lack some reading comprehension skills and your vile hatred is sticking out.
No where in the post was a partisan comment made, only you could bring it up.
Lobbyists are a scourge on our goverment. It seems however, you find it fitting for your beloved neo-cons to have it their way with heavy lobbying influence, yet only choose to smit one party.
Nice retort dummy.

Hey, lamebrain. From the OP:

Corperate State of America
State corperatism, the GOP dream

So, speaking of comprehension, "the GOP dream" isn't a partisan statement?

Before you start recommending that people grab dictionaries why don't you and the OP learn to spell CORPORATE? Or is using a spell checker beyond your comprehension?

He coppied and pasted olfrauds spelling numb nuts. It's not our fault you idiots don't know how to spell. It's also against forum rules to edit others posts so go pound some sand there skippy.

 

[Dragon]

OF COURSE the Democrats get part of the largesse. What good would it do for the plutocrats to buy off only ONE party? They'd face democracy (i.e., from their perspective, catastrophe) every time the Democrats won an election, and they'd also increase the chances of the Democrats doing so (because they'd be offering the people representation that actually serves the public interests). Government of the people, by the people, and for the people would become a real danger if only the Republicans were corrupted by the cash flow.

The only way the scam can work is if they buy off BOTH parties so that the people aren't offered any choice about it: government of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations is what they're voting for no matter who they vote for.

 

[dblack]

The horrible blight of Washington lobbyists is something that should transcend party politics. It is their influence that robs us all of our voice in Washington and fuels many of the wedge issues designed specifically to keep us divided. This needs to be issue #2 right after the economy and forget all the other crap lobbyists themselves decided we should be concerned about.

(bolding is mine)

I can't help but comment on what I see as a painful irony here. The single biggest motivation for the army of lobbyists is government's ability, and eagerness, to intervene in economic matters.

 

[Dragon]

I can't help but comment on what I see as a painful irony here. The single biggest motivation for the army of lobbyists is government's ability, and eagerness, to intervene in economic matters.

The Constitution does not forbid the government from doing so, and (in two of the clauses of Article I, Section 8) empowers it to do so in certain ways. Unless you propose amending the Constitution, it will therefore always be possible for the government to do so. As long as the government can do so, and the lobbyists are allowed to resort to bribery, it will do so in a corrupt manner.

If the Constitution is amended so as not to allow any such intervention (e.g., the authorization to regulate interstate commerce is struck from the document, and the tax-and-spend clause amended to make it resemble that of the Confederate Constitution rather than the U.S. Constitution), that will remove the incentive for corruption, but it will also make it prohibitively difficult for the U.S. to have a modern economy capable of competing in the modern world against foreign countries without such restraints.

Either way, we're screwed -- as long as the lobbyists are permitted to bribe.

 

[paulitician]

This current President isn't even hiding the fact he's completely Corporate-Owned. He understands most of his followers are just too ignorant to know any better. So he's actually right in their faces with it. Yea,GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt a "Jobs Czar?" My God,what a scam. It's actually pretty funny but than again it's not funny at all. People really can be easily duped for the most part. Obama's devoted followers prove that.

 

[dblack]

I can't help but comment on what I see as a painful irony here. The single biggest motivation for the army of lobbyists is government's ability, and eagerness, to intervene in economic matters.

The Constitution does not forbid the government from doing so, and (in two of the clauses of Article I, Section 8) empowers it to do so in certain ways. Unless you propose amending the Constitution, it will therefore always be possible for the government to do so. As long as the government can do so, and the lobbyists are allowed to resort to bribery, it will do so in a corrupt manner.

If the Constitution is amended so as not to allow any such intervention (e.g., the authorization to regulate interstate commerce is struck from the document, and the tax-and-spend clause amended to make it resemble that of the Confederate Constitution rather than the U.S. Constitution), that will remove the incentive for corruption, but it will also make it prohibitively difficult for the U.S. to have a modern economy capable of competing in the modern world against foreign countries without such restraints.

Either way, we're screwed -- as long as the lobbyists are permitted to bribe.

An amendment, or judges willing to revert a hundred years+ of case law, is exactly what we need. I don't believe that will make it difficult to have a modern economy. Indeed, I think it's the next evolution of free democratic society - one that will push as ahead of the rest of the world rather than following their blunders. But as a true separation of economy and state has never been tried, I'll acknowledge that it's an article of faith.

I think its considerably less naive, however, that the notion that we can maintain government/corporate collusion and have anything like egalitarian government.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Since Dims also share in the largesse it's their dream too.

Any other smart thing you'd like to opine on?

