Babs did say that this is bamas economy, and isn't it great!!

Babs did say that this is bamas economy, and isn't it great!!

Can you give me a link to the quote of Barbara Streisand saying that?

Thanks!

It's been revealed that Willard is worth between $190 - $250 million dollars - it's understandable he believes corporations are people...

YUP! Ordinary everyday working folks for sure... lol

MAW-1297690

The liberal media will support Obama no matter what he does and all they do is try to tear down other people.

I can say with surety Fox Noise's ECHO CHAMBER aka right wing media makes it worse.

I wonder how they sleep at night?

Easy, they conjure up paradigms of OBAMA Anti-American, libruls play the race card, libruls want handouts, BLAH, BLAH?

"the day the Bush administration took over from President Bill Clinton in 2001, America enjoyed a $236 billion budget surplus -- with a projected 10-year surplus of $5.6 trillion. When the Bush administration left office, it handed President Obama a $1.3 trillion deficit -- and projected shortfalls of $8 trillion for the next decade."

Hey, no fair, DNC. You hurt my feelings.

Yours truly,

~ Walmart -- Low Prices, Always

FAUX NOISE and their shills will decry Obama no matter what he does. Even if he decided to repeal all federal income taxes, they would still be against him.

MAW, your conservatives can dish it out but they can't take it. I hardly call our President asking banks and corporations to play fair with consumers "job killing". I hardly call our need for clean air and clean drinking water "job killing". You would squeal like a stuck pig and wonder "why didn't the government do SOMETHING" as soon as something starts to affect YOU. If you want to continue to promote a fascist, return to slave labor, corporate state instead of a democracy then be my guest.

MAW lost any credibility he had which was none, when he made up the lie that President Obama "created about 5000 new job choking regulations". Come on MAW, you don't have to make things up and lie to make your post sound better. Leave that to the tea people GOP, their much better at it.

Beverly,

Did the government actually stick to the Clinton budget? Or, did the debt actually increase during those years? Just because they PLANNED to spend less doesn't mean that they actually did. There is a big difference between a budget and actual expenditures. Why do people actually think after all these years that the government is going to be frugal with the money we give it?

Lemur,

Can you explain what Sarbanes-Oxley has to do with clean air or clean water?

Hey, no fair, DNC. You hurt my feelings.

Yours truly,

~ Walmart -- Low Prices, Always

Anna Molly, you owe me a keyboard and printer.

(OK,....not really on the printer thing, but I thought I would go for extra stuff as long as you were buying.)

JC-1439099

Beverly,

Did the government actually stick to the Clinton budget? Or, did the debt actually increase during those years? Just because they PLANNED to spend less doesn't mean that they actually did. There is a big difference between a budget and actual expenditures. Why do people actually think after all these years that the government is going to be frugal with the money we give it?

Why don't you put your thinking cap on? George Bush SQUANDERED Clinton's budget with 2 wars and tax cuts for his rich cronies. You can believe it factual

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jan/15/david-axelrod/axelrod-claims-bush-saddled-obama-big-deficit/

Just send me the bill, Greg. My welfare check should cover it. ;-)

Wiki - "Only a company that has been formally incorporated according to the laws of a particular state is called 'corporation'. A corporation was defined in the Dartmouth College case of 1819, in which Chief Justice Marshall of the United States Supreme Court stated that " A corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of the law"."

Mitt thinks that an 'artificial being, invisable, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of the law' is a person.

Sounds like a good description of hiw own self worth.

what do you mean little?

Beverly - you can't "squander" a budget. It is only a plan on how to spend the money. Do you honestly believe that they "budgeted" for Katrina? How about Joplin? Was that in this year's budget? Do you even understand what a budget is?

LOL.. I love how some people don't understand the simple concept that corporations are people.

They are a group of people that get together to provide a good or service for money.

Work for a corporation, guess what, you're part of the "People" of that corporation.

Don't agree with what your corporation does, start your own.

Corporations aren't evil, Most aren't even remotely evil, they are typically good. They are also typically small and filled with the average american.

While some corporations have some people in them that are bad and do some bad things, it is the same proportion as would be found in america in general.

Why people hate corporations is beyond me.. If they move jobs overseas it is because they must find a way to cut cost in order to survive rather than go out of business.. Its simple economics, yet this makes the EVIL? Why? You would rather these companies go out of business? Exactly how is that going to help the american economy?

