Aren't they giving the corporations and banks more power by giving the government more power? And then they want the corporate controlled government to create more regulations that will shut down small business so big business doesn't have to worry about competition.
The US consistently ranks as among the most corruption free democracies in the world. However, in public opinion polls of how citizens see the corruption level of their govt, the US consistently ranks quite lowmeaning we tend to think of our govt as corrupt even when it is not, whereas most other nationsincluding the really corrupt onestend to have the opposite perspective. If you want to know who has the power in our govt, just follow the money. The largest drivers of spending are entitlements. Programs aimed at the poor. Defense certainly is a large component as well, but it's growth rate is fairly flat and those entitlements are growingexponentially in some cases. It is the poor who wield the power. The notion that a minority of wealthy power brokers runs things is a great Hollywood story, but it is untrue. The money flows show that it is the poor who run the govt. They pay negative taxes with the EITC, and receive substantial direct payments and support. And many regulations are aimed exclusively at their benefit at the expense of everyone else. Perhaps you think that is how it should be? So be it. But let's not continue the fairy tale that rich cigar smoking white dudes gather in shrouded rooms to control the govt. If such a fairy tale were true, the spending would reflect it. The taxation would be regressive, not one of the most steeply progressive in the world.
that's why libs also support the proposed 28th amendment that would no longer classify corporations and banks as people, So 350 million Individuals would have more influince over the goverment then the 500 corporations that buy the pollatitions.
A weak federal government is precisely why the large corporations own and control our Congress. It use to be illegal for US Congressional members to accept campaign donations, hard or soft, from a corporation. It use to be illegal for corporations to donate anonymously to any political campaign. It is use to be corporations were not considered people. Unregulated big money in politics has corrupted the entire political system. Pay for Play was never what was intended for public service.
Well, if it were indeed the case that the banks and big corporations MUST inevitably own 100% of the government, and if, moreover, all liberals wanted the government to have more power then it already does, then you would have a point. But neither of those things is true, so in fact, you don't have a point.
Umthey have too much control over right-wing politicians. We’d like to eliminate that, get corporate cash completely out of politics, and close loopholes that are sucking the life out of our economy. Like this loophole (one of many, many stupid ones) costs us $100 billion a year. Deferral of Overseas Income Multinational companies don’t have to pay U.S. income taxes on overseas profits until they transfer them back home. But in reality, companies just leave their profits in overseas tax havens, deferring taxes indefinitely. Not only that, an accounting scheme known as “transfer pricing” allows companies to move profits from the U.S. to offshore havens so they’re counted as overseas earnings. For example a pharmaceutical company could sell a drug patent to a subsidiary in the Cayman Islands for a nominal fee, then have the subsidiary charge the parent company huge licensing fees. The company can then deduct the licensing fees from its taxable income in the U.S. and send the profits to its foreign subsidiary, where taxes can be indefinitely deferred. Some 83 percent of top 100 publicly traded companies had tax-haven units in 2009, according to the GAO. General Electric, Google, Pfizer, and many other companies use this technique. The federal government loses an estimated (PDF) $100 billion a year through offshore tax abuses.
