Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Can We Have the Corporate Death Penalty Back?

Posted 7 months ago on Jan. 17, 2014, 11:36 a.m. EST by shoozTroll (17632)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Since they want to be people, they should be treated as such.

The penalty for breaking laws and the public trust, must be re-instated.

http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/company-responsible-major-chemical-spill-great-candidate

76 Comments

76 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

You don't really expect me to take anything they say at rense seriously?

Libe(R)topians have been busy stripping those agencies for decades.

[-] 2 points by Nevada1 (4497) 7 months ago

Yes, as nothing else helps. People incorporate to get limited liability and the right to sell shares, which serve as a mechanism for the worst people to rise to power.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

Yes, but when their "owners" suck the value of the corporation dry, it's the public that's left holding the bag.

As will now be the case with Freedom Industries.

There will be no one to sue for damages.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/17/freedom-industries-bankruptcy-west-virginia-chemical-spill_n_4619385.html

Welcome to libe(R)topia, where plutocracy is a way of life..

If of course they haven't already gutted class action suits, as per ALEC cookie cutter laws..

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 months ago

not the worst people

just the people with all the money

[-] 2 points by Shule (1696) 7 months ago

Best idea I heard in a long time.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

We need to figure out how to "cuff 'em" too.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 months ago

Yes. I think the corporate death penalty is a fabulous idea.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

And the former owners/controllers, and their assets, should be available for court cases seeking damages.

All major assets frozen, until then.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 months ago

I agree. Completely.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

Just knowing this could happen, would scare them straight.....................:)

Loss of wealth, is their greatest fear.

[-] 1 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

Death penalties are generally a bad idea, for people and corporations alike. The sufferings that corporations created can linger on for decades or centuries. Without a group of "living" corporations, there will be no redress of grievances discovered only decades or centuries later.

Breaking up of misbehaving corporations makes sense though as long as the reasons such as creating systemic risks and engaging in monopolistic behaviors are necessary to maintain a level playing field for all.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

Hmmm, so their owners, can start a new one and do it all over again?

That's what they do now.

[-] 1 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

Only if they still have capital outside of the corporations that they had messed up.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

Kinda like this then????

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/01/18/w-va-chemical-spill-company-bankruptcy/

YAY libe(R)topia!!!!

Fuck those silly people who "chose" to live on a river I have the "right" to pollute for profit!

[-] 2 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

Those people are NOT as silly as you may think because they had probably acquired their properties on the river cheaply. I would not have been in the market for any such properties if I knew that upriver there is 4-methylcyclohexane methanol mass storage so disclosure laws could have been helpful.

The regulators failed in doing their jobs but the people who put them there did not just "win one for the Gipper." They won MANY for the Gipper! Who are we to say that Jobs! Jobs! Jobs! was the wrong choice for the people? Corporations were invented to shield capital owners from "excessive liabilities" to activate capital to provide jobs. Bankruptcy laws were invented in the same vein. These were all blessed indirectly by the people. Perhaps they could have required corporations to post bonds to cover potential damages but pretty much deregulation had won again and again in the last few decades. I can only tip my hat at the Gipper (in admiration) for his "leadership charge" to "America is back!"

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

That stuff, hasn't been kept there that long.

What I'm describing, more than a little tongue in cheek, is the libe(R)topian attitude that precedes it, and is still very much in place, as the perpetrator of all the damage, has positioned himself to profit, while the public pays the price of his negligence....

WFT kind of corporate charter would allow such a thing?

the answer?

A libe(R)topian one.

[-] 3 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

Freedom Industries' corporate charter specifically allows that.

How is "freedom" linked to 4-methylcyclohexane methanol? They are unrelated unless it is the "freedom" to release that chemical massively. Far too many of our people have the wrong idea about freedom. Without a supporting framework, freedom is meaningless.

The Gipper actually said, "Win just one for the Gipper." It was not "Win one, two, three, four, five, six, etc. for three decades!"

[-] 2 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 7 months ago

freedom industries helped out by those who gave us the patriot act.

[-] 2 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

Yes. They confuse people by fouling up the language. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act had an acronym that made everyone who opposed it unpatriotic but I still remember a time when anyone who called themselves patriots automatically got put onto the terrorists watch list. It was probably still in force when that act was passed. How prescient of our security agencies watching for potential terrorists!