Corporations may not be people but they are communities. When I worked for a Fortune 500 company it allowed me to do more good than when I didn't work there. With all the charity programs that raised millions, without corporations charities or rich people charities could exist. The fact is they contribute over 90% of a charities revenue. But the one thing I loved was each year, the company would select 20 individual families that could not give their children a Christmas, and we would donate our money to buy the gifts for the single parent and their children. Corporations need to make a profit, and like anyone making a comment on here people investing in them want to be rich. But I just can't figure out why people don't ever see the good that corporations provide along within the people and communities created within a corporation.

Markmitch ---

Are you for clean tax reform? (Everyone, including Corps) Clean legislation? (Hold Congress accountable for their vote on a single piece of legislation, no attachments?) Let all stand or fall of their own accord? Just curious....

Smart initiatives voted on independent of any other legislation with a review process that would determine if it is effective? I could go on...but you get the gist. Any thoughts?

FR: AMES, IA -- Could Mitt Romney's "people are corporations, too" line dog the former Massachusetts governor the same way that Barack Obama's "bitter"/"cling to guns or religion" remarks did during the '08 campaign?

Well lets see, Romney made a comment on what he thinks corporations are made up of. His comments didn't personally insult anyone.

Obama's comments made a derogatory reference to people that opposed him. His remarks were insulting and degrading to millions of Americans.

FR: Ultimately, Obama's "bitter" remarks didn't hurt him in '08.

Of course they didn't. The media was too infatuated with Obama to actually be critical of him in any way.

FR: Then again, they weren't captured by camera; Obama delivered them at a closed-press fundraiser.

Odd, so what is the following video? A reenactment done with actors?

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZWaxjiQyFk

Need to do the proper leg work before you spout off your biased opinions FR.

Hey Ted-803281 !!!

You said: Why people hate corporations is beyond me..

I have ONE, no make that TWO, words for you.

ENRON and Halliburton

BE AFRAID LEFTY LIBERALS, BE VERY, VERY AFRAID:

Barry is meeting with these corporate-people in unannounced, hastily scheduled, meetings at the WH. According to the article in the weekend WSJ, the invitations were issued just two days ago. Barry must be getting really, really nervous if he is turning to bankers and hedge funds and corporate CEO’s for advice. I have to wonder what beloved lefty liberal icons he will be throwing overboard to save his sinking Presidency??

From the Weekend WSJ:

Obama Sits Down With Executives

BY LAURA MECKLER AND ROBIN SIDEL

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama met Friday with eight business leaders to hunt for ideas to revive the economy, but the White House declined to say what he took away from the session.

In the meeting, which lasted just over an hour, Mr. Obama asked business leaders what he and his administration could do to improve their confidence, according to people familiar with the session.

Chief executives attending included Ursula Burns of Xerox Corp., Kenneth Chenault of American Express Co., Richard Davis of U.S. Bancorp, Larry Fink of BlackRock Inc., Glenn Hutchins of Silver Lake Partners, John Stumpf of Wells Fargo, John Surma of US Steel, and Bill weldon of Johnson & Johnson.

It's really amusing what lengths the left will go to in an attempt to smear someone. A corporation is a business entity that is created by people and run by people and invested in by people. The corporation has no life of its own save for the life imbued into its processes by people. A corporation cannot make decisions for itself; it requires people for decision making. A corporation cannot exist without people to create and manage it.

That said, I don't see any real problem with what Romney said but leave it to the left wing whack jobs to promote the usual lies and distortions. I wonder just who the target audience is for this left wing line of BS? Are there that many gullible zombies milling around out there?

Is the DNC really that clueless about how economies work?

This kind of ideology is turning capitalism in pyramid schemes within a grand pyramid scheme.

They don't make money off of products they make it off of people.

Stop treading on me so I can trickle on you.

Stop treating workers like tools.

The problem is, Romney's words are not so much a flub as a really poor mindset. He really does think business interests are more important than the interests of people, or perhaps the same. But what is good for business rarely translates to what is good for people.

It is all kind of Friedman's fault for saying that profit is the only purpose for business. First off, a business' purpose is creating a real product or service to profit from. Without providing a service or product, it is larceny. A con man is the one who profits without providing something in return. Unfortunately, many businesses are simply cons nowdays (hedge funds come to mind).

But there was a time when not only government put the interests of people first, business did too. Henry Ford's goal was not just to profit, but to make people's lives better. As was Edison's and Kellog's. Even Sam Walton's goal was not to ruin small town's mainstreets, but to provide better shopping. Somehow that all got bastardized by his kid's greed.

OK., what is the purpose of a business without profit? I get that. But was is the purpose of profit, if it does not improve people's lives?

Ooops...ignore my BMW post above, unless you're going to Munich, then it'll be a big help to you.

ENRON and Halliburton

Just because two corporations did some terrible thing that makes them all bad? Boy I hate to see your list of stereotypes..

If Enron and Halliburton were the only bad boys, we wouldn't be in this mess. Let's start talking Exxon, who created a disater that Alaska is still suffering from decades later. They posted $10 billion in profits, pay no taxes and still got over $100 million in subsidies from the government to boot. Let's talk about the "too big to fail" banking institutions. Let's talk BOA who skirts taxes and still makes huge profits.

The problem isn't a few companies, it's America's whole business culture and lack of oversight.

Scott,

Can you give us some examples of these other bad boy corporations? Any you can point out for us?

Uh, I think I just did. But, here's a few more:

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0124-21.htm

It takes an employee to become incorporated hence corporations would not exist without people. Corporate profits are used to 1) pay employees, 2) pay shareholders, 3) reinvest into the corporation through additional capital including human capital. These profits are also used to pay for our bloated government through employer and employee taxes. Without corporations and the people that work and invest in the corporations, there would be no government because the government does not actually produce anything. The fundamental difference between republicans and democrats is, replublicans ackowledge the importance of corparations re: our general wealth and welfare and democrats, starting with our president constantly impugn corporations and view them as evil monolithic empires. Hell, I may go out today and become incorporated and name myself CEO; it's a pretty easy process then I can be one of those evil empires democrats love so much.

Richard,

" A corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of the law"."

Mitt thinks that an 'artificial being, invisable, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of the law' is a person.

Sounds like a good description of hiw own self worth.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Cute .........and actually a more sophisticated manipulation obfuscation than the regular liberal blather.

Just curious since aside from legal definitions and applications, would you not admit that basically a "corporation" is a number of people organized to function cooperatively as a group?

Couldn't you say the same definition basically applies to the definition of a team?

So what cute little quip do you have about Obama going to Dover Air Force Base .......

Was he there to pay his respect to some "artificial" military being known as SEAL Team Six, or was it something else ....... maybe the lives of the "people" .......

Ever heard of the term intellectual moron?

Obviously, the right wing, teag bagging, birthers show no empathy with the average person. Electing them to national office will only result in the defaulting of our nation and some of the draconian changes that were done in Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana, etc, when they took control. You cant trust the elephant people

Dont_carry_it_all

Yes. Let me elaborate.

Taxes.

We currently employ one of the most criminal progressive tax systems possible. Over 71,000 pages of tax code and over 1,200 different forms to submit with your taxes.

Now, just WHO do you think can employ the army of accountants, MBA's, tax-lawyers, consultants and advisors to abuse manipulate this massive bureaucracy? Yes, those that can AFFORD it. The bigger question is, why does our government demonize the very people who have found ways to use, abuse, avoid and evade taxes because of the enormity the government has created? Did the rich people create the tax code? Did the corporations create the legislation that defines our current tax system. In essence, yes they did. But Congress had to allow it.

They did this with lobbyists, PAC's, trade associations, public interest groups and others. The "Iron Triangle" of Congress, executive associations and interest groups is openly and blatantly exhibited. The corruption of government via these external factors has created this monstrosity and now they blame their own creation being abused. Ironic or ignorant?

Today's debate and class warfare is based on this very premise. Laws are created to avoid taxation and as usual the governments incompetence is never acknowledged, it is diverted to those that are using it. So, where is the real blame?

The idea that our corrupted government will eliminate tax loopholes, subsidies and other manipulations is nonsense. These are created for the sole purpose of guaranteeing the politicians reelection and longevity. Both the tax avoiders and those that allow it benefit. The sheer magnitude of our tax code should prove this. Even if they do eliminate a few tax loopholes here and there how long do you think it will take Wall Street or GE to hire the next economics or math geek from MIT, Hahhhhvad or Wharton's to find or create the next loophole? This is the problem. Wall Street hires the geeks, our government hires Timmy "Turbo Tax" Geithner. Guess who's winning?

