Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey

[gipper]

I found this great column just for you. Please read. Can you refute it?

The Long History of Elite Rule: What Will It Take To End It?
Elites have ruled over people and commanded the surplus produced by their labor for many millennia. It is this long history we have to contend with in today’s crisis of capitalism that has produced endless wars and environmental catastrophes as corporate billionaire rulers continue to promote business as usual while preparing to fight each other with armed forces and nuclear weapons. This has all been “normalized.” Concentrated elite power ends up massively distorting people’s understanding of the nature of big business rule. Their highly paid spokes people even shamelessly deploy concepts like “freedom” and “liberty” to rationalize the enslaving and killing of millions for profits in resource wars. But we also need to understand that despite this long reign of (t)error, human beings lived for most of their evolutionary history (a much longer period of time than that during which elites have ruled) in nomadic hunter-gatherer societies where life conditions produced a rough equality among the Paleolithic family groups. If there was anything that could be called freedom here, it was a consequence of a primitive subsistence level that demanded participation from all in obtaining the means of survival while providing minimal incentives for large-scale social conflicts. Cooperation was primary; it is what made human societies — not competition. These conditions also kept the human populations low and in balance with available resources, while as some anthropologists speculate (see Marshall Sahlins), providing significant amounts of free time for cultivating social ties.

We also need to understand that anyone trying to change things for the benefit of the masses of the people – even when they try to play within the rules set by big business — will be the targets of endless media efforts to demonize and disqualify them.
The Long History of Elite Rule: What Will It Take To End It? - CounterPunch.org

"Big business rule?" What a joke. Business has never ruled anything. Big business has only manage to emerge because the power of political rule has been reduced. When politicians have control over your means of survival, you can depend on them taking the biggest share for themselves. Business can only become big by serving the consumer.

What a surprise that you would ridicule concepts like freedom and liberty. That's what tyrants have always done.

Counter Punch is a Marxist publication, BTW. What a surprise that you would quote it.

Big business sure does rule the country, since they control the federal government.

You just make sure you vote for one of the wealthy Democrats as you're told.

I have never voted D for potus. Though I’m not proud of this, since both parties are pretty much the same. Actually I’m ashamed of some of the asshole Rs I’ve voted for.

I don’t vote any more but if Bernie gets the nomination, I might.

I was a dumb con once, like you. I learned long ago it’s all a scam. When will you?

If you vote for Bernie, then you're a king sized sucker.

Stop believing right wing propaganda. You are no different than the lefties who swallow left wing propaganda.

 

[gipper]

Big business sure does rule the country, since they control the federal government.

You just make sure you vote for one of the wealthy Democrats as you're told.

I have never voted D for potus. Though I’m not proud of this, since both parties are pretty much the same. Actually I’m ashamed of some of the asshole Rs I’ve voted for.

I don’t vote any more but if Bernie gets the nomination, I might.

I was a dumb con once, like you. I learned long ago it’s all a scam. When will you?

Vote. Don't vote. Nobody gives a shit what makes you feel superior. You'll still impotently ***** on the internet either way.

I’m certainly superior to you. Thanks for understanding.

Oh, I understand, all right. I understand you're just a pompous blowhard.

I’ll try harder next time.

 

[daveman]

Regardless of what you label it, or refuse to label it, there are undeniably successful companies in America.

Sanders wants to punish them for being successful.

That's profoundly stupid.

No worse than punishing people for saving their entire lives.

A person's life savings being confiscated by the government affects only a few people.

A company being shut down due to malign government policies affects many.

Why do you think one is bad, but one is good?

Rabbit hole. If you want to address what I say, great. You don't get to make an argument up for me and then argue against that.

That is what you said. Chickenshit.

I never once mentioned shutting anything down (outside of bail outs and the socialist policies of the Fed).

You support Sanders. He WILL shut down companies through burdensome regulation. This is inarguable.

 

[daveman]

You just make sure you vote for one of the wealthy Democrats as you're told.

I have never voted D for potus. Though I’m not proud of this, since both parties are pretty much the same. Actually I’m ashamed of some of the asshole Rs I’ve voted for.

I don’t vote any more but if Bernie gets the nomination, I might.