[-] 5 points by spinoza34 (39) 7 months ago

Anytime our government slaps a euphemistic or noble sounding title on something...or it has the word 'children' in it..Watch Out!..because it usually means they are about to begin a perverse undertaking that is to the detriment of most of us.

[-] 3 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

Nobody liked the "bailouts" in recent years so Europe invented the "bailin" and tested it in Cyprus. This talent knows no national boundaries.

[-] 2 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 7 months ago

i liked freedom fries as well.

[-] 3 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

Iraq and Afghanistan understand that prescient phrase all too well - "freedom fries" with Operation Iraqi (not coalition's any more) Freedom and Operation Enduring (the longest for the U.S. and still being endured) Freedom. Freedom Industries belong to the Life Row.

[-] 3 points by spinoza34 (39) 7 months ago

Good examples.The basic rule of thumb as I see it is, the more noble sounding the title of the nefarious initiative undertaken is.. the more immoral and the more bloodletting there will be.

"Freedom" is a meaningless word when either you or a family member is maimed or killed so that the killer can take control of your country and its resources.

[-] 3 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

Iraq has so many bombings killing so many people nearly daily that they may well have been better off without "Iraqi Freedom" given them at great costs by the U.S.-led coalition. What was truly sad was that Charmander-in-Chief's administration was suppressing intelligence and quashing dissent internally to build nearly unanimous support for war.

[-] 3 points by spinoza34 (39) 7 months ago

I remember going into a diner before the Iraqi War started (when France was in opposition to the war), and ordering french fries from the guy who took my order. He said, you mean Freedom Fries, and I said NO, I mean french fries! He didn't take that too well as he obviously supported the war.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

It's the corporate charters of W. Virginia, that allow that.

Such charters are written at the State level.

In other news, no one knows where they came up with 1prt per million figure that's been declared "safe".

http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201401160034

It was kind of arbitrary.

ain't libe(R)topia grand?

[-] 1 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

West Virginia loves its "freedoms" in libe(R)topia, as shown by its political records. Is it incidental that the states which pay more attention to the health and education of their residents tend to be better off, even without these "freedoms?"

We probably should not beat up on the additional precautions for pregnant women and children because it is better to know the uncertainties involved and be safe rather than to have the authorities demonstrate the safety of the water by drinking it themselves. I have observed many times before that some people in power would rather keep their mouths shut or swallow the tainted water in public than alarm the people.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18429-robinson-silence-west-virginia-chemical-spill

In closing, I would like to add, that I have suggested that to change corporate behaviors we need to change corporate charter.

No one seemed to understand.

[-] 2 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

Better yet change the regulators' connections to the industries and have the electorate ensure that they are not too chummy. Let the regulators do their jobs without any plutocratic interference.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

You would have to get the congress of no to refund all those agencies.

Good luck with that, after all those decades of cuts.

No, the charter is the best way to go.

Keep in mind that incorporating is a privilege, not a right.

It's a privilege granted by 50 individual states.

[-] 1 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

We have the U.S. Constitution. Isn't it a kind of charter that has been chipped away piece by piece? Ultimately, I trust the conscientious objectors holding the power to execute in their hands far more than anything on paper or oral promises. Enlightenment can come to the executioners so Grace can come through them.

West Virginia had its incorporation control on the charters but that did not help. The U.S. electorate has done no better in pushing for change than the West Virginians until Edward Snowden's revelations.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

You do understand who owns the SCOTUS?

The guys that told us money is speech?

You do understand the implications of that decision?

Besides, changing corporate charter, works for ALL corporations, not just one.

How did this get to Snowden?

[-] 1 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

The plutocracy owns the Supreme Court of the United States. "Money is speech" came from "Citizens United v. FCC" case whose name is a damned lie. The implication of that decision is "Money is Government" enshrining the plutocracy with a Supreme Court precedent.

There are fifty states whose regulations can differ on corporate charters and corporations can have interstate impacts as the West Virginia polluted water case has shown. There is no getting away from dealing with the federal government sooner or later. It makes sense therefore to deal with it first and foremost.

