Corporatism is the combined actions of corporations: by definition, unnatural persons. Mostly, they don't die. Also, Milton Friedman rationalized the notion that corporations have no obligation to anyone except their shareholders. In real life the managers of corporations feel no loyalty to anybody except themselves: often the largest of the shareholders, or else, the very highly paid lackeys of the largest shareholders.

Labor fought hard for a place at the table to negotiate working conditions and a smidgen of authority. Never a majority of votes on any corporate board.

Government implies too many different entities to discuss in this limited forum. Sometimes it was municipalities: remember 1960s New Haven, inspiration for N.Y.C. Mayor John Lindsay? How to expand the cash flow in a big city to improve the standard of living and the attraction of business and industry to the city? Borrow, borrow, borrow. After, "Fun City" which did a great many good things: planted trees, supported development of block associations, made Central Park safe by putting Shakespeare and music in the Park, poor old Mayor Abe Beame confronted the bill for the interest payments for all the borrowed money. Fortunately, the block associations had taught New Yorkers how to pull together and do more to take care of themselves, like manage despite the ghastly trash removal crisis.

And New Yorkers started selling their belongings - displayed on blankets spread on the sidewalks - and rents began to rise until reaching the shocking heights they now have achieved. The reliable subways became dilapidated and lacked adequate money to pay sufficient employees and maintain the equipment. The city continued to pay on the exorbitant price that had been agreed to by corrupt officials back in the day when the privately run subway train companies were sold to the city despite their terrible financial status. The city could have seized them. But chose to take the money paid by the owners for the purchase price.

All that borrowing seemed like a really good idea at the time. The City got more liveable.

But, now, we have to ask whether the shareholders are Americans, feeling any loyalty to our beloved nation. Or are the government officials on the receiving end of huge amounts of cash and prestige provided by oil magnates - international oil magnates - and mine owners, and agri-business holders of patents on genetically modified plants that are bred to produce sterile seeds, whose pollen flies wherever the wind blows it, so besotted with the excessive money they demand or are offered, or both, that they lose the sense of connection with real people?

Corporatism is about the belief (NOT the fact, but they think it is) that corporations are the superior "persons" to manage the business of America. Real flesh and blood people - especially the ones who sweat and bleed and weep to carry out their work - can be sacrificed. All are, "soldiers,"but not the corporations, and those who act in and for the corporations.

National Socialism, (Nazis. fascists. NOT, democratic socialists).

LOTS of folks are hurting bad. And Speaking out - Recalls in Wis, demonstrations in Fla and other states Folks are so fed up with lying greedy politicians that disrespect us and treat us like we are expendable after an election. 2012 may be a shock to many arrogant Repubs who campainged on jobs then ignorned them and went straight to busting unions, privatizing Medicare and demanding even more corp tax cuts , loopholes and OIL subsides. Ryan says with a straight face ' I am trying to save Med' BS We did not just fall off a turnip truck ...well maybe some of us did or just trusted Fox Faux ' news' .

Well Thom as far as I'm concered, I don't want to loose my American Freedoms because of fear. Americans are not a Fearful people. Well I can't say that today, all I see is fearful Americans. I was in Desert Storm, Desert Sentry, Bosnia, Macidonia, then finaly Operation Iraqi Freedom. I didnt join the service to see Americans give up there rights. I rather die by a gun purchaced here in the united States by an Al Qaeda member then loose my American Freedoms. We should be willing to die for the Freedoms that this country was given. I know I am. We all ready, out of fear, given the goverment the ability to regulate every aspect of our life, because we think it is good to have the Goverment to babysit us (the Nanny State). Our freedoms are disapearing, and they are not being taken away, we are giving them up. And really I'm sick of seeing American doing this. They say they love there soldiers, but they do not respect them, if they just give up, and do not even fight for there rights in the uS home frount.

I love your show, because usally you see the ignorance of what is happening all around as. But I will never belive in giving up freedoms in order to do it. Maybe if so many Americans are afraid of Al Qaeda buying wepons in the uS, they should go out and buy them too. Then we can do whatever it takes to protect our country.

No Sesame Street is fair and balanced, Bert is conservative and Ernie is liberal!

After the Civil War the Republican members of Congress were called Radical Republicans because they changed the power of state governments and the federal government in radical ways. The current Republican party needs to be called the Regressive Republicans because they want the nation to regress to times before the New Deal, Medicare, a Progressive Income Tax, and labor rights. For example their concept of health savings accounts is identical to the "health program" by grandparents had. My grandparents paid medical expenses with the money they saved. Most Americans did not receive much medical care in the past under this savings program and women died in childbirth like my wife's grandmother.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Tracking-Explaining-and-U-by-Richard-Clark-110606-841.html

Tracking the banksters!

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Socialism-and--Nazism--T-by-Mark-Sashine-110606-662.html

There is a difference.

http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Paul-Krugman--Vouchercare-in-Best_Web_OpEds-110606-731.html

To read the whole article you must sign up for the N.Y. Times! I have no intention of signing up. Paul Krugman is right!!!

Wonderful!!! But, it is too bad that most Americans do not read the Holy Bible. If they do read God's Love Letter to you and me, they do not understand what is written in the Holy Bible.

http://www.salon.com/news/religion/index.html?story=/news/feature/2011/06/06/americans_belief_in_god_gallup&source=newsletter&utm_source=contactology&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Salon_Daily%20Newsletter%20%28Not%20Premium%29_7_30_110

I was listening to Thom's show today, and he was espousing ideas, similar to the ideas in the article. He was adamant in saying that the way to create jobs was to put money into the hands of the unemployed, the lower classes, and that they will then consume, thus stimulating the economy and creating jobs.