I was a dumb con once, like you. I learned long ago it’s all a scam. When will you?

Vote. Don't vote. Nobody gives a shit what makes you feel superior. You'll still impotently ***** on the internet either way.

I’m certainly superior to you. Thanks for understanding.

Oh, I understand, all right. I understand you're just a pompous blowhard.

I’ll try harder next time.

Naaah, you're redlined.

 

[Markle]

I have never voted D for potus. Though I’m not proud of this, since both parties are pretty much the same. Actually I’m ashamed of some of the asshole Rs I’ve voted for.

I don’t vote any more but if Bernie gets the nomination, I might.

Bernie Sanders will not get the nomination, not possible. The DNC will not allow it, they know that both he and Elizabeth Warren are way too far to the left to be a serious candidate.

 

[daveman]

I have never voted D for potus. Though I’m not proud of this, since both parties are pretty much the same. Actually I’m ashamed of some of the asshole Rs I’ve voted for.

I don’t vote any more but if Bernie gets the nomination, I might.

Bernie Sanders will not get the nomination, not possible. The DNC will not allow it, they know that both he and Elizabeth Warren are way too far to the left to be a serious candidate.

Bernie would have gotten it last time, but he sold out.

 

[bripat9643]

"Big business rule?" What a joke. Business has never ruled anything. Big business has only manage to emerge because the power of political rule has been reduced. When politicians have control over your means of survival, you can depend on them taking the biggest share for themselves. Business can only become big by serving the consumer.

What a surprise that you would ridicule concepts like freedom and liberty. That's what tyrants have always done.

Counter Punch is a Marxist publication, BTW. What a surprise that you would quote it.

Big business sure does rule the country, since they control the federal government.

You just make sure you vote for one of the wealthy Democrats as you're told.

I have never voted D for potus. Though I’m not proud of this, since both parties are pretty much the same. Actually I’m ashamed of some of the asshole Rs I’ve voted for.

I don’t vote any more but if Bernie gets the nomination, I might.

I was a dumb con once, like you. I learned long ago it’s all a scam. When will you?

If you vote for Bernie, then you're a king sized sucker.

Stop believing right wing propaganda. You are no different than the lefties who swallow left wing propaganda.

You mean lefties like you?

 

[Markle]

I have never voted D for potus. Though I’m not proud of this, since both parties are pretty much the same. Actually I’m ashamed of some of the asshole Rs I’ve voted for.

I don’t vote any more but if Bernie gets the nomination, I might.

Bernie Sanders will not get the nomination, not possible. The DNC will not allow it, they know that both he and Elizabeth Warren are way too far to the left to be a serious candidate.

Bernie would have gotten it last time, but he sold out.

The DNC did not allow it in 2016 and they will not in 2020 either. As I said, and even you know it is true, he and Elizabeth are way to far to the left to be a serious candidate. He would be demolished by President Donald Trump in the debates and at the polls.

 

[gipper]

I found this great column just for you. Please read. Can you refute it?

The Long History of Elite Rule: What Will It Take To End It?
Elites have ruled over people and commanded the surplus produced by their labor for many millennia. It is this long history we have to contend with in today’s crisis of capitalism that has produced endless wars and environmental catastrophes as corporate billionaire rulers continue to promote business as usual while preparing to fight each other with armed forces and nuclear weapons. This has all been “normalized.” Concentrated elite power ends up massively distorting people’s understanding of the nature of big business rule. Their highly paid spokes people even shamelessly deploy concepts like “freedom” and “liberty” to rationalize the enslaving and killing of millions for profits in resource wars. But we also need to understand that despite this long reign of (t)error, human beings lived for most of their evolutionary history (a much longer period of time than that during which elites have ruled) in nomadic hunter-gatherer societies where life conditions produced a rough equality among the Paleolithic family groups. If there was anything that could be called freedom here, it was a consequence of a primitive subsistence level that demanded participation from all in obtaining the means of survival while providing minimal incentives for large-scale social conflicts. Cooperation was primary; it is what made human societies — not competition. These conditions also kept the human populations low and in balance with available resources, while as some anthropologists speculate (see Marshall Sahlins), providing significant amounts of free time for cultivating social ties.