The only solution is to eliminate our criminal progressive tax system. Yes, I do believe in a clean tax reform. But it must be absolute. No more manipulations of tax brackets or alleged codes, eliminate it all. The buzzword today is to pay your "fair" share. I agree. A Fair Tax, without caveats, on both individuals and corporations. Even if you reduce our current tax code to its 1930's level of 400 pages, I assure you within 10 years it will balloon back to its current size. The ability of Congress to manipulate taxation under the influence of external factors must be eliminated. A Fair Tax allows equal and equitable taxation of all classes. If you're rich you WILL pay for your Macy's wardrobe. If you're middle class you WILL pay for your Abercrombie wardrobe. if you're lower class you will pay for your WalMart wardrobe. THIS is Fair. Everyone will pay for their level of consumption. If you want a Rolex, you'll pay equal tax on it as someone buying a Timex. No deductions, no exemptions and no manipulations. A Fair Tax also allows the "black market", that is estimated at over $1 TRILLION dollars, to be taxed also.

No one argues the need for taxes. The argument is how to truly make it fair. Our current system is unacceptable. It is antiquated and corrupt. If you truly want "tax reform" it must be total and complete. Nitpicking targeted industries will never work. The question is do we have the courage to accept this dramatic change? This time of economic upheaval is a perfect time to change into something better, simpler and more "fair".

Clean legislation?

Absolutely. No earmarks, no riders, no corruption. Also, a TRUE "Sunlight before Signing" of at minimum 2 weeks so the American people can see what the civil servants we honored with our vote are doing is imperative. I would also insist on a "Sundown Clause" be attached to all legislation of 5-10 years. This will discourage thousands of frivolous bills to be proposed, introduced and ratified that are forgotten. Regan's Grace Commission revealed over 900 social programs. If you like you can be enrolled in 15-20 of them simultaneously even though you don't need them. Some programs haven't been reevaluated since the 1950's.

And we wonder why our economy is collapsing under its own weight?

Corporation...a body of people acting under a legal charter as a separate entity, having it's own rights and priveleges...

The preceding from the American Heritage Dictionary. Great post, bob!

A company may be made up of people, workers, investors etc. But that does not mean that they represent the interests of their workers, or even a majority of their shareholders. They represent the interests of their Largest shareholders and upper management. But even if they were to represent all of the interests of all of their workers and shareholders, that's still a very small percent of the population.

I suppose all of the shareholders and workers should be held accountable for corporate misdeed too?

Maybe I'm wrong, but America was supposed to be a government "of the people, by the people and for the people, not of the corporation, by the corporation and for the corporation".

You're right Bob. It wasn't much of a flub. People work for corporations to earn a living, they buy stock in corporations to hopefully make a profit, and the public also buy the goods and services provided by a corporation. Legally corporations are treated as individuals under the law as they are able to purchase and own property. So if you spent a moment thinking about corporations are all about people all of them looking to earn money.

The DNC just wants to demonize corporations with the hope that people will ignore the economy and the other blunders that we've had lately. Imagine if tomorrow all of the corporations shut down. How many jobs do you think would be left in the US? Think we'd still have a tax base?

I thought the republicans already proved in a federal court and the court sided with them that corporations were people and could make unlimited campaign donations even without disclosing their identities?

I would think the two republicans that took out the 2.1million $ bank loan knowing they couldn't repay it and then turned around and are suing the bank that gave them the loan for giving it to them or the other republican that tried to get his state motto to be In God We Trust and made anti gay his agenda only to get caught buying a boy toy on craigs list would be much more entertaining topics this week.

That the republicans believe corporations to be people is really old news.

Great! Corporations are people. I want every single worker, investor and all management from AIG, Halliburton, etc jailed and fined to pay for their company's crimes. Think that's gonna fly?

You want it both ways. You want the limited liability that not being a person provides a company AND the rights all the rights and priviledges of a citizen for corporations. It's a bunk argument. And the sad thing is, the case that gave corporate personhood originally was a clerical error.

Wow, Markmitch, while I can't always agree with how you say things....i.e...your first post....I certainly can agree with your second post. Amazing. I would go further to say it's all tribalism by design. We need to find common ground and speak out...... I would urge all to stand up to their "party' on these issues and be resolute in making our government and its people accountable. Clean up this swamp, something we all can agree upon.

