What if corporations aren't evil?

[KissMy]

They've also done stuff like -- buying the leading bee research company after it didn't like what its research showed about the effect of GMO on bees.

------- purely to protect the consumer from paying more for bee research, of course... what possible other motivation could they have....

I was talking with some Monsanto people years ago & their scientist were very worried about the Bees CCD problem. They did not know why it was happening. Since then they bought Beeologics corp & blamed the problem on mites.

I was skeptical of that explanation so I had a bee-keeper friend of mine let me keep tabs on his bees. He has 1 hive on his garage in a major metropolitan city. The other 2 hives are near Monsanto crop fields. 2 years ago the hive in the major metropolitan city feeding off of flowers & gardens died off. Last year all 3 hives died off through the cold winter. So that anecdotal evidence has the Bees feeding off the GMO planted fields surviving better than those that are not.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Some corporations can be a good tool, but they are not people & should not be treated as such. Corporate executives & investors are people & should be taxed at the same rate as payroll employees. Carried interest executive pay should be banned again as it had been before republicans created the loophole for their cronies.

The same rules should apply equally to all people, business & corps. The problem is that here in the USA politically connected use their corps suck tax money from all the rest of us hard working people. We are forced by government taxation at gunpoint to subsidize the privileged few rich elite on wall-street & in government with our money.

The connected elite use government & corporate veil's to screw us citizens through taxes & higher prices. Mitt Romney & Monsanto are prime examples of screwing us this way, yet the idiots wanted to make him president. The republicans are clueless tools.

Monsanto majorly polluted large parts of the USA. The government had to perform tax payer funded clean-up of this mess. Monsanto was supposed to pay for or do the clean-up, but this would have cost them all their money & they may have had to sell off their prized assets (genetics, science, seeds) to responsible corporations. So instead they hired a powerful politican/presidential candidate (George Romney) son who was Mitt Romney right out of school for a $million to get them out of paying for the damage they caused. Romney used his political clout to get the government to hold off on Monsanto while Mitt Romney helped them to shelter their money. So Monsanto formed another corporation named Solutia. They put all of their chemical assets that the government said caused the pollution into that Solutia corp & spun it off to unsuspecting investors, pension funds, etc.

They reorganized Monsanto, all it's money & clean assets into this new Monsanto. Now the money was safe & in the clear. Solutia corp went bankrupt screwing investors & the government made us tax payers pay for their Super Fund Clean-Up.

Instead of having to sell their assets & go bankrupt, Monsanto took that money & bought up the competition. Now they own most of the seeds that grows the worlds food supply. This monopoly could not have happened without "pay to play government assistance" by the Romney's. This scam is why you pay 400% more for food & more taxes. Enjoy the high prices & taxes & thank a republican voter for it.

They've also done stuff like -- buying the leading bee research company after it didn't like what its research showed about the effect of GMO on bees.

------- purely to protect the consumer from paying more for bee research, of course... what possible other motivation could they have....

You do know that, if bees actually disappear, Monsanto will go out of business, aren't you?

I am sure the fact that Monsanto is actually funding a massive amount of research into Colony Collapse Disorder that is actually showing some promise of success is completely irrelevant to you. After all, you already have the answers, you really don't need to look around to see if you might be wrong.

What Really Happened At Monsanto's Bee Conference | Co.Exist | ideas + impact

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Thats why you vote out people who dont do the job.

As someone else already pointed out, politicians are not the government, which is why there is so little actual change in government policy even though we get a new group of politicians every few years.

Politicians use the government to effect change. The change their constituents voted them in for. The process of changing policy is inherently slow due to our 3 tiered system. I thought everyone knew that?

I ma sure you have thousands of examples of that happening, feel free to start a thread about them. In the meantime, feel free to actually comment on the topic of the thread, or not. If you choose the latter, feel free to not post again in this thread.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You keep missing the point that the government can be voted out. Inherently its more trustworthy than an entity you have no control over. The fact that the government can be voted out should tell you the point is you trust no entity you lack any control over.

When was the last time you voted out the guy at the DMV office who spends more time playing video games than he does helping people?

By the way, what does any of this have to do with the OP? Do you have a pathological need to defend the government?

What does your question have to do with voting for politicians? You made a silly statement and I called you on it. If you dont like that then you should try thinking a little harder before throwing out a half baked opinion.

Sigh.

There are 537 elected politicians in Washington DC, there are over 2.6 million federal employees. Even Obama admitted that he can't change the place, yet you think voting for different politicians will change the way the government works.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

They've also done stuff like -- buying the leading bee research company after it didn't like what its research showed about the effect of GMO on bees.

------- purely to protect the consumer from paying more for bee research, of course... what possible other motivation could they have....

I was talking with some Monsanto people years ago & their scientist were very worried about the Bees CCD problem. They did not know why it was happening. Since then they bought Beeologics corp & blamed the problem on mites.

