Edwards message is too abstract. He against corporations, big deal. Is there any business that

[CK_John]

is not a corporation any more. Maybe some street peddler or hot dog vendor someplace. Ranting against the 21st century is going nowhere fast, that Huckabee's venue.

He should be telling people there 401k will be worthless by Jan 09 at the rate we are going.

[Vincardog]

1. Being against the parasitic corporate oligarchy is not abstract, it is necessary.

[CK_John]

2. But there no other form of business anymore, we are never going to be a mom & pop economy again.

[Vincardog]

7. Are you in favor of mega corporations raping the environment and workers for profit?

Do you believe that being incorporated absolves them of any responsibility other than to maximize profit?

[Luminous Animal]

11. You miss the point by a mile.

It is not the legal structure of the business that is at issue, but the undue influence that largest corporations have over government policy resulting in a government for business rather than for its citizens.

[Vincardog]

17. Howe is that a mile away from opposing the parasitic corporations?

[Luminous Animal]

23. I was responding to CK John.

He seems to think that Edwards' criticism of corporations is vague because nearly every business is a corporation these days (which is not true, by the way) and to criticize them is to criticize the very structure of the U.S. economy.

My point is that Edwards is not criticizing a specific business structure but the increasing loose regulation of that structure and the undue influence that several corporate industries have over U.S. governance.

[arendt]

20. I disagree. The whole "corporate personhood" lie is a legal structure that must be repealed.

They used that fraudulently obtained personhood to enhance their ability to manipulate the government into giving them corporate welfare. Then, they have their bought politicians "outsource" the government functions to private companies. Hell, we are having our Army uniforms made in China - and we wonder why our employment numbers are tanking.

It is way beyond "influence" it is outright takeover; and it has to be repealed.

arendt

[Luminous Animal]

26. I'm not sure what you point is...

Corporations as a legal fiction is an entirely different animal than corporations as a legal person. I am totally against "corporate personhood" and I am for corporations as a business structure. A well regulated business structure subject to democratic oversight.

[arendt]

29. This is a terminology tarpit...

What is the difference between a legal person and a legal fiction???

I assume, based on your approval of regulation, that you think only living human beings are legal persons. But I could be mistaken.

arendt

[Luminous Animal]

32. Yes, only living human beings are legal persons.

A legal fiction is that which only exists on paper.

[CK_John]

33. I recall corporations are authorized in the constitution. n/t

[Luminous Animal]

35. Actually, they are completely absent from the Constitution. n/t

[CK_John]

39. I think your wrong, but my OP is about Edwards and his vague message. Many of the

responses here have made a better case than Edwards.

[Luminous Animal]

42. I'm not wrong. Corporations are not mentioned in the constitution.

In fact, an impetus to break away from England was the tyranny of corporations. For the 1st 100 years of our democratic republic, corporations were only granted charters to a specific period of time to attain a specific end (i.e., build a bridge, drain a swamp, lay a railroad), their officers could not escape liability for wrongdoing, and they were regulated by the states with democratic oversight.

Jefferson was particularly critical of the the "aristocracy of our monied corporations".

[CK_John]

43. Obligation of Contracts is the basis for corp. n/t

I believe it’s Article. I, Section 10 , Clause 1

Section 10
Clause 1: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or
Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit
Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in
Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or
Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of
Nobility.

[Luminous Animal]

46. No it isn't.

It put limits on the states to forgive debt. Corporations were already in existence.

[avaistheone1]

16. Most of us will never work for big business again

because most jobs with big business have are either on a contract basis, or are off-shored.

[arendt]

21. With enough fatalists like you, that statement can become true. n/t

[2rth2pwr]

3. Being against them in the abstract is nice, but what is the plan for

replacing them? Believe it or not Corporations actually employ quite a few people and many more
rely on their growth to fund retirement.

[Vincardog]

10. The plan is not to replace them it is to REGULATE them.

[2rth2pwr]

24. You are a person of few words, they are regulated. So what

do you mean?

[Vincardog]

27. The ray gun revolution started the deregulation of corporate power. DimSon

has +completely removed government oversight of corporations. The Idiot bush has placed corporate insiders into oversight regulatory positions. Why do you say that "They are regulated?"

[2rth2pwr]

36. I'll try a differtent way, what are the regulations that Edwards is

proposing that will "take on" the corporations. Abstract rants against capitalism aside, please - please I'm begging you- what is the plan?

[Vincardog]

37. For one thing Edwards proposes that CEO pay be limited to 40 times the average workers pay.

IF you want more details go visit his web site.

[2rth2pwr]

45. Government control of private earning potential will never pass. nt

[Vincardog]

53. Funny the government controlled my job right off to India. If you are some kind of

Free Market freak maybe you have the wrong web site.

[2rth2pwr]

55. Just stating facts, all I hear from Edwards supporters are

platitudes and the new rhetoric from him that is 180 degrees away from his record.

[Luminous Animal]

28. They are regulated

to the extent that they write (or seek immunity from) the laws that regulate them.

[Inspired]

14. Thank you, you are correct.

[midnight]

4. CK I'm not sure if speaking out for the poor to have access to

health care via repealing the tax cuts for the rich is too abstact or not, but it sure makes sense to me. The message of giving the poor a voice is very important to me. Because if your statement that we should be told that our 401 k will be worthless in Jan 09 is true, and somehow I suspect you have it right, wouldn't you want someone who gives a care about you? But I don't know you. You probable have your money tied up in something more safe at this point. If you are savy. I suspect you are, if you have a 401k. Let me know?

[2rth2pwr]

6. The 401k's will be worthless if the corporations that drive them are demonized

and driven down in value.

[LSK]

13. so explain why MORE regulated European Corporations are doing well

[2rth2pwr]

22. better than ours? nt

[Luminous Animal]

34. How good does a corporation have to be?

Do we judge a corporation's success on how well it exploits the citizenry? Or do we ensure other factors come into play? Such as, providing a decent standard of living, striving for and practicing decent environmental standards, or being subject to democratic oversight.

[LSK]

44. my best fund in my 401k this year is INTERNATIONAL Stock Fund

How is that possible?

[2rth2pwr]

47. Must be that overseas corp are just flat better performers.

Or the marketing guys at your money fund are creative with the naming of your fund.

I wonder which...

[CK_John]

12. No 401K, I never paid anyone to manage my money. I would like a good

populace messenger, but as I pointed out his message is too vague.

[OneGrassRoot]

5. He is against corporate GOVERNMENT control...

against fascism. Not again business in general unless it's gone to the extreme of greed and nationalist (or international) control.

[lwcon]

8. As opposed to Obama's message, which is simply wrong

http://www.correntewire.com/obama_stump_speech_strategy_of_conciliation_considered_harmful

Seems that he and Huckabee are both playing the same venue, pretending our problems are nothing but a foodfight.

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[fuzzy otter pop]

9. if this is to abstract for you, might i suggest

a little book learning is order for you to catch up with the class.....

[Roland99]

15. It's more that he is in favor of supporting workers and removing the power that corps have attained.

[CK_John]

18. That maybe what he wants to do, if so, he needs a better message.n/t

[Luminous Animal]

30. Given that is exactly what he says...

I suspect you get you news from the corporate media that skews his message NOT as pro-worker but anti-corporation.

[frazzled]

19. He'll huff and hel'll puff and he'll blow that house down

Nice rhetoric, but how does he plan to execute this big fight while preserving what's left of the economy and protect jobs? In the end, I think all the Democrats will bring back a measure of regulation on corporate America ... but John Edwards isn't going to be a dragon slayer any more than any of the others. After all, his $16 million Cayman-Island registered hedge fund is at stake.