Nevada --- Thanks for that advertisement for BMW! : ) I'll make sure to check it out next year! Are they a union company?

Joe in Albany -- Now you are against Corporations and business men???

OK Fiesty, all else aside and in the other room.

Really - you're constantly without fail the first one commenting on every (or most every) "First Read" political commentary.

How are you affiliated with "First Read"?.....inquiring minds want to know.

Mitt Romney's "people are corporations, too" ranks right up with Sarah Palin's "I can see Russia from my back yard"!

What a bunch of politicians! SSSOOOO out of touch with the real world!

Do we REALLY want someone like this to be the president?

Next he'll be telling us how every political contribution he has ever gotten came from regular "people"! He didn't take corporate donations he just considers them all from people.

People better think long and hard before they vote in 2012!

babs was a great pick?! Have you actually listened to anything she has said in the past? She's a blithering idiot. Figures the left would go for her! Birds of a feather and similar IQ's ROTFLMAO!!!

Dont_carry_it_all

My first post, although somewhat confrontational, is meant to expose the utter irrationality of the Liberal Progressive incessant demonization of wealth. Ask any child what they want to be when they grow up. Do any say I want to be dependent on government social programs. I want to donate money all my life to fictitious "Trust Funds" and "Lock Boxes" in the hope that it will be there in 40 years when I need it? I want to give my hard earned money to a massive bureaucracy to redistribute because I am too incompetent to do it myself? I want to be a janitor (no offense to janitors).

NO.

They want to be a doctor or an engineer, an astronaut (well, at least they used to) or a fireman. Mankind's inherent nature is NOT to sit by idly and let a certain preselected alleged intelligentsia to tell us what to do, when to do it and why to do it. We unleash our imagination, our ambition and our dreams to create things. Do kids on the beach just pile sand up in a huge mound and say "look what I made"? No, they make a sand castle, or an impression of a fish or something imaginative. This is what creates innovation, inventions, TV's, immunizations, automobiles and Kindle's.

This expands into commerce. Lemonade stands become Businesses which become corporations which have created the world we all live in. America has taken us from the horse-and-buggy to Rovers roaming the surface of Mars. We invented light bulbs, manned-flight and Hula-Hoops. The world is what it is today because of America's dreams becoming corporations that help everyone. If you don't like how a certain corporation does business, voice your dissatisfaction by not endorsing it and buying its products. If you truly want to fix it, become the corporation. Don't sit on your La-Z-Boy watching "Idol" and BITCH! Or even worse, HOPE that our government will CHANGE it.

Our government is the biggest corporation on the planet and it is insolvent. If any private corporation was run the same way it would have been out of existence decades ago. The CEO and Board would be expelled. Yet we keep placing the same incompetence into office for decades at a time. As Charley Reese so eloquently stated,

"Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them".

For nearly 100 years we have been victimized by Progressivism. Unsustainable entitlements, social programs, political correctness, Keynesian economics and our "corporation" is bankrupt. Ironically the Liberal Progressives rely on private corporations for all their university grants and donations all the while belittling them. Now, when their grand social experiment of social and economic justice for their collective is collapsing they demand the same entity to save them.
Our Federal Constitutional Republic has been bastardized into a pseudo-democracy built around dependence and self-pity. Our economy has been transformed from the greatest domestic exportable manufacturing industry into an 80% consumption/service sector hybrid. Show me a single nation, with our populace, that has ever created the wealth, prosperity and standard of living we are accustomed to using this model. There is none.. There never will be.

We create UNFAIR trade policies. We permit criminal taxation systems. We allow irrational regulations. We tolerate corrupt unions. We denounce proven industries such as energy, manufacturing and agriculture while selectively subsidizing an unproven "Green Initiative" in the hopes taht in 20-30 years it may be efficient and profitable. What do we do in the meantime with the 25 million good Americans who are under/unemployed? We demand that they be consumers. To consume you need money. To make money you need jobs. To create real, long term, domestic, profitable jobs government MUST get out of the way. Our entitlement/social program laden government consumes 60% of our economy. The solution is NOT more spending or taxes, it's jobs. We can't export entitlements. We can't export social programs. We can't export road and bridge building projects.

