What The Founding Fathers Thought About Corporations

[Dick Tuck]

Yes, it's just a blog. But it makes an interesting argument, using facts. So instead of shooting the messenger, and feeble minded flaming (from both sides). Let's try something new, and have an intelligent discussion (yeah, I know I'm dreaming).

What The Founding Fathers Thought About Corporations

One interesting observation comes from Jefferson.



snopes.com: Thomas Jefferson on Banks

Private Banks (Quotation) « Thomas Jefferson

Thread killa!

I repeat, the whole premise is based on a quote that Founding Father Jefferson never made.

The whole premise? Hardly. Why did real patriots throw the property of the East Indian Tea Company into Boston Harbor. BTW, Snopes didn't dispute the statement, nor did it provide an alternative view of Jefferson. Our founders distrusted the corrupting power of corporations. That fact is clear.

If the author got hoodwinked on that one, so be it. It certainly doesn't change the fact of how our founders bridled limited liability corporations soon after our founding, nor does it make the premise false.

Are you able to present a compelling argument that claims that our founders were in strong favor of limited liability corporations?

 

[francoHFW]

#15-- 2 + 3: Excellent. Bring back Glass-Steagall ...

 

[kwc57]

I repeat, the whole premise is based on a quote that Founding Father Jefferson never made.

The whole premise? Hardly. Why did real patriots throw the property of the East Indian Tea Company into Boston Harbor. BTW, Snopes didn't dispute the statement, nor did it provide an alternative view of Jefferson. Our founders distrusted the corrupting power of corporations. That fact is clear.

If the author got hoodwinked on that one, so be it. It certainly doesn't change the fact of how our founders bridled limited liability corporations soon after our founding, nor does it make the premise false.

Are you able to present a compelling argument that claims that our founders were in strong favor of limited liability corporations?

The author is building his case on at least one unsubstantiated quote. Who knows how many others he has wrong. That's the great thing about the interwebs, there is no editorial process and people can make up whatever they want. Why, did you know that Megan Fox said that kwc57 was the best lay she'd ever had and she'd be his slut any day of the week? True story!

 

[g5000]

He strongly opposed federalism.

"We are all republicans -- we are all federalists," Thomas Jefferson told the American people in his first inaugural address.'

Thomas Jefferson, Federalist. | Essays in History

Like I said.

You fool. You don't even comprehend the meaning of that statement. He was elected as the candidate of the Democratic-Republican (Anti-Federalist) party. John Adams was the leading Federalist party candidate.

That sentence was from Jefferson's inaugural, and he was saying "we are all federalists" the way another politician might say "we are all black -- we are all white" to bring racial harmony back to the table.

The election of 1800 was the most divisive election in our history, second only to the election of 1860. It had taken 36 ballots to finally elect someone. After such a vitriolic campaign season, Jefferson was attempting to re-unite the country to work together. You should read some of the hateful propaganda thrown around back then. It makes for a nice contrast with today's rhetoric.


He was solidly anti-federalist. Just because you completely misunderstood his statement, which usually happens when you take something out of context, does not "prove" you can quote Jefferson to support any view.

Only a person ignorant of American history would believe Jefferson was a federalist.

 

[whitehall]

Jefferson was talking about private banks printing money you dope. The FF would be rolling over in their graves if they saw the hypocrites on the left maligning corporations and then dancing in the streets when the DOW spikes on rare occasions during a democrat administration.

 

[Dick Tuck]

The whole premise? Hardly. Why did real patriots throw the property of the East Indian Tea Company into Boston Harbor. BTW, Snopes didn't dispute the statement, nor did it provide an alternative view of Jefferson. Our founders distrusted the corrupting power of corporations. That fact is clear.

If the author got hoodwinked on that one, so be it. It certainly doesn't change the fact of how our founders bridled limited liability corporations soon after our founding, nor does it make the premise false.

Are you able to present a compelling argument that claims that our founders were in strong favor of limited liability corporations?

The author is building his case on at least one unsubstantiated quote. Who knows how many others he has wrong. That's the great thing about the interwebs, there is no editorial process and people can make up whatever they want. Why, did you know that Megan Fox said that kwc57 was the best lay she'd ever had and she'd be his slut any day of the week? True story!

Bullshit. He's built his case on a preponderance of facts. You've yet to have shown that your cherrypicked fact is false. The argument is what reservations our founders had against limited liability corporations, and the treat they posed to our Republic.

The facts remain that the Boston Tea Party was a destruction of property demonstration against the corporations.

The fact remains that our founders spoke, not for or against, corporations, but of their threat to the Republic.

The fact is that our original articles of incorporation were limited by both time and scope.

Do you dispute that?

 

[francoHFW]

Reasonable regulation is the answer, but what is reasonable- only expeience, not blind (Pub these days) ideology.

Another huge problem is CEO etc pay. In the 50's, about 25x the workers, 1980: 80 x, now 350x. We need higher taxes for the very rich, something like 80% over 20 million...50% over 10 million, because this is a travesty...

 

[g5000]

Right after Jefferson made his inaugural speech, SniperFire, he halted Adams' federal appointments because Adams had tried to pack the judiciary with Federalist judges on his way out the door. This battle eventually led to the landmark Marbury v. Madison Supreme Court decision.