We also need to understand that anyone trying to change things for the benefit of the masses of the people – even when they try to play within the rules set by big business — will be the targets of endless media efforts to demonize and disqualify them.
The Long History of Elite Rule: What Will It Take To End It? - CounterPunch.org

"Big business rule?" What a joke. Business has never ruled anything. Big business has only manage to emerge because the power of political rule has been reduced. When politicians have control over your means of survival, you can depend on them taking the biggest share for themselves. Business can only become big by serving the consumer.

What a surprise that you would ridicule concepts like freedom and liberty. That's what tyrants have always done.

Counter Punch is a Marxist publication, BTW. What a surprise that you would quote it.

Big business sure does rule the country, since they control the federal government.

ROFL! They certainly do not. They pay $billions in extortion to politicians every year.

Lol. That’s what I mean. They buy the politicians who do their bidding. Do you have the money to buy politicians?

In other words politicians extort money from them. Who has more power, the perpetrator of extortion, or the victim?

No. The big corporations are running a racket. They buy protection from competition, by buying off the politicians and making sure their former employees are hired by government agencies, who regulate the corporation.

It’s a scam. Can you see it?

 

[bripat9643]

"Big business rule?" What a joke. Business has never ruled anything. Big business has only manage to emerge because the power of political rule has been reduced. When politicians have control over your means of survival, you can depend on them taking the biggest share for themselves. Business can only become big by serving the consumer.

What a surprise that you would ridicule concepts like freedom and liberty. That's what tyrants have always done.

Counter Punch is a Marxist publication, BTW. What a surprise that you would quote it.

Big business sure does rule the country, since they control the federal government.

ROFL! They certainly do not. They pay $billions in extortion to politicians every year.

Lol. That’s what I mean. They buy the politicians who do their bidding. Do you have the money to buy politicians?

In other words politicians extort money from them. Who has more power, the perpetrator of extortion, or the victim?

No. The big corporations are running a racket. They buy protection from competition, by buying off the politicians and making sure their former employees are hired by government agencies, who regulate the corporation.

They wouldn't need protection from government if government wasn't running things, dumbass.

 

[gipper]

I have never voted D for potus. Though I’m not proud of this, since both parties are pretty much the same. Actually I’m ashamed of some of the asshole Rs I’ve voted for.

I don’t vote any more but if Bernie gets the nomination, I might.

Bernie Sanders will not get the nomination, not possible. The DNC will not allow it, they know that both he and Elizabeth Warren are way too far to the left to be a serious candidate.

Bernie would have gotten it last time, but he sold out.

You mean Hillary, theDNC, and the MSM cheated him.

 

[georgephillip]

Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey
Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey

Nearly 1.1 billion fewer people are living in extreme poverty than in 1990.
In 2015, 736 million people lived on less than $1.90 a day, down from 1.85 billion in 1990.
Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey

So not only are there less people in extreme poverty but there are more
In 1990 there were 5,327,231,041 people... https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/1990/
In 2019 there were 7,713,468,205 people... https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/2019/

Facts are there are 1.1 billion fewer people in poverty even though there is 44% more people!

If you're defining "extreme poverty" as those living on less than $1.25 a day, capitalism still consigns millions of human to an early grave.

https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-died-because-of-capitalism

"'If we want to stick with a single international line, we might use the 'ethical poverty line' devised by Peter Edward of Newcastle University.

"He calculates that in order to achieve normal human life expectancy of just over 70 years, people need roughly 2.7 to 3.9 times the existing poverty line.

"In the past, that was $5 a day.

"Using the World banks new calculations, its about $7.40 a day.

"As it happens, this number is close to the average of national poverty lines in the global south.

"So, what would happen if we were to measure global poverty at this more accurate level? We would see that about 4.2 billion people live in poverty today. That’s more than four times what the World Bank would have us believe, and more than 60% of humanity.

"And the number has risen sharply since 1980, with nearly 1 billion people added to the ranks of the poor over the past 35 years.

https://www.quora.com/Did-capitalis...pitalist-socialist-or-communist-less-relevant

"The UN’s sustainable development goals, launched in September, are set to use the $1.90 line to measure poverty.

"Why do they persist with this implausibly low threshold?