I was skeptical of that explanation so I had a bee-keeper friend of mine let me keep tabs on his bees. He has 1 hive on his garage in a major metropolitan city. The other 2 hives are near Monsanto crop fields. 2 years ago the hive in the major metropolitan city feeding off of flowers & gardens died off. Last year all 3 hives died off through the cold winter. So that anecdotal evidence has the Bees feeding off the GMO planted fields surviving better than those that are not.

Actually, the research seems to indicate that mites make bees more sensitive to pesticides. The link I gave earlier cited a study that indicated as many as 35 pesticides in bee pollen. Since GMO crops are designed to use fewer pesticides there might be a correlation between bee survival and the presence of GMO crops.

Please note, I am not claiming this proves that GMO crops will save bees, just pointing out that, as usual, the answers aren't simple.

 

[auditor0007]

Corporations are neither good or evil. They're self-interested, and in the pursuit of self-interest may do both good and evil things. Trusting an entirely self-interested entity to self-police is stupid.

Yet you trust the government to self police.

A freely elected government can be trusted with the knowledge that voters can remove those in power should they not police themselves. There is a difference here because outside of the government, there really is no one to police private companies.

 

[KissMy]

They've also done stuff like -- buying the leading bee research company after it didn't like what its research showed about the effect of GMO on bees.

------- purely to protect the consumer from paying more for bee research, of course... what possible other motivation could they have....

I was talking with some Monsanto people years ago & their scientist were very worried about the Bees CCD problem. They did not know why it was happening. Since then they bought Beeologics corp & blamed the problem on mites.

I was skeptical of that explanation so I had a bee-keeper friend of mine let me keep tabs on his bees. He has 1 hive on his garage in a major metropolitan city. The other 2 hives are near Monsanto crop fields. 2 years ago the hive in the major metropolitan city feeding off of flowers & gardens died off. Last year all 3 hives died off through the cold winter. So that anecdotal evidence has the Bees feeding off the GMO planted fields surviving better than those that are not.

Actually, the research seems to indicate that mites make bees more sensitive to pesticides. The link I gave earlier cited a study that indicated as many as 35 pesticides in bee pollen. Since GMO crops are designed to use fewer pesticides there might be a correlation between bee survival and the presence of GMO crops.

Please note, I am not claiming this proves that GMO crops will save bees, just pointing out that, as usual, the answers aren't simple.

Yup - The lower pesticide & herbicide use is why I have no problem with GMO crops. I am only pissed about the Romney/Monsanto dirty political business tactics fleecing citizens. Monsanto's monopoly extortion tactics is why I & many other farmers only plant Stine's Liberty seeds now.

 

[FA_Q2]

Government is not by design either self-interested or dedicated to its own monetary profit; that's the difference. The same reason Romney's "business experience" was never a valid basis for qualification: government and business are dedicated to mutually antagonistic objectives.

How do you infer what the poster trusts? Or are we just making it up again?

Government, by design, is interested in power. That is why it keeps growing, and expanding its regulatory oversight, and then fining companies. The fact that you trust a power hungry bureaucracy to self regulate just proves that you really have no concept of the problem.

You keep missing the point that the government can be voted out. Inherently its more trustworthy than an entity you have no control over. The fact that the government can be voted out should tell you the point is you trust no entity you lack any control over.

The interesting point that YOU miss is the fact that you have COMPLETE control over a corporation where you have far less power over the government. you seem to think that the ability to vote again 4 years after the last election somehow confers this awesome oversight of the government but that the simple fact that you can stop purchasing a product right now and the corporation ceases to exist confers no power to you at all.

That is completely asinine.

We have ultimate control over companies at all times. not only can we obliterate them by simply not purchasing their products but we may also get that exact same service or product from their competitor. What about the government? Just try and stop paying them and see what happens.

This idea that companies have some major power over us all is the most convoluted and confusing sentiment that people hold these days. YOU have the money and that means YOU have the power.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

If GMO's are good then why has Europe and Russia banned them completely? I do not trust GMO's and I would not care if Santa Claus delivered it to me instead of Monsanto. It isn't about Monsanto - although by having patent on seeds they would have the monopoly on food production. They know this. Is that evil? To have the monopoly on food? Yes, I believe it is.

Because they prefer to cater to fear than to use science to argue a point.

I'm a farmer and we don't like hybrid seeds, GMO foods or anything that makes folks sick.

In the South we have a saying and it applies to seed that comes from our trees & our food - if it ain't broke? Don't fix it.

 

[Asclepias]

As someone else already pointed out, politicians are not the government, which is why there is so little actual change in government policy even though we get a new group of politicians every few years.

Politicians use the government to effect change. The change their constituents voted them in for. The process of changing policy is inherently slow due to our 3 tiered system. I thought everyone knew that?

