-
- Elizabeth Barrette (
ysabetwordsmith) wrote,
Elizabeth Barrette
ysabetwordsmith
- Mood:
busy
Behind the Wall Street Protest
-
A Little Slice of Terramagne: YardMap
Sadly the main program is dormant, but the YardMap concept is awesome, and many of its informative articles remain. YardMap was a citizen science…
-
Goldenrod Gall Contents
Apparently all kinds of things go on inside goldenrod galls, beyond the caterpillars who make them. Fascinating. I've seen the galls but haven't…
-
Science and Spirituality
Here's an article about science and spirituality, sort of. It doesn't have a very wide view of either. Can you be scientific and spiritual? This…
-
A Little Slice of Terramagne: YardMap
Sadly the main program is dormant, but the YardMap concept is awesome, and many of its informative articles remain. YardMap was a citizen science…
-
Goldenrod Gall Contents
Apparently all kinds of things go on inside goldenrod galls, beyond the caterpillars who make them. Fascinating. I've seen the galls but haven't…
-
Science and Spirituality
Here's an article about science and spirituality, sort of. It doesn't have a very wide view of either. Can you be scientific and spiritual? This…
Electoral reform, yes, but let's drop the corporate issue
October 12 2011, 22:25:03 UTC 9 years ago Edited: October 12 2011, 22:25:26 UTC
Corporations are derivatives of people: persons one step removed. They exist as a tool of persons.
The concept of Corporate personhood is tied up with the concept of campaign contributions, right? I mean, your issue isn't that corporations don't get jail time or get executed for murder, it's that they have rights as entities that you wouldn't give them?
If that's the case then we can leave corporate law alone and concentrate on campaign reform and the electoral system changes you propose. I think these both have a lot of merit. The corporate personhood thing just muddies the waters in my opinion.
Almost every person I know is a shareholder in a corporation. They and us are the same. Every CEO run amuck gets to do this because the corporate shareholders - their BOSSES - don't show up to bitchslap them at the annual meetings. Go look at your retirement savings: own any stock? Show up at an annual meeting lately? My point is that we as a citizenry are SO CULPABLE in the misdeeds of corporations that it's fruitless to pretend it was only evil CEOs (selling us the goods we were demanding to buy of our own free will.)
No, let's leave the corporation stuff out of it. But, yes, electoral reform. Got any more on that? Links?
Re: Electoral reform, yes, but let's drop the corporate issue
October 12 2011, 22:36:51 UTC 9 years ago
I find that corporate personhood has far more problems than campaign ones. They have the advantages but not the disadvantages of personhood. So they are encouraged and rewarded for doing things that would be considered psychopathic in a human being. This harms everyone.
>>Almost every person I know is a shareholder in a corporation. They and us are the same.<<
Well, there's a key reason for the differences of opinion. Almost nobody I know is a shareholder. They don't have that kind of money. What retirement? People who aren't making enough to live on -- or who are unemployed altogether -- don't have the luxury of retirement. I think that's wrong.
>>But, yes, electoral reform. Got any more on that? Links?<<
Let's see ...
http://tcf.org/elections
http://www.fairvote.org/
http://www1.american.edu/ia/cfer/
Re: Electoral reform, yes, but let's drop the corporate issue
October 13 2011, 21:35:31 UTC 9 years ago Edited: October 13 2011, 21:37:19 UTC
This sentence has stayed with me all day.
The secret to success in a capitalist world is to save 10% of everything you make. Get a check for $1000? Put $100 in the bank.
It doesn't MATTER how much you make. Save 10% of it. I did this as a babysitter. I did this as a grocery store clerk. I saved and saved and saved and when I was 24 I had a 10% downpayment on my first house.
It hurts my brain to hear you say you don't have enough to live on and so can't save. There is not such THING as "enough to live on". NO one EVER has "enough". There is ALWAYS something more you need or want. If what you're saying is that you don't want to work 10% more so that you could save for retirement then SAY THAT. Admit it to yourself. It would be ANNOYING to scramble together 10% more hours, 10% more clients, a job paying 10% better. Admit this to yourself and be content with it.
If you are injured or unable to work and living off of savings or as a dependent on someone else then, yes, it's possible that you don't have enough to live on: that's why someone else is supporting you.
But if you are "supporting yourself" then you are BADLY mistaken to think that you have some excuse for not saving 10%. And it will bite you in the butt because you are human and frail and shit is going to happen and you'll wish you had some savings, even if you never desire to accumulate capital for anything (like putting your kids through college, or buying an income-producing property, or any of a number of things where having money means you can make money.)
We don't know each other and I'm probably stepping over a line by scolding you like this. I walked away at first. But "unable to save" is a lie you are telling yourself and I don't care if you lie to me, but please don't lie to yourself.