"Because it’s the only one that shows any meaningful progress against poverty, and therefore lends a kind of happy justification to the existing economic order' (Hickel 2015)."

 

[bripat9643]

Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey
Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey

Nearly 1.1 billion fewer people are living in extreme poverty than in 1990.
In 2015, 736 million people lived on less than $1.90 a day, down from 1.85 billion in 1990.
Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey

So not only are there less people in extreme poverty but there are more
In 1990 there were 5,327,231,041 people... https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/1990/
In 2019 there were 7,713,468,205 people... https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/2019/

Facts are there are 1.1 billion fewer people in poverty even though there is 44% more people!

If you're defining "extreme poverty" as those living on less than $1.25 a day, capitalism still consigns millions of human to an early grave.

https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-died-because-of-capitalism

"'If we want to stick with a single international line, we might use the 'ethical poverty line' devised by Peter Edward of Newcastle University.

"He calculates that in order to achieve normal human life expectancy of just over 70 years, people need roughly 2.7 to 3.9 times the existing poverty line.

"In the past, that was $5 a day.

"Using the World banks new calculations, its about $7.40 a day.

"As it happens, this number is close to the average of national poverty lines in the global south.

"So, what would happen if we were to measure global poverty at this more accurate level? We would see that about 4.2 billion people live in poverty today. That’s more than four times what the World Bank would have us believe, and more than 60% of humanity.

"And the number has risen sharply since 1980, with nearly 1 billion people added to the ranks of the poor over the past 35 years.

https://www.quora.com/Did-capitalis...pitalist-socialist-or-communist-less-relevant

"The UN’s sustainable development goals, launched in September, are set to use the $1.90 line to measure poverty.

"Why do they persist with this implausibly low threshold?

"Because it’s the only one that shows any meaningful progress against poverty, and therefore lends a kind of happy justification to the existing economic order' (Hickel 2015)."

That's the cost of no capitalism, shit for brains. Those problems occur in countries that don't have capitalism, or that haven't had it for very long.

 

[gipper]

Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey
Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey

Nearly 1.1 billion fewer people are living in extreme poverty than in 1990.
In 2015, 736 million people lived on less than $1.90 a day, down from 1.85 billion in 1990.
Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey

So not only are there less people in extreme poverty but there are more
In 1990 there were 5,327,231,041 people... https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/1990/
In 2019 there were 7,713,468,205 people... https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/2019/

Facts are there are 1.1 billion fewer people in poverty even though there is 44% more people!

If you're defining "extreme poverty" as those living on less than $1.25 a day, capitalism still consigns millions of human to an early grave.

https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-died-because-of-capitalism

"'If we want to stick with a single international line, we might use the 'ethical poverty line' devised by Peter Edward of Newcastle University.

"He calculates that in order to achieve normal human life expectancy of just over 70 years, people need roughly 2.7 to 3.9 times the existing poverty line.

"In the past, that was $5 a day.

"Using the World banks new calculations, its about $7.40 a day.

"As it happens, this number is close to the average of national poverty lines in the global south.

"So, what would happen if we were to measure global poverty at this more accurate level? We would see that about 4.2 billion people live in poverty today. That’s more than four times what the World Bank would have us believe, and more than 60% of humanity.

"And the number has risen sharply since 1980, with nearly 1 billion people added to the ranks of the poor over the past 35 years.

https://www.quora.com/Did-capitalis...pitalist-socialist-or-communist-less-relevant

"The UN’s sustainable development goals, launched in September, are set to use the $1.90 line to measure poverty.

"Why do they persist with this implausibly low threshold?

"Because it’s the only one that shows any meaningful progress against poverty, and therefore lends a kind of happy justification to the existing economic order' (Hickel 2015)."

What’s truly amazing is the billionaires like Bezos, Buffet, FB Dork and others could easily put and end to this, but they don’t. They must be psychopaths.

 

[georgephillip]

Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey
Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey

Nearly 1.1 billion fewer people are living in extreme poverty than in 1990.
In 2015, 736 million people lived on less than $1.90 a day, down from 1.85 billion in 1990.
Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey

So not only are there less people in extreme poverty but there are more
In 1990 there were 5,327,231,041 people... https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/1990/
In 2019 there were 7,713,468,205 people... https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/2019/

Facts are there are 1.1 billion fewer people in poverty even though there is 44% more people!