Snowden is a renegade who has exposed some violations of rights (some are U.S. Constitutional rights and others are universal human rights to which the U.S. is a signatory). The violations were shrouded in secrecy. What one does not have evidence of, one cannot pursue in court or defend against. My point is that ultimately it will be up to the people in key positions who come to their senses or discover their fundamental humanity and morality who will save us, including from corrupted corporate charters.

[-] 0 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 7 months ago

who votes on regulators? within that spot could be more interference than outside forces.

[-] 3 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

The electorate has control over the administration so it needs to exert its influence. Good independent press and whistleblowers can provide valuable guidance to the electorate.

Other cultures can discipline their regulators in other ways such as through public dishonor and shame but these methods cannot work for the U.S. for obvious reasons.

[-] 2 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 7 months ago

a governments good will can be measured in its willingness to change. sshwartz is dead, hastings is dead, manning is gone and snowden is forced to hide. At what time do we pull the cord on the whack mole machine and take the change back out?

[-] 2 points by grapes (2877) 7 months ago

Ask the people I pledge allegiance to. Ancient Rome had its SPQR. The U.S. has its Covenant, too. There were Gladiators, Christians, and Spartacus so we have our modern equivalents. Who will answer Lady Liberty's call when she puts her bosom in the line of fire and asks all who were suckled by her to follow her into battle?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28105) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 months ago

One would think that Texass would be all for corp(se)oRat death penalties . . . . OH . . . . ummm . . . my bad . . . Texass already supports corp(se)oRATion death penalties . . . funny though - they got it all wrong bassackwards - as they allow criminal corp(se)oRATions to do the killing of the innocent population.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

"By the 1870s, nineteen states had amended their state constitutions to give lawmakers the power to “execute” corporations that violate the public’s safety and trust.

The longstanding practice of giving businesses the corporate death penalty only really stopped when President Warren G. Harding was elected president in 1921 with the promise of putting “less government in business and more business in government.”

The quote could have come from any number of our current GOP governors,

“less government in business and more business in government.”

Fucking up the world since 1921.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28105) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 months ago

Fucking up the world since 1921.

Fucking up the world since - the beginning of time? Earlier versions just having different names/designations but essentially were still the same monster (s).

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

Indeed, but that quote is eerily familiar.

Iterations of it have been used in numerous campaigns, over the last few decades.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (28105) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 months ago

Iterations of it have been used in numerous campaigns, over the last few decades.

Coinkydink??? I think not. As these types of quotes/sayings become more numerous as the current system (s) of societies degenerate/rot. The Royalty used to be Kinks and Queenks and Ducks and such and are now "more commonly" referred to as Executive abominations umm abominations . . . damn . . . Officers ( well you get it ).............

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

You mean like being tired of all this talk about inequality?

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/david-brooks-income-inequality

They just get so tired of hearing about it.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28105) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 months ago

OMG - let him work for 7.00 an hour - fucker needs a reality check.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

Did you like he refers to them as "workers"?

As if

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28105) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 months ago

BTW - TWEET

DKAtoday ‏@DKAtoday

@DavidBrooks420 income inequality - Ur views make U a putz - U wrk 4 $7/hr & let us know how it wrks 4 U. U have no idea what real work is.

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 months ago

thanks for paying attention

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28105) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 months ago

That asshole and those like him have absolutely no concept of what work is - not REAL work. He wants to stop hearing about income inequality? Fine - lets make it so that no-one - NO-ONE can make more per hour/year than anyone else - we will then have no income inequality to hear about. Easy Peasy - everyone is restricted to making no more than7.00 an hour - problem solved. YAY

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

"NO-ONE can make more per hour/year than anyone else"

You socialist, you!!!

Can we all make $2,000 an hour?

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (28105) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 months ago

Can we all make $2,000 an hour?

EDIT

Sure - but if we are gonna go there - why don't we all make a billion an hour? Then everyone can feel extremely well-off - Hey? {:-]) Hhmmm lets see now . . . 24 hours in a day 365 days in a year . . . . 365x24x1 billion and WOW.................

I mean who is gonna bitch about only making a lousy billion bucks an hour? No don't answer that.

