Recent comments
ADHD: Hunter in a Farmer's World
Thom Hartmann has written a dozen books covering ADD / ADHD - Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder.
Join Thom for his new twice-weekly email newsletters on ADHD, whether it affects you or a member of your family.
Thom's Blog Is On the Move
By webmaster
Hello All
Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.
Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.
The need to lower the number of lobbyists is never more apparent and there should be laws written to prevent things like this from actually occuring. Until then, the American people can never win their fair right to the pursuit of happiness.
I agree with partygnome that we aren't there yet but it could happen.
P.S. I don't know how Ayn Rand got into this, although I am aware of Mr. Hartmann's attempts at "ad hominum" dismissal of her.....but her novels don't contain any heroes from the professions of banking and finance. Her philosophy, regardless of Mr. Hartmann's characteristion is best understood from two other works, The Virtue of Selfishness and Capitalism; The UNKNOWN Ideal.
To summarise the first, the general principle is that if you are incapable of self love, you would lack any true capacity to love other's, and Mr. Hartmann certainly does not appear to be opposed to the first part of that concept.
The title of the second book would give pause to anyone regarding the attempt to link her with any aspect of capitalism historically or otherwise......being an UNKNOWN IDEAL?
Finally, her philosophy....Objectivism is not something that anyone supporting "intelligent reasoning", from a secular humanist base should have a problem with.......because from what I can tell, Mr. Hartmann is at least trying to make the attempt.......
" Do not ask for whom the bell tolls.............."
I don't think we are quite at the depression stage just yet, but if things keep going they way they are now, we will and sooner than anyone can anticipate.
I'd like to argue that, not only are corporations not people, they are legally constrained from acting as people. My view comes, to some extent, from Robert Reich's "Supercapitalism". He talks about corporations in his book, and about how it's somewhat meaningless to demonize Walmart, because Walmart is simply acting as corporations are supposed to act. Central to their purpose is their
Normal
0
MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
fiduciary role toward the financial interests of their stockholders. Corporations can be sued for deviating from their
Normal
0
MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
fiduciary responsibilities. This says to me that corporations are restricted, legally, from considering various alturistic, humanistic, or other such values that any ordinary individual can consider. As such, corporations can't really act as persons and shouldn't be given all the rights and responsibilities of persons. They can't exercise the same judgment as people can.
thom mentioned that since he started smoking earlier, it was harder to quit smoking. this really isn't accurate since back when, cigarettes were nowhere near as addictive as they are now. I started when I was 8 years old, back in the 60s and quit in my 20s. people today have a MUCH harder time quitting, regardless of when they started.
" To conquer, first divide!"
What a stupid question? Did you vote? Why? You don't have enough information......Do you have an opinion? How? You don't have enough information!
"Do not ask for whom the bell tolls.............."
"To conquer, first divide!"
The sad part about forums like this, is that it illustrates democracy and the effects of opinion entitlement and is interesting standard if you believe that one is entitled to "ignorance".....which can be supported by the citation of the First Article of the Bill of Rights, which allows belief in any faith based fantasy you choose, but also notes in Article 6, that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land....and where "seperation of church and state" resides. The claim that the united States is a christian nation, and/or possibly any other type of mythology.....can not be supported, since "no religious test" can be imposed to hold any public office. To reason intelligently, if the united States were intended to be associated with any mythology, then a test verifying allegiance to that mythology would be mandatory, would it not? ( rhetorical )
Which brings us to tobacco and government, or rather government involvement with tobacco.....which involves the FDA, and something that happenned a while back in some of the several states, called the tobacco settlement......whose monies were designated for "specific purposes" and which raises a number of questions........
1.) Where did this money go?
and second......
2.) Why haven't all the additives been banned by the FDA? This being somewhat of a no-brainer given THIS issue.........in fact one wonders why the tobacco companies aren't doing this voluntarilly since it would seem to me that production costs would go down?
Many of the problems we face, as a nation, are due to a rather strange phenomenon which ultimately resides in a mythological concept: "enlightened self interest". This reality does not exist and is a rare trait among individuals, who can be relied upon to act in their "perceived self interest" which shares no connection to anything close to a reasoned and intelligent solution.
Why? Because "solving problems" puts the "problem solver" out of business....and since our approach to this via education is also a mythology whereby one pays for certification in order to participate with increased degrees of specialisation.......this certainly self defeating. Consider that the two elite professions, that of medicine and law, result in a "license to practice".....mainly on YOU. ( the paying VICTIM )
Consider the so called health care debate, which has nothing to do with "health care", but which carried the argument that a certain class of people were being denied it, and because of this a certain pertcentage of people were dying......but the stark facts are these.......being exposed to "health care" represents the largest number of preventable deaths in the united States, so more of them would actually DIE, from it, then do now, for lack of it. In the late 70's iatrogenic stats for hospitals were that 1 in 5 caught something they didn't have and one in 30 of those died, which made your odds of getting out alive at 149 to 1. Recently the first stat was reported at 1 in 3, and another study pegs the deaths at at between 700,00 to 900,000 deaths per year.....and these deaths are for something other than what they were there to be treated for.
"Do not ask for whom the bell tolls..................."
I corporations are people, can they be tried for assisted suicide?
The "spy patch" that adheres to skin without glue and is thinner than a hair sounds like glitter. I detest glitter, and I'm sick of its ubiquity in greeting cards. But it looks like my hatred of it is now justified by more than just the fear of getting it in my eyes.
The frightening thing about a lie detector is the belief that it actually works. More frightening is that someone may develop one that does work. Who gets to use it?
There are many criminals in Congress. Some just haven't been convicted ... yet.
Fukushima? Everybody has a dog in this fight. We're crapping in our nest.
If corporations are people, wouldn't merging be people eating people, commonly known as canibalism, which is against the law?
If corporations are people, shouldn't those conservatives who are opposed to same sex marriage be against corporate mergers unless they can medically determine the sex of the corporations involved?
If corporations are people, isn't it against the law for a corporations to merge if one or more of the corporations are under a state's legal age of consent?
If corporations are people, isn't it against the law in most states if there is more than two people involved in joining in that relationship?
<http://www.merchantsofdoubt.org>
This video lecture is from 2007 by Naomi Oreskes, <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T4UF_Rmlio> mentions the same paid off scientists, Robert Jastrow, Fred Seitz, Bill Nierenberg, and Fred Singer who push "scientific" doubts about dangers of tobacco and later were hired to push doubts about global warming.
Why certain societies revolt
Thom once said something on air about why certain societies tend to revolt while other societies who are highly oppressed do not.
Thom said (and I'm paraphrasing), that societies who engage in revolution do so because they feel that they have been promised something and that promise was not delivered. Thom may have cited a study that came to this conclusion. I wish I remembered!
Does anyone else remember this? Did Thom write an article on the subject? I would like to find more comprehensive information about this phenomenon. Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks!
Corporations are People, only because the John Birch Society has done a make-over -- They have a specific goal and roadmap, to remake American in the image of that John Birch Society --
The John Birch Society Redeaux- Where is the investigation, the movie, the reporting? The most responsive and positive communications I get when discussing political affairs includes: 1. Making the link between Koch, each of their 501 think tanks and the John Birch Society, redeaux.2. Since 1970s, there has been a frontal assault by these Birchers who abandoned their racist society, to impose their agenda, by co-opting the: COURTS, CONGRESS and the EXECUTIVE REGULATORY BRANCHES of government.3. Since the 1970s they have vetted judges to make sure their Executives (Bush) picked their Judicial choices, Alito, Roberts, Thomas, Scalia, and now we have Citizens United.4. Alec is a shadow government, that is road mapping their take-over of State and Federal seats of power, setting agendas, writing legislation, all under the guise of a 501.5. Koch started the tea party, and funds anything that strengthens their hand at electing congressmen who will not regulate against them, saving them billions of dollars.6. During Bush, these interests controlled the Executive Regulatory Branch of government, and we saw failure after failure: Mine Safety, Off shore drilling, FDA breaches, salmonella in food, SEC and Banking - Madoff and the Bank Failures, Intelligence, and the list goes on, to the point that we are so far in debt and must join the Birch coalition and cut social services, or raise taxes.7. They have neutered Obama, a man who wants them to like him, and be invited to their party, and have stolen his voice for American, as we become a fascist state, that they control and manipulate.8. Their goal among many spewed by the John Birch Society is to have the US gov't collect taxes, to pay to them, and maintain all infrastructure to enable them to make money and attract investment, as they play their global economic game to win, as in the movie "trading places".
Thanks Maxrot.
well said mdmro - mostly anyway. The snide remarks aside.
I'm gald to hear someone else state the obvious - Ayn Rnad was a disgruntled old woman in a love-hate relationship with her dear fatherland, Russia. Most of her published rants were dismissed .... until support of "Fountainhead" grew during the anti-comminism days and culminiated with her "masterpiece" Atlas Shrugged.
It doesn't really bother me much that people follow one philosophy or another. It bothers me when people follow a work of fiction as their bible.
I guess I'm just as guilty ' cause I strongly belive that the philosphy of Popeye the Sailor is great work on which to base my life. And no... I am not a spinach farmer trying to prop up prices.
Peace!
Sounds kinda cool.
Will it work?
Does pure democracy work?
Does anarchy work?
I guess it will be the billionaires version of king of the hill.
Regardless of my skepticism, I wish them luck
finding fresh water
finding big game to hunt and kill
finding green pastures to plant
finding safe havens to park their billions free from <em>heavy</em> tax burdens
finding peace</ul>
I posit one thing - who's gonna protect their billions from pirates? Avast matey - thar's easy pickins just outside the US boundaries where we pirates too are not constrained by cumbersome laws.
Peace!
By definition, companies are NOT people. DUH. Can a company undergo chemotherapy? I think not. Nuff said.
Maybe because of a history of suspected racism. It would be embarrassing, at this juncture, to attach him and that reputation too closely to the Republican Party.
About 400 years ago King James I made some interesting observations concerning tobacco use. He wrote "loathsome to the eye, hateful to the nose, harmful to the brain, and dangerous to the lungs." He also wrote about one smoker whose stomach at death contained a bushel of soot.
Add another $4 tax per pack!
Libertarians utopia fail proof for sure. One mans sewer is another mans drinking water on that Billionaire Barge.
What happens if you try to raise a child without boundaries (rules) or have you tried to raise a dog without boundaries? We all need boundaries. Rules, or constraints, provide a context in which a person, a dog, or a society can thrive. Take those away and not only is it more difficult to thrive. It also makes it easier for those with the most resources to take control and run roughshod over those without the power of infinite resources. I say, rules are good. After all, isn't that the basis of all religion? (I am not religious but consider myself to be very spiritual).