If you're defining "extreme poverty" as those living on less than $1.25 a day, capitalism still consigns millions of human to an early grave.

https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-died-because-of-capitalism

"'If we want to stick with a single international line, we might use the 'ethical poverty line' devised by Peter Edward of Newcastle University.

"He calculates that in order to achieve normal human life expectancy of just over 70 years, people need roughly 2.7 to 3.9 times the existing poverty line.

"In the past, that was $5 a day.

"Using the World banks new calculations, its about $7.40 a day.

"As it happens, this number is close to the average of national poverty lines in the global south.

"So, what would happen if we were to measure global poverty at this more accurate level? We would see that about 4.2 billion people live in poverty today. That’s more than four times what the World Bank would have us believe, and more than 60% of humanity.

"And the number has risen sharply since 1980, with nearly 1 billion people added to the ranks of the poor over the past 35 years.

https://www.quora.com/Did-capitalis...pitalist-socialist-or-communist-less-relevant

"The UN’s sustainable development goals, launched in September, are set to use the $1.90 line to measure poverty.

"Why do they persist with this implausibly low threshold?

"Because it’s the only one that shows any meaningful progress against poverty, and therefore lends a kind of happy justification to the existing economic order' (Hickel 2015)."

That's the cost of no capitalism, shit for brains. Those problems occur in countries that don't have capitalism, or that haven't had it for very long.

That's the cost of no capitalism, shit for brains. Those problems occur in countries that don't have capitalism, or that haven't had it for very long.

Care to name a few countries that capitalism doesn't affect?

 

[gipper]

Big business sure does rule the country, since they control the federal government.

ROFL! They certainly do not. They pay $billions in extortion to politicians every year.

Lol. That’s what I mean. They buy the politicians who do their bidding. Do you have the money to buy politicians?

In other words politicians extort money from them. Who has more power, the perpetrator of extortion, or the victim?

No. The big corporations are running a racket. They buy protection from competition, by buying off the politicians and making sure their former employees are hired by government agencies, who regulate the corporation.

They wouldn't need protection from government if government wasn't running things, dumbass.

You don’t see it then. Let me try again. They buy off the politicians and regulators who in turn protect them from competition. It’s a racket the Mafia can only dream of.

If you think this is good, you aren’t thinking. Shit for brains.

 

[bripat9643]

Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey
Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey

Nearly 1.1 billion fewer people are living in extreme poverty than in 1990.
In 2015, 736 million people lived on less than $1.90 a day, down from 1.85 billion in 1990.
Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey

So not only are there less people in extreme poverty but there are more
In 1990 there were 5,327,231,041 people... https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/1990/
In 2019 there were 7,713,468,205 people... https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/2019/

Facts are there are 1.1 billion fewer people in poverty even though there is 44% more people!

If you're defining "extreme poverty" as those living on less than $1.25 a day, capitalism still consigns millions of human to an early grave.

https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-died-because-of-capitalism

"'If we want to stick with a single international line, we might use the 'ethical poverty line' devised by Peter Edward of Newcastle University.

"He calculates that in order to achieve normal human life expectancy of just over 70 years, people need roughly 2.7 to 3.9 times the existing poverty line.

"In the past, that was $5 a day.

"Using the World banks new calculations, its about $7.40 a day.

"As it happens, this number is close to the average of national poverty lines in the global south.

"So, what would happen if we were to measure global poverty at this more accurate level? We would see that about 4.2 billion people live in poverty today. That’s more than four times what the World Bank would have us believe, and more than 60% of humanity.

"And the number has risen sharply since 1980, with nearly 1 billion people added to the ranks of the poor over the past 35 years.

https://www.quora.com/Did-capitalis...pitalist-socialist-or-communist-less-relevant

"The UN’s sustainable development goals, launched in September, are set to use the $1.90 line to measure poverty.

"Why do they persist with this implausibly low threshold?

"Because it’s the only one that shows any meaningful progress against poverty, and therefore lends a kind of happy justification to the existing economic order' (Hickel 2015)."