Though if an hour was only ever paid by 1 penny at MOST - well - a penny would see extreme growth in worth.

The problem with all of this - IS - and always has been - HELL no-one could feel extra-special about themselves ( that is those who value their self worth as having more than others rather than valuing their individual contribution/abilities ). Damn it would just spoil the fun of so many. I mean what asshole wants to sit down to a fancy dinner and be at a table next to their plumber and his/her spouse? HORRORS OH HORRORS!

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28105) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 months ago

This type of thinking could get real crazy.

I mean what if - besides restricting pay too a minimum/maximum of 1 penny per hour ( or 2,000.00 or a billion ) - what if there was an absolute maximum of only working 8 hours in a day? and those 8 hours could only be worked between a specified 8 hour period starting at say 8:AM and ending at 8:PM and only five days per week and no business ( place of work ) could be in operation for more than 8 hours a day or 40 hours in a week.

Daymn what a different world that would be - Hey?

Now consider no-one ( NO-ONE ) allowed to work no more or less than 8 hours a day for a maximum/minimum of five days a week. Take it further no-one can own more than one business or any interest in another business ( business being restricted to one building in one location).

Hhmmmmmmm would this all require more businesses and facilities and workers to meet demand? Everyone ( EVERYONE ) making the same income in the same number of hours per day per week - no business operating 24 hours per day 7 days per week. HUH.

Imagine - NO-ONE could ever be considered as over qualified - though individuals could still be under qualified - so one would be limited to the type of employment options as to their individual abilities.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

Hey!!!???

That's their median wage.

I just want to play catch up.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28105) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 months ago

Well - there ya go - how about everyone starts the new system at zero? You/We can have y/our catch-up on a hot-dog or hamburger made at home or bought from a business that pays equal " living Wage " to all it's employees. {:-]) We can ALL have our catch-up & mustard too.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago
[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28105) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 months ago

Will the city pass it though?

Wouldn't THAT be something? So - being a sane and overall a wonderful idea - NO - Nope - It Has No Chance In Hell. Not with the current crop of politicians in office and the lack of public involvement/say in the process.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

Letting it live, is what we do now and that's cruel and usual punishment to the rest of us.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28105) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 months ago

That's my thinking as well - my bad I got carried away in thinking what would be proper public sentiment - as if I addressed the question you posed - as it was posed - corp(se)oRAT idea of cruel and unusual would be anything that MADE IT operate in a healthy ( to all ) and responsible/accountable manner.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

That could work. Just after we get the corporate death penalty back.

Just as a deterrent, mind you...........:)

What would constitute "cruel and unusual" to a run away corporation?

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28105) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 months ago

What would constitute "cruel and unusual" to a run away corporation?

Letting it live?

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 months ago

yawn

death violence

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

Ywn.............sorry you found it boring.

You were expecting corporations to bleed real blood?

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 months ago

really

calling for the death penalty is just troll baiting

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

Then pick a new metaphor.

Either way, something needs to be done to punish corporations that get out of hand.

Their existence needs to be ended and their owners (co-conspirators?), need effective punitive judgments, as well.

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 months ago

if War were just a metaphor

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

Are you saying you would prefer to keep recalcitrant corporations on life support?

that would be the equivalent of bailouts.

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 months ago

thanks

maybe bail outs because people owe other people money ?

property is the base of the economy ?

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

Property is sacred to the libe(R)tarians.

Personally?

I think the owners (co-conspirators) should be barred from forming another corporation, if the one ran went bad.

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 months ago

whatever selection seems arbitrary like some other force controls the money

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

And what force is that?

How would you punish a corporation gone rogue on the public interest?

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 months ago

the amount of money as debt that hangs around in the system

is much greater than the amount of money that is exchanged for goods and services

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

How does that punish them?

didn't they create that debt in the first place?

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 months ago

the banks deal in debt

the money introduced allows people to pay others for goods and service

and those need to be exchanged to circulate a society

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 months ago

You're still missing the question.

How do you punish a corporation that fails the public trust?

Such as Freedom Industries. Who after fucking everything up in the name of the Koch's profits, claims bankruptcy.

[-] -1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 7 months ago

I'm looking to correct the system not punish things.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]