You remember Mitt Romney. He’s the one that believes that when he dies he will become the god of his own planet. (See the Book of Mormon Jokes.) More importantly, he believes, as he said, “Corporations are people, my friend.” Two down . . . and as little Ricky Perry, I can’t remember the third.
Before we get past this supreme egoist, remember how he made the fortune of which he is so proud; the one that makes him superior to us. Forget his paltry inheritance. Most of the work of Bain, his personal creation, consisted of acquiring healthy corporations, sucking from them everything of value and eliminating them. Anyone taking seriously the claim that corporations are people, perforce, must take seriously Stephen Colbert’s characterization of Mitt as a serial killer.
The Supreme Court of Wall Street presently has a case under advisement that the oligarchs fear will rid us of that particular inanity.
If the majority on the court ruled for Citizens United and favor corporations 93% of the time, why wouldn’t they rule for the Hobby Lobby corporation this time? Well, this time there’s a difference. Scores of corporations filed amicus briefs supporting Citizens United. Nary a one has done so on behalf of Hobby Lobby.
That is a dramatic difference. Has the corporate world not heard about this latest attempt to expand their powers and protections? Oh, yeah. They’ve heard. They are avoiding the case as a Republican avoids facts. Why? Because, were the case successful, It would bring such calamities as to put in jeopardy even the most limited claims of corporate personhood.
Imagine, if you will, that Hobby Lobby’s claim that the corporation was founded and is run on Christian priniciples. Their particular point being that they should not have to abide by the law that insurance companies must provide coverage for birth control. Someone else comes along and claims their religion is against war. Another claims their’s is against paying for public education (by the way, that one was already shot down. The Amish lost.) Some are against vaccinations. Some are against lax gun ownership laws. (Me.) Some don’t think they need to obey the traffic laws. They worship speed.
Where would that end? Anyone and everyone could pick and choose which laws they will obey. Since the government is somewhat restricted with regard to religion, who is to draw the line and say that you can’t use opium as a ritual of your religion? Again, that’s another one the court shot down when they refused to accept the need for some American Indians to use peyote in their rites.
Okay, that points to a practical problem with Hobby Lobby succeeding in their suit. But that’s not what concerns all of those corporations.
As it stands, corporations are people for the purpose of purchasing unlimited “free” speech in the political marketplace. Hobby Lobby wants that to extend to corporate religion. That confronts us with some questions. Can those corporations translate their political speech into the right to vote? How often must a corporation attend church to remain in good standing? Flesh and blood people can get by with only three times a year, Xmas, Easter and the Sunday before the Super Bowl.
Surely we must allow these “people” to carry guns to church, schools, public parks and other such places where children are gathered. Will corporations of the same gender be permitted to marry? Can they adopt . . . or might that border too close to slavery? Will the oil, agriculture, pharmaceutical and other corporations have to forgo their subsidies to qualify for food stamps, Medicaid and free cheese?
Will they be subject to incarceration? As so many are international now, shall they be permitted bail?
As silly as the last three paragraphs may seem, they hint at a serious concern for corporations. They fret that carrying this, “Corporations are people too, my friend,” to its logical, ludicrous conclusions would force a brief, unwonted, unwanted moment of sanity on the court. It would focus such a hot, searing spotlight on the entire concept as to give the court no choice but to overturn their Citizens United impractical joke and eliminate any and all hints of such nonsense. They worry about actually losing some of the benefits they now enjoy, with some justification. However, taking into account the court’s lack of intellectual capacity, change is likely not in the offing.
Now that I’ve covered some of the actual possibilities, permit me to propose the impossible. While my position seems quite lonely, I take a degree of satisfaction in that others have agreed. “The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.” Jefferson said that in 1816. There are many others by Thomas that strike the same chord. A few are near the top of the righthand column.
Old Tom was hardly the only one. With the exception of Alexander Hamilton, the Founding Fathers were pretty much agreed that corporations were the primary agents that likely would destroy the nation they had built. Some felt a strong need to severely restrict their powers. Other felt only complete banishment would protect this country and the rights of the people. Today, many gulls have bought into what might be called, Romney’s Rubbish. I elect to side with those old guys in wigs who dressed funny.
