As a person who holds two above average paying jobs and still lives month to month down to the last couple bucks in the bank even with paying housemates because of endless debt and expense: A-F'ing-Men.
I'm not against personal wealth or property, financial gain or family fortunes. It's obtaining that through levering yourself up on everyone else and making sure they are kept that way that pisses me off.
WOW! Wolfmage, I had no idea you were into this as much as me! (I realize you didn't write it, but still...) This is an excellent summation of everything I've been ranting about for 15 years!
I am particularly an opponent of "corporate personhood." If you don't know that whole story, you need to read Thom Hartmann's Unequal Protection. Hartmann himself is the hero (to me) who took the effort to delve into the Supreme Court files, and discover the Big Lie- in 1886, case Santa Clara County vs. Union Pacific Railroad, the Supreme Court DID NOT grant corporations personhood. Instead, a court clerk inserted a false and misleading summary- that insists the S. Court did grant this "right" to corporations! For many decades, no one bothered to read the actual case notes, not getting past the summary. So years of "precedent" based on a false premise has given us a whole 20th century of greed and greed0driven misery. Now, of course, our "objective" (can you hear the sarcasm dripping here?) Court has gone ahead and actually done what they
( ... )
Comments 7
Reply
Reply
I'm not against personal wealth or property, financial gain or family fortunes. It's obtaining that through levering yourself up on everyone else and making sure they are kept that way that pisses me off.
Reply
Reply
I am particularly an opponent of "corporate personhood." If you don't know that whole story, you need to read Thom Hartmann's Unequal Protection. Hartmann himself is the hero (to me) who took the effort to delve into the Supreme Court files, and discover the Big Lie- in 1886, case Santa Clara County vs. Union Pacific Railroad, the Supreme Court DID NOT grant corporations personhood. Instead, a court clerk inserted a false and misleading summary- that insists the S. Court did grant this "right" to corporations! For many decades, no one bothered to read the actual case notes, not getting past the summary. So years of "precedent" based on a false premise has given us a whole 20th century of greed and greed0driven misery. Now, of course, our "objective" (can you hear the sarcasm dripping here?) Court has gone ahead and actually done what they ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment