An Interesting Poll

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Baptist in Richmond, Feb 17, 2010.

  1. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
  2. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294
    It was great decision.

    SCOTUS has reminded politicians that political speech by all parties is protected by the First amendment, not just that of unions and phony 527 front groups.

    Move. on is dead.

    SCOTUS has leveled the playing field by allowing all to participate. I'm sure that the democrat party wil continue to be a wholly owned subsidiary of labor unions and trial lawyers. The difference is that now the amount of their bribery wil be public. And competitive.
     
  3. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    Yep, I get the talking points too, carpro.
     
  4. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you not believe that shareholders are entitled to the same voice as union members?
     
  5. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    Sure they are - they are entitled to vote.
     
  6. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why should union members enjoy the right to pool their funds so that the union management can spend it for political advertising purposes while stockholders should not?
     
  7. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    Do you really believe they are doing this for the sake of the stockholders??

    An honest question, by the way.

    Regards - sorry I didn't post that in my last reply to you,
    BiR (in St. Louis)
     
  8. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe that corporations act in the best interests of the company which is also the best interests of the shareholders.

    If shareholders do not agree with the politics of the management of a particular corporation they are free to sell their stock.

    Do you belive that unions spend campaign dollars for sake of the union members?

    Union members on the other hand have no say in the politics of the union management. Their union dues are taken from their paycheck no matter what.
     
  9. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Companies already run PACs. We have the best corporate bought and paid for govt money can buy.
     
  10. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    Corporations have a responsibility to make money, period. The "shareholder" is a myth. For example, go to Yahoo Finance and look at who owns Phillip Morris, a company who just happens to help fund the thinktank with which the author is associated:

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=MO

    According to this page, 66% of the shares are owned by either institutions or mutual funds. In most cases, the shareholder is insignificant.

    For whose sake are they spending it?

    Another honest question, by the way.

    Regards,
    BiR (in St. Louis)
     
  11. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    And who do you think owns the mutual funds?

    It all comes down to investors. Mostly retirement dollars.



    Unions spend the campaign dollars in accordance with the wishes of the union heads - not the wishes of the union members.

    Do you believe that every union member is of the same political persuasion?

    Or are members of any particular union all over the board politically?

    Why is it then the union dollars almost universally go to democrats?
     
  12. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    You might want to re-read the prospectus. Shareholders in mutual funds own shares in the fund, not the underlying stocks.


    I can make the same argument about corporations. Corporations donate to PAC's and have the same voice in politics that the unions have....and they have substantially more money than the unions.

    The union dollars almost universally go to Democrats because they are the party who is going to best pursue their interests - just like the PAC's do for the corporations.
     
  13. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Correct, but the investors can divest of the mutual funds.




    You still haven't explained why you believe that unions and corporations should be required to operate under different rules.

    What about the union member whose dues are taken from him for poitical uses even if he is 100% against the politics that the union heads choose to support?

    Union members are not a monolithic block politically.
     
  14. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    And it won't change a thing.

    That is because I wholly and completely disagree with such an assertion. Do you really think that the unions currently have an advantage over the corporations? There aren't different rules. The system as it is largely favors corporations.

    Neither are corporations.
     
  15. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294
     
  16. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ah, spoken like a true acolyte. Nice job, carpro.
     
  17. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294
    I know. I know. I'm a true believer in the 1St Amendment.

    Sorry that offends you so.
     
  18. Paul3144

    Paul3144
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,378
    Likes Received:
    0
    So now you want to give corporations the rights of American citizens?
     
  19. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    The 1st Amendment applies to corporations?
    Are you sure about that?
     
  20. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294
    Corporations don't exist in a vacuum. They are owned and operated by real people who have as much right to express their collective political opinion as a union or a lobbying association does.
     

Share This Page

Loading...