No corporations at all? The only solution. It all started in Great Britain. They termed them Limited, you know, those Ltd.s so common among British companies. We decided to say they were incorporated, Inc. Same difference. Great Britain is no longer. It’s now just the United Kingdom. Great Britain may be gone but we are still saddled with corporations.
How and why did this abortion ever get created? Some businessmen in London didn’t mind making money but they weren’t awfully fond of losing it. Some evil genius offered a solution. Let’s create a legal personality but don’t tell anyone it’s a legal fiction. You and I have some financial resources; not enough, but some. If some financial misfortune befell us, we were expected to pay our debts. If those debts exceeded our resources, we lost everything . . . and moved into a debtors’ prison.
To those businessmen, the attractive feature of all that was that we could not lose more than what we, as an individual person, owned. We end up with nothing but our creditors could not go beyond the individual for redress. They were, as some put it, shit outta luck. Now that doesn’t appear at first glance to be all that attractive a situation. Then you aren’t all that familiar with the vermin elite.
They paid induced the Parliament to allow for the creation of fictitious people. Then these businessmen could purchase pieces (shares) of these fake people. Were they to suffer any financial setbacks, the creditors could only attach what this fictitious person owned. The owners could not be pursued for any debts beyond the assets this fake person owned. Though the owners made the decisions which led to the financial distress, they were not to be held responsible for all of it. Their liabilities were limited. Hence the appendage attached to the corporation’s name.
One last observation about the hypocrisy of the Hobby Lobby, Inc. Just what is their real objection? Before the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) was proposed, they already had health insurance. But, you never heard a peep from them about the fact that their polices covered birth control. I’m uncertain but I think it also covered abortions. Given that ObamaCare doesn’t cover abortions, why would they object to just the birth control provision of ObamaCare and not from their existing insurance policies? In looking for a difference, it seems clear that their real objection is political, not religious. Given their history, it seems clear that their political motivations are based on the fact that Obama is Black. It seems clear that the masters of the hobby plantation base their politics and religion on the rock-solid foundation of their entire belief system – racism.
Can you hold some of your personal assets immune to the creditors for personal debt? I would strongly advise against it.
Of course, that does not exhaust the benefits of incorporation. They get to deduct essentially every penny they spend and pay tax only on some of what’s left over. How about you? If you could deduct your food, your fuel, your clothes, all that you spend on your house, not just a part, and don’t forget traveling to visit the relatives at Thanksgiving, going to the movies, the bars and the games, you might not have much remaining to be taxed. Fictitious people get treated more kindly by the tax code. Could it be that they own the government, as the Founders feared, and write their own rules?
A few final comments about the clowns in the center ring, Hobby Lobby. Their claim that their objections are based on their religion are specious. The absence of birth control leads to an increase of abortions. Opposition to abortion is more likely to be generally considered a religious tenet, at least by those that don’t read the Bible too closely. But, the Hobbits claim birth control is the sticking point. Weird.
They are also against abortion but that isn’t covered by insurance. However, they are a major purchaser of goods from China where the government can and does command abortions. Did the Messiah exempt religious corporations to support sinful foreign corporations that depend on essentially slave labor if it increases their profits? And, they take money from people who use birth control and have abortions. Just another little fly in the ointment of that Christian corporation: their retirement funds are heavily invested in corporations that manufacture birth control pills, emergency contraceptives pills, IUDs and drugs used in abortions. They seem to get their religion from a faucet; one that is about to wear out from overuse. Just another bunch of Cafeteria Christians.
To judge the claims of these hypocrites as based on religion is ludicrous . . . unless the court accepts racism as a religion.
The justification for allowing corporations is to promote commerce, not to practice hypocritical religion. The owners of Hobby Lobby are not prepared to support my objections to health insurance practices. I am for single-payer. I want to eliminate the greed of those corporations from profiting from the misfortune of those with medical problems and coming between me and my physicians while having been responsible for deaths by denial of service but never having cured anyone. I can find no justification for health insurance companies or their sucking 30% or more off the top to provide no value.
Stepping down from the pulpit.
. .
A badly cooked steak that is of prime grade will still
likely taste better than a low grade steak that is prepared well.
Hey There. I discovered your blog the usage of msn. That is an extremely neatly written article.
I’ll be sure to bookmark it and return to learn more of your useful info.
Thank you for the post. I will certainly comeback.