I ma sure you have thousands of examples of that happening, feel free to start a thread about them. In the meantime, feel free to actually comment on the topic of the thread, or not. If you choose the latter, feel free to not post again in this thread.

I dont want to start a thread about them. I simply informed you that your thought process was weak by trying to use the fact that people trust the government because they can elect officials they want making policy. if you dont want this addressed in your thread then next time you better not bring it up. Does that make sense to you?

 

[bedowin62]

IF CORPORATIONS ARENT EVIL the Left wont be able to survive

 

[Asclepias]

When was the last time you voted out the guy at the DMV office who spends more time playing video games than he does helping people?

By the way, what does any of this have to do with the OP? Do you have a pathological need to defend the government?

What does your question have to do with voting for politicians? You made a silly statement and I called you on it. If you dont like that then you should try thinking a little harder before throwing out a half baked opinion.

Sigh.

There are 437 elected politicians in Washington DC, there are over 2.6 million federal employees. Even Obama admitted that he can't change the place, yet you think voting for different politicians will change the way the government works.

Sigh

Its unfortunate people give up so easy. No wonder only a handful of people ever reach their goals. Its pretty simple. You vote making whats important your main issue. DMV is not a priority and your use of it is a puerile example.

 

[Asclepias]

I was talking with some Monsanto people years ago & their scientist were very worried about the Bees CCD problem. They did not know why it was happening. Since then they bought Beeologics corp & blamed the problem on mites.

I was skeptical of that explanation so I had a bee-keeper friend of mine let me keep tabs on his bees. He has 1 hive on his garage in a major metropolitan city. The other 2 hives are near Monsanto crop fields. 2 years ago the hive in the major metropolitan city feeding off of flowers & gardens died off. Last year all 3 hives died off through the cold winter. So that anecdotal evidence has the Bees feeding off the GMO planted fields surviving better than those that are not.

Actually, the research seems to indicate that mites make bees more sensitive to pesticides. The link I gave earlier cited a study that indicated as many as 35 pesticides in bee pollen. Since GMO crops are designed to use fewer pesticides there might be a correlation between bee survival and the presence of GMO crops.

Please note, I am not claiming this proves that GMO crops will save bees, just pointing out that, as usual, the answers aren't simple.

Yup - The lower pesticide & herbicide use is why I have no problem with GMO crops. I am only pissed about the Romney/Monsanto dirty political business tactics fleecing citizens. Monsanto's monopoly extortion tactics is why I & many other farmers only plant Stine seeds now.

Actually GMO's foster higher pesticide and herbicide use. Its interesting to me that Monsanto also manufactures the herbicide Roundup.

Center for Food Safety | Issues | rbGH | GENETICALLY MODIFIED (GM) CROPS INCREASE PESTICIDE USE AND FAIL TO ALLEVIATE POVERTY, REVEALS NEW REPORT

 

[Pogo]

It is true that companies......corporations are looking out for their own self interest which is usually to earn a profit. The best way to do this is to provide products that are benificial to their perspective customers.

One way to do that is, but it's the height of naïveté to believe it's the main one. Far more effective is successfully marketing a product even if it's inferior, and more effective than that is cheating -- say if you had an oil pipeline and was acting as a delivery middleman, and skimming a bit off the top and then fudging the numbers ... but that would never happen, because corporations are inherently moral, right?

The over regulation of corporations by goverment has lead to incestual relationships.....crony capitalism.

It's absolutely true that Corporatia owns and operates the government but it's pretty obvious that's because they buy their way into it -- hard to figure how the entity with less power (government) would set itself up as a slave.

Government has an incestual infection, no question. But that's set up by the old Revolving Door trick. When you have a former cellphone exec running the FCC, a former Wall Street Wanker running the SEC, and for gods sake a former Monsanto lawyer in Ag, the shit hitting the fan is pretty much inevitable. What we have here is a Conflictofinterestocracy.

 

[Pogo]

Government, by design, is interested in power. That is why it keeps growing, and expanding its regulatory oversight, and then fining companies. The fact that you trust a power hungry bureaucracy to self regulate just proves that you really have no concept of the problem.

You keep missing the point that the government can be voted out. Inherently its more trustworthy than an entity you have no control over. The fact that the government can be voted out should tell you the point is you trust no entity you lack any control over.

The interesting point that YOU miss is the fact that you have COMPLETE control over a corporation where you have far less power over the government. you seem to think that the ability to vote again 4 years after the last election somehow confers this awesome oversight of the government but that the simple fact that you can stop purchasing a product right now and the corporation ceases to exist confers no power to you at all.

That is completely asinine.

We have ultimate control over companies at all times. not only can we obliterate them by simply not purchasing their products but we may also get that exact same service or product from their competitor. What about the government? Just try and stop paying them and see what happens.