That's the cost of no capitalism, shit for brains. Those problems occur in countries that don't have capitalism, or that haven't had it for very long.

That's the cost of no capitalism, shit for brains. Those problems occur in countries that don't have capitalism, or that haven't had it for very long.

Care to name a few countries that capitalism doesn't affect?

Capitalism has a positive effect on every country where it's tried.

 

[bripat9643]

ROFL! They certainly do not. They pay $billions in extortion to politicians every year.

Lol. That’s what I mean. They buy the politicians who do their bidding. Do you have the money to buy politicians?

In other words politicians extort money from them. Who has more power, the perpetrator of extortion, or the victim?

No. The big corporations are running a racket. They buy protection from competition, by buying off the politicians and making sure their former employees are hired by government agencies, who regulate the corporation.

They wouldn't need protection from government if government wasn't running things, dumbass.

You don’t see it then. Let me try again. They buy off the politicians and regulators who in turn protect them from competition. It’s a racket the Mafia can only dream of.

If you think this is good, you aren’t thinking. Shit for brains.

I didn't say it's good, but it doesn't support your claim that corporations control the government. Precisely the opposite is the case.

 

[gipper]

Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey
Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey

Nearly 1.1 billion fewer people are living in extreme poverty than in 1990.
In 2015, 736 million people lived on less than $1.90 a day, down from 1.85 billion in 1990.
Capitalism seen doing 'more harm than good' in global survey

So not only are there less people in extreme poverty but there are more
In 1990 there were 5,327,231,041 people... https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/1990/
In 2019 there were 7,713,468,205 people... https://www.populationpyramid.net/world/2019/

Facts are there are 1.1 billion fewer people in poverty even though there is 44% more people!

If you're defining "extreme poverty" as those living on less than $1.25 a day, capitalism still consigns millions of human to an early grave.

https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-died-because-of-capitalism

"'If we want to stick with a single international line, we might use the 'ethical poverty line' devised by Peter Edward of Newcastle University.

"He calculates that in order to achieve normal human life expectancy of just over 70 years, people need roughly 2.7 to 3.9 times the existing poverty line.

"In the past, that was $5 a day.

"Using the World banks new calculations, its about $7.40 a day.

"As it happens, this number is close to the average of national poverty lines in the global south.

"So, what would happen if we were to measure global poverty at this more accurate level? We would see that about 4.2 billion people live in poverty today. That’s more than four times what the World Bank would have us believe, and more than 60% of humanity.

"And the number has risen sharply since 1980, with nearly 1 billion people added to the ranks of the poor over the past 35 years.

https://www.quora.com/Did-capitalis...pitalist-socialist-or-communist-less-relevant

"The UN’s sustainable development goals, launched in September, are set to use the $1.90 line to measure poverty.

"Why do they persist with this implausibly low threshold?

"Because it’s the only one that shows any meaningful progress against poverty, and therefore lends a kind of happy justification to the existing economic order' (Hickel 2015)."

That's the cost of no capitalism, shit for brains. Those problems occur in countries that don't have capitalism, or that haven't had it for very long.

That's the cost of no capitalism, shit for brains. Those problems occur in countries that don't have capitalism, or that haven't had it for very long.

Care to name a few countries that capitalism doesn't affect?

It rules the world, but somehow dumb cons can’t see it.

Venezuela is a good example. Dumb cons think it’s economy is failing because of socialism. Somehow they fail to see the enormous impact of the Empire’s long running sanctions and covert efforts to harm the country economically.

 

[gipper]

Lol. That’s what I mean. They buy the politicians who do their bidding. Do you have the money to buy politicians?

In other words politicians extort money from them. Who has more power, the perpetrator of extortion, or the victim?

No. The big corporations are running a racket. They buy protection from competition, by buying off the politicians and making sure their former employees are hired by government agencies, who regulate the corporation.

They wouldn't need protection from government if government wasn't running things, dumbass.

You don’t see it then. Let me try again. They buy off the politicians and regulators who in turn protect them from competition. It’s a racket the Mafia can only dream of.

If you think this is good, you aren’t thinking. Shit for brains.

I didn't say it's good, but it doesn't support your claim that corporations control the government. Precisely the opposite is the case.

Jesus dude. You’re slow.