Corporate Political Giving Swings Toward the GOP

Corporate Political Giving Swings Toward the GOP - WSJ.com

September 2, 2002​

"When George W. Bush took office, his Administration loudly touted its corporate credentials. In place of Clinton's policy wonks, the Bush economic team featured real businessmen, who knew how the world worked, and who appreciated, in a visceral and practical way, the value of free markets. Bush had more former C.E.O.s in his Cabinet than any previous President. His Vice-President was a former C.E.O., and Bush himself had run an oil company. "No president, administration, and Cabinet has been as marinated in capitalism," observed USA Today, which also praised the Administration's "deep management pool" and its "all-star boardroom."

"Mind you, there's nothing inherently corrupt here. Lobbying, fixing, finagling: it's just business, of a kind. The point is that such ways of doing business have very little to do with free-market capitalism. They have more in common with crony capitalism, in which whom you know is more important than what you do and how you do it. That's the world Bush's key policymakers come out of: they've made their careers by circumventing the free market. Why expect them suddenly to embrace it?"

BU$HCO's CORPORATE CABINET​

​

January 13, 2008​

"The recession-deniers were muzzled by a horrendous last two weeks of December, and the gloom-and-doomers are now out in force. Their key arguments:

* Plummeting housing will now drag down the rest of the economy.

*The "bad debt" problem is not just "sub-prime" folks who should never have have taken out mortgages in the first place. It includes credit card debt, "high quality" mortgages, car loans, and other leverage that have recently become a consumer way of life.

*Pressure on consumers is leading to a reduction in consumer spending (70% of economy), which, in turn, will lead to a reduction in spending by companies that sell stuff to consumers.

*The question now is not "will there be a recession?" but "how bad will it get?"

*The most optimistic forecasts in a NYT gloom-and-doom round-up are for three crappy quarters, regardless of what the Fed does. Less optimistic forecasts suggest that we are, well, screwed.

After blowing the last downturn, we've been worried this one since last summer (see below). We also suspect that, given the importance of housing to the economy and debt to consumer spending, the recession will be deeper and more prolonged than people think."

"U.S. Economy Screwed"​

​

 

[JWBooth]

Happily running the US since 1861.

 

[BillyV]

I can't help but comment on what I see as a painful irony here. The single biggest motivation for the army of lobbyists is government's ability, and eagerness, to intervene in economic matters.

The Constitution does not forbid the government from doing so, and (in two of the clauses of Article I, Section 8) empowers it to do so in certain ways. Unless you propose amending the Constitution, it will therefore always be possible for the government to do so. As long as the government can do so, and the lobbyists are allowed to resort to bribery, it will do so in a corrupt manner.

If the Constitution is amended so as not to allow any such intervention (e.g., the authorization to regulate interstate commerce is struck from the document, and the tax-and-spend clause amended to make it resemble that of the Confederate Constitution rather than the U.S. Constitution), that will remove the incentive for corruption, but it will also make it prohibitively difficult for the U.S. to have a modern economy capable of competing in the modern world against foreign countries without such restraints.

Either way, we're screwed -- as long as the lobbyists are permitted to bribe.

Where in the Constitution is the "permitted bribery" clause? Lobbyists are not permitted to bribe, at least not directly. They are allowed to arrange donations to political parties and PACs, as are any other citizens. Unions, non-profits, and individuals also make or arrange donations to influence the political process. This is much different than bribery, which implies a specific payment for a specific action. And while I agree that the politicians can be swayed to provide benefits to favored constituents, that works both for and against the corporations. Here is a short article that details the difference between the two:

Lobbying And Bribery

As for the claims that corporations "didn't pay taxes", that may be true in any given year, but for the most part those years either represent a period following a year containing a significant tax loss that can be carried forward (as in the case of GE, which lost huge amounts at GE Capital in 2008), or based upon accelerated depreciation deductions that are simply a deferral of tax to another, later year, not a permanent break. The corporations also have significant foreign operations, and by treaty we do not permit double taxation for companies who are taxed by a foreign government. We tax Toyota on its US income because of the treaty with Japan, and they don't; also nothing unusual. In the last three years these two simple things (and additional bonus depreciation which was pushed by the Obama Administration as an incentive for all companies, big and small, to invest in new equipment on the theory that it creates jobs to build the equipment, and also granted by the Bush Administration earlier in the decade) have combined to spare many large corporations from paying out cash in those years. In future years their tax deductions will be less and those deductions will be recaptured as revenue. It's nothing sinister; accelerated depreciation has been around almost since the income tax was created. In FedEx's 2010 financial statements, they recorded a tax expense related to federal taxes of $444 million; those are deferred but will be due in future years based on accelerated deductions in 2010, mainly depreciation. This kind of "paid no taxes, they must be evil" partial reporting is great for headlines, but it doesn't tell the whole story.