This idea that companies have some major power over us all is the most convoluted and confusing sentiment that people hold these days. YOU have the money and that means YOU have the power.

Sorry FQ but those things in bold are laughably insane. Corporations exist at the pleasure of the people in theory only. In practice, you go organize a boycott because you don't like Coca-Cola. Rotsa ruck. Corporatia controls the government and will use it as its tool to thrive up to and including its military. Unless we somehow gain mind control over millions of consumers we have zero power over it. We have created an oligarchy instead of a royalty but the effect is the same. And that oligarchy has plenty of loyalists, which are as impenetrable as that boycott.

Government? A puppet show. We can play with the voting machine toy and pretend we're electing a puppet who, this time for sure, is gonna go clean the place up -- but it's still a puppet, and to believe that its wearing of a red or blue costume is going to make a damn bit of difference is as illusory as the illusion that we have "control" over Corporatia.

Sorry but your bold above strikes me as acutely naïve.

 

[Asclepias]

Government, by design, is interested in power. That is why it keeps growing, and expanding its regulatory oversight, and then fining companies. The fact that you trust a power hungry bureaucracy to self regulate just proves that you really have no concept of the problem.

You keep missing the point that the government can be voted out. Inherently its more trustworthy than an entity you have no control over. The fact that the government can be voted out should tell you the point is you trust no entity you lack any control over.

The interesting point that YOU miss is the fact that you have COMPLETE control over a corporation where you have far less power over the government. you seem to think that the ability to vote again 4 years after the last election somehow confers this awesome oversight of the government but that the simple fact that you can stop purchasing a product right now and the corporation ceases to exist confers no power to you at all.

That is completely asinine.

We have ultimate control over companies at all times. not only can we obliterate them by simply not purchasing their products but we may also get that exact same service or product from their competitor. What about the government? Just try and stop paying them and see what happens.

This idea that companies have some major power over us all is the most convoluted and confusing sentiment that people hold these days. YOU have the money and that means YOU have the power.

I was trying to figure out if you were being sarcastic or not. It seems like you are serious. You dont have control over companies if they provide you with essentials. If they establish a monopoly by whatever means you are at their mercy without regulation. I dont think you really thought that post through all the way. Think about what you are saying. I dont think corps are inherently evil as I know some CEO's that are good people. Make no mistake about it. If a company is publicly traded they are looking out for their stockholders and not the consumer. Businesses are in the business of making money.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Corporations are neither good or evil. They're self-interested, and in the pursuit of self-interest may do both good and evil things. Trusting an entirely self-interested entity to self-police is stupid.

Yet you trust the government to self police.

A freely elected government can be trusted with the knowledge that voters can remove those in power should they not police themselves. There is a difference here because outside of the government, there really is no one to police private companies.

I wish people would get over the monumentally stupid idea that politicians are in control of the government. In fact, I am going to start a thread about just how stupid you have to be to believe that, and refuse to address anyone that brings it up in this thread about corporations.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If GMO's are good then why has Europe and Russia banned them completely? I do not trust GMO's and I would not care if Santa Claus delivered it to me instead of Monsanto. It isn't about Monsanto - although by having patent on seeds they would have the monopoly on food production. They know this. Is that evil? To have the monopoly on food? Yes, I believe it is.

Because they prefer to cater to fear than to use science to argue a point.

I'm a farmer and we don't like hybrid seeds, GMO foods or anything that makes folks sick.

In the South we have a saying and it applies to seed that comes from our trees & our food - if it ain't broke? Don't fix it.

Yet everything you plant is part of centuries worth of genetic manipulation of seed stock.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Actually, the research seems to indicate that mites make bees more sensitive to pesticides. The link I gave earlier cited a study that indicated as many as 35 pesticides in bee pollen. Since GMO crops are designed to use fewer pesticides there might be a correlation between bee survival and the presence of GMO crops.

Please note, I am not claiming this proves that GMO crops will save bees, just pointing out that, as usual, the answers aren't simple.

Yup - The lower pesticide & herbicide use is why I have no problem with GMO crops. I am only pissed about the Romney/Monsanto dirty political business tactics fleecing citizens. Monsanto's monopoly extortion tactics is why I & many other farmers only plant Stine seeds now.

Actually GMO's foster higher pesticide and herbicide use. Its interesting to me that Monsanto also manufactures the herbicide Roundup.

Center for Food Safety | Issues | rbGH | GENETICALLY MODIFIED (GM) CROPS INCREASE PESTICIDE USE AND FAIL TO ALLEVIATE POVERTY, REVEALS NEW REPORT

Farmers have been using herbicides since they were first discovered because they discovered it is easier to spray a field to kill the weeds than to walk through it every day and pull them out by the roots.

 

[BobPlumb]

Okay, y'all have convinced me. Corporations are evil. I need the government to protect me from them.