As the New York Times, in its post-caucus editorial today, states:

Mr. Edwards has a strong populist message, but it sounds a bit odd coming from a former tort lawyer and hedge fund executive who ran as a completely different person in 2004. One of his ads features an out-of-work Maytag employee who said Mr. Edwards promised his 7-year-old son: "I'm going to keep fighting for your daddy's job." We're still waiting for Mr. Edwards to explain how he, or any politician, can turn back the tide of economics and globalization. We'd prefer if he explained how to make it work for all Americans.

How is he going to get that Maytag daddy's job back? He hasn't told us. The promise is as vague as some see Obama's hope for brining his enemies to the table under the light of public scrutiny (something I actually think works better than issuing blustering threats: it doesn't work in international diplomacy, and it doesn't work here at home either).

[Mike03]

25. Coming from him, it is not abstract

He made his living as an attorney fighting corporations.

But more importantly, who else can proclaim this message without being hypocritical?

Not Hillary Clinton, who has accepted fortunes from the medical industry.

Who else is going to give us Universal Health Care?

Obama doesn't even seem to be inclined to focus on domestic issues, so who does this leave us with? Edwards is our last hope.

[Mike03]

31. John Edwards: "Universal Health care--non negotiable." How abstract is that? NT

[annie1]

54. snap. :D

[Yukari Yakumo]

38. In short...

John should've ditched the rhetoric and actually gone into specifics.

Campaigning on vague terms got John nowhere.

[Vincardog]

40. He finnish ahead of HRC

[Baconfoot]

41. Baloney

Some business related highlights from his website:
http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/health-care/health-care-fact-sheet/">Healthcare
"First: Business Responsibility. Businesses have a responsibility to support their employees' health. They will be required to either provide a comprehensive health plan to their employees or to contribute to the cost of covering them through Health Care Markets. In return, the Edwards plan will make it easier for businesses to offer insurance by reducing costs and creating new choices. Covering all Americans will eliminate the cost of uncompensated care. Businesses can also choose to purchase care through Health Care Markets, which will offer quality plans at low prices and with minimal administrative burdens."

http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/poverty/">Minimum Wage
"Make Work Pay: Edwards will increase the reward for working by raising the minimum wage to at least $9.50 an hour by 2012 and then indexing it, tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) for adults without children and cutting the EITC marriage penalty."

http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/working-families/">Unions
"Strengthen Labor Laws: Unions made manufacturing jobs the foundation of our middle class, and they can do the same for our service economy. That's why Edwards has helped more than 20 national unions organize thousands of workers over the last few years. Union membership can be the difference between a poverty-wage job and middle-class security. Federal law promises workers the right to choose a union, but the law is poorly enforced, full of loopholes, and routinely violated by employers. Edwards supports the Employee Free Choice Act to give workers a real choice in whether to form a union, and making penalties for breaking labor laws tougher and faster, so unions can compete on a level playing field and the right to join a union means something. Edwards also supports banning the permanent replacement of strikers so unions can negotiate fairly."

I could go on... and on and on and on and on. There are two main points to be made here:
1) If you look at JE's comprehensive plan his pro-working family agenda is woven into all of his proposals in such a way as to have a positive impact on corporate action.
2) You can find all this stuff in his speeches and debate responses. You don't even need to go to his official website.

But we should all visit the official websites of all the candidates just in case our loyalty to one candidate or another stuffs our ears full of cotton when an opponent speaks. I know I've sometimes been guilty of selective hearing. It's something we all need to guard against. Peace.

[tammywammy]

48. Sprint-Nextel Wireless

Not a corporation, it's a partnership.

[CK_John]

49. Sprint is a corp that started out as Souther Pacific railroad and Nextel is a corp

who has formed a relation to provide a service. And where does it fit in with Edwards message?

[tammywammy]

50. I was just being a little silly

Sprint Wireless and AT&T Wireless aren't incorporated, they're partnerships. :)

[CK_John]

51. Yea, I am still uptight over last night.

[tammywammy]

52. I understand

:hug:

[Hieronymus]

56. Just support Hillary and let it go. She's for the corporations too. It's ...

Edwards for me.