While this may sound rational, this type of stimulus is a banker's/capitalists'/big crooked corporations' dream come true! When you put money into week hands, it's soon removed by the big corporations, the medical monopolies, and the big banks. Giving out spending money, to promote consumerism is a horrible idea, and Thom was very sincere in stating that this was the way to bring the economy back.

What we have is monetary dis-equilibrium. When you put money into the hands of "consumers" they will most certainly consume, using interest bearing credit. Since the big corporations, who manufacture all their goods overseas will be the beneficiary of this "stimulus", it won't do the middle, or lower classes any good, beyond giving them some new baubles, or trinkets to clutter their apartment with.

The caller he was talking to had a better idea, in the proposal to promote small businesses through tax incentives. Thom didn't like this at all! He likened it to giving money to "Fat Cats". Thom is associating small businesses with multi-national corporations. What Thom should first consider is that big corporations, such as Obama's favorite, GE don't pay ANY TAX, while taking full advantage of the commons and the government services that make their business much more profitable. The multi-nationals are also "in the market" for cheap labor, and more "efficient" regulations, which means they will go to the country with the lowest prevailing wages, and the least amount of environmental and worker protection regulations.

Since the "Fat Cats" already don't pay any taxes, and the lowest prices on wages, there has to be some effort to give the little businesses a chance to compete. The robber barrons are here, they just stay in the shadows, and like Nelson Rockefeller said..."competition is a sin" amongst the big politically connected corporations. So putting money into the hands of mindless, jobless "consumers", while great for banks and big corporations, won't do anything to raise the living standards of the lower and middle classes.

The only way to really give the lower and middle classes a real chance to improve their lives is to give them a stake in the system. Facilitate a business environment that allows small business to employ people, at a decent wage, in a job that is meaningful. That means eliminating the massive red-tape and government regulations that stiffle free enterprise. It means leveling the playing field and putting up some common sense tarrifs on goods imported from places that have much lower living standards.

Prior to the progressive Woodrow Wilson, the U.S.A. enjoyed 100 years of economic growth, funding the government entirely through import duties on business and corporations, and excise taxes, fully apportioned and consistent with the taxing power granted to the government in the Constitution. Then, in a revolutionary move, the big banksters, working with the Wilson administration changed everything in favor of the big monopolies by funding the government through personal income taxes on the working class! Giving the corporation the biggest tax break in HISTORY!

Our country was not founded as a Capitalist nation. The vast majority of us are not capitalists. A Capitalist is a banker, or someone endowed with the privilege of creating credit out of book entries. The ability to engage in fractional reserve banking, making money out of nothing, and earning interest on it. Our Nation was founded on the ideal of "free enterprise" and limited government. Capitalism is an elitist control mechanism, the modern version of fuedalism, where the endentured servant fastens his own chains, and maintains his own prison, giving all of his labors to the bankers. We are merely units of capital, on the capitalist's ledgers.

Thom, I agree with you in principal, but I believe your practical solutions will actually make things alot worse for the average american. Think: taxing imports, not handing out borrowed money to consumers. Think "Made in America", not "Paid in America, Made In China".

Our biggest problem by far is the fact that as a nation, we don't manufacture our own goods. The second, or equally as big a problem is the privileges the government grants to certain individuals and corporations to create credit (which is money, it spends the same) out of nothing, and earns interest on it. Fractional Reserve Banking is the most elitist system of neofeudalism ever created.

Let me give you something to think about. If a corporation is attracted to a state with low or no taxes, the state wins. The corporation (a single entity) may not pay taxes, but the hunderds or thousands of employess working for the corporation do pay taxes. Plus, if they were receiving unemployment from the state, that expense will stop. It's hard for me to understand why everyone gets so upset because one corporation doesn't pay taxes, but all the employees do. Some one explain that to me.

really, you don't know why that is? somehow i don't believe you. me thinks you are playing devils advocate, so i'll bite in order to flush you out:

its simple really, in general liberals (democrats) are people who share and who are compassionate and therefore they are compromisers; whereas conservatives (republicans) are greedy, arrogant, power hungry jerks who refuse to compromise with anyone, especially those who hope to help the less fortunate in our society. keeping that truth in mind, its easy to see how when a republican is president he can get things done with a democratically controlled congress and when a democrat is in office he faces opposition regardless of which party is in control of congress because the republicans will use whatever means necessary to block an agenda which is for the betterment of society as opposed to the betterment of their and their corporate sponsors wallets. case in point, Obama's first two years in office. you're right; he had majorities in both houses. unfortunately, dems didn't have a super majority (60 votes) in the senate to avoid a filibuster and the republicans shattered all records for the amount of times the filibuster was used. in fact, republicans are still blocking Obama's nominations so our gov't isn't really working properly. its crazy really. republicans have one thing in mind: make Obama look bad so they can blame him for their mistakes and take back control in 2012. forget about getting out of the recession; they want to prolong the recession so they can call it Obama's recession as opposed to Bush's....which we all know it is...

now that i've taken your bait and stepped in your proverbial $h1t, I await your partisan, baloney response....

As far as Anthony's Wiener goes, I don't care. But I do wonder was it all one sided, I mean were these women reciprocating with photos to him... and who initiated what. After all think about it, Wiener is a Celebrity (pseudo, but Celebrity nonetheless) and since he's in the public light he's going to attract people. So perhaps being flattered with flirtation he lost his head. I wonder too how much this was a bad decision based on temptation and how much it is a character flaw, and how much it was just stupidly not realizing the compromising position he was putting himself in. That being said, I don't see it relating to his job, so I see no reason for him to resign.

N