Quote gumball:How would keeping business corporations which are chartered for BUSINESS... out of the political arena be bad? You speak of bumper sticker thinking when YOU just keep repeating them... such as the above.Quote ulTRAX:See post #54
DIRECT QUESTION: Are you EVER going to admit these issues are of legitimate concern? Yes Or No?
Is the corruption concerns legit? Yes, is the proposed cure worse than the disease? Yes.
HOW would keeping business corporations out of politics be worst than the disease which, according to a Supreme Court decision was justified by a
...compelling state interest: preventing corruption or the appearance of corruption in the political arena by reducing the threat that huge corporate treasuries, which are amassed with the aid of favorable state laws and have little or no correlation to the public's support for the corporation's political ideas, will be used to influence unfairly election outcomes.
What are your metrics upon which YOUR bumper sticker mantra is based?
Business owners have their own money. Shareholders can use their own money. Employees can use their own money. Why should management use CORPORATE money without shareholder consent... to engage in politics?
You are a big fan of S&P index funds. So what if the CEOs of those companies say... screw earnings... screw shareholders. They think they can get tax cuts passed that affect their own tax rate... golden parachute, stock holdings whatever.
Are you saying that YOU want them undermining YOUR dividends for THEIR purposes? Of course... where does management get permission when a majority of their shares are held not by persons but by holding companies like Vanguard? Seems you're giving them permission to do what they like with your money... actually, you never see that money. Your only hope is someone will pay with THEIR money for shares held in your name.