Trying to use a single sentence to "prove" Jefferson was a Federalist would draw deep belly laughs from serious circles.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Jefferson was talking about private banks printing money you dope. The FF would be rolling over in their graves if they saw the hypocrites on the left maligning corporations and then dancing in the streets when the DOW spikes on rare occasions during a democrat administration.

"You dupe" helps your position in what way?

I'm not maligning corporations. Unlike Roberts, I see them as inanimate constructs. They're neither good nor bad. They are a legal entity that provides individual, and some collective protection, under it's right of limited liability.

That's what they are. That's also a major perk. If the company nukes Wall Street, the owners are only liable for what they invested. Come on and take a free ride.

Is that fair/ I don't think so, but I also think that the freebie of limited liability ought to come with reasonable regulation.

I'm not a libertarian. I believe in free markets, and handing out the perk of "limited liability". I just believe that it has to come with some reasonable consequences, and don't want to see it as a loophole to hose our Republic.

 

[g5000]

what do you plan on replacing corporations with?

Corporations should not be replaced. We just need to make sure there are safeguards which prevent the unnatural redistribution of wealth from the pockets of the common man into the rich man's vault.

If the law and its enforcers allow the defrauding and robbing of ordinary people, then our Republic is in jeopardy.

what would those safeguards be exactly?

For starters:

1. Placing credit default swaps under insurance regulations and outlawing naked CDS.

2. Arresting, indicting, trying, and convicting fraudsters. Some examples being the following people who are walking free despite everyone knowing their crimes:

Daniel Sparks and Tom Montag: Goldman Sachs. Constructed the fraudulent Timberwolf billion dollar toxic mortgage security and sold it to investors, then profited by betting against it. Deliberately stuffed the security with mortgages they knew were toxic so they could be on its failure while also profiting from its sale it to investors.

Brian H. Stoker: Citigroup. Constructed the fraudulent Class V Funding III CDO-squared which ripped off investors for over $700 million.

Fabrice Tourre: Goldman Sachs. Constructed the fraudulent Abacus 2007-ac1 CDO for which GS was fined but no one went to prison. Tourre allowed hedge fund manager John Paulson to select the toxic mortgages to be placed in the CDO so Goldman Sachs and Paulson could bet against it. Paulson believes when it comes to this kind of business, we should be supporting them and encouraging them.


Angelo Mozillo: Countrywide CEO. This guy and his financial officers committed the exact same kind of crime the Enron CEO and financial officers did, and yet he walks free. Mozillo kept telling investors that Countrywide was "consitently producing quality mortgages" while his internal memos show that he was well aware his company was creating the most toxic mortgages on the planet. The SEC originally demanded a jury trial for Mozillo, but he ultimately walked away with a fine and no admission of wrongdoing. This guy is the scummiest of the scum.


3. Repeal the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000 which contains amazing gems like this in Section 117:

This Act shall supersede and preempt the application of any State or local law that prohibits or regulates gaming or the operation of bucket shops

Ask yourself why the CFMA had to have a provision in it which exempted Wall Street from state laws which apply to illegal gambling rip-off joints. Ask yourself why not one Republican bitched about the usurpation of states rights in this bill.

4. Repeal the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999.

5. Outlaw the SEC from allowing the removal the capital reserve requirements for the biggest broker-dealers so that when their derivatives shit ultimately blew up in their faces, NONE OF THEM had had any cash reserves to cover their losses. We all know what happened to Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, and Lehman Brothers as a result.



It really isn't hard for the government to figure this shit out if it really wants to.

 

[g5000]

6. Place derivatives trading on public exchanges so that a free market price point can be established, and so that broker-dealers will have to show they have capital to back their gambles.

 

[g5000]

A man invents a gadget and makes millons of dollars a year selling the gadget.

Meanwhile, a thief is breaking into every house on his street every day while he and his neighbors are at work. The police know who the thief is, but do nothing.

The Left's solution to the problem of everyone being robbed is to tax the inventor more.

The Right's solution to the problem of everyone being robbed is to deny robbery even occurs.

If someone stands up and says we should make a law against robbery and throw the robber in jail, that does not make that person "anti-rich" or a "liberal" or "anti-corporations".

Don't get confused. You are the ones being robbed. The robber's hand is in your pocket. He is stealing from YOU.

If you have a 401k or some other kind of pool of money being handled by someone else for you, you are the victim.

Wake the **** up.

This particular kind of theft is very complex, but it IS happening. Just because you do not understand how it is happening does not mean it isn't. You did not lose your money because of the negroes of Iceland.

 

[Katzndogz]

what do you plan on replacing corporations with?

Corporations should not be replaced. We just need to make sure there are safeguards which prevent the unnatural redistribution of wealth from the pockets of the common man into the rich man's vault.

If the law and its enforcers allow the defrauding and robbing of ordinary people, then our Republic is in jeopardy.

Corporations make money by selling either a product or providing a service. You hold the power in your own hands. Don't buy.

 

[g5000]

what do you plan on replacing corporations with?

Corporations should not be replaced. We just need to make sure there are safeguards which prevent the unnatural redistribution of wealth from the pockets of the common man into the rich man's vault.

If the law and its enforcers allow the defrauding and robbing of ordinary people, then our Republic is in jeopardy.

Corporations make money by selling either a product or providing a service. You hold the power in your own hands. Don't buy.

Read my last three posts.