The only way we can bring "NEW MONEY" (Money from abroad) into our economy is to start building widgets, gizmos and gadgets here again. In 1960 manufacturing accounted for 53% of our economy, today it accounts for 9%. You can't go to Target or Walmart and buy a pair of tennis shoes or a screwdriver "Made In The USA" any longer.

This is our shame.

This will be our downfall.

HEY RADICAL NONSENSE PACKERS, thank you for pointing out what I already know, that the Republican party tends to be more corporate friendly. However, please also turn on your own light bulb and understand that Mitt Romney is not wrong, nor in fact does it mean he shouldn't be elected.

This is NOT a 'zinger.' Corporations are made of people, and Mitt Romney is not a 'bad person' for thinking so. He is obviously a believer of trickle down, even if YOU aren't. I've seen trickle down work, and I've seen it fail. If someone wants to debate that trickle down works or doesn't, fine. But quite frankly, I don't really think it is wrong to have a candidate who believes in it. Duh. And if it was such an anathema to Americans, then you wouldn't have Bagger idiots gaining popularity in Congress in '10.

So please, up the intelligence of the conversation. Debate about trickle down or not. But I don't blame Mitt Romney for believing in it, just like I don't blame Democrats for being against it. It is an election choice, and all this BS blame game makes the radical left as asinine as the radical right.

Anytime you hear someone say that Clinton had a surplus, you know you are dealing with a moron.

As per Federal Gov't figures: There was no years during the Clinton Presidency where the Federal Gov't was in the black.

There were no years that Clinton cut the budget. Every year under Clinton, the Federal Gov't spent more than the year before.

Knowing those facts, the liberal lakeys then try to tell you that Clinton left a "Surplus". Sure. That makes alot of sense. The guy that can't balance his own budget is going to leave $200 billion for the next guy instead of using that money to balance his own budget.

Poor liberals, I know many are educated, too bad they never learned how to think on their own.

Hey Ryan

Then GWB was a liar as he said this money belonged to the Americans. Yes about 80% of it went to the top 1% of Americans.

Now, to all the other posters, right left and center, especially those who moan about governement spending:

The Reps were anti- the Obama stimulus; yet they were first in the queue demanding their share - Michelle bachman (3 requests), Mitt Romney (5 requests), Bobby Jindahl (8 requests), Eric Cantor (3 requests), ... you get the picture. This is hypocrisy at it's finest. What evil people!

There was a time when being conservative, meant being dignified, responsible, belief in law, ... All those conservative values. When did the right wing come down to being this lumpen @!$%#z? And now Perry wants to be president. He was one of the biggest recipients of Democratic stimulus. He used this money to lure companies from California, giving them massive tax 'holidays', which are totally counter-productive to the Texan economy. Not to worry, when he becomes president, the Red states can get tons of pork - same like GWB did.

BTW, I am an independent conservative, not a libertarian/fascist Rep/Tea Bagger, etc.

As I recall, the quote was "Corporations are people, my friend...".

Perhaps what Mr. Romney intended to say was "Corporations are LEGAL people, my friend, composed of NATURAL (biologic hominid) people..." (but way too complicated to make a pithy five word sound-bite).

As a natural person, I had a biologic birth and will die a biologic death. As a biologic person, in this country, I have the legal potential to vote a ballot, if I am qualified and choose to do so.

A legal person is an artificial construct, intended to confer some (but not all) the rights/responsibilities of natural personhood. A legal person (so far) cannot vote, but they can certainly influence elections as much, if not much more so, than biologic people can.

Mr. Romney's gaffe probably reflects his view of the world in which LEGAL personhood is conflated with NATURAL personhood under the word PERSON.

I own a small business, but I would never assume that my "business self" (an LLC, which could have been done as an S Corporation, but way too complicated for my brain to absorb) is equivalent to my "biologic self".

Bob numbers -

One can institutionalize concepts, but they'll never breath or bleed.

Obama paying his respects to the SEAL team, of which he is commander, has no place in your feeble attempt at analogy. I find that wholly disrespectful to the grieving.

Bob numbers:

would you not admit that basically a "corporation" is a number of people organized to function cooperatively as a group?

Couldn't you say the same definition basically applies to the definition of a team?

Couldn't you say the same definition applies to a union!?

"Poor liberals, I know many are educated, too bad they never learned how to think on their own"

LOL...the quote above is a pretty good example of the term "oxymoron." LOL...but then again I am not surprised to see it being used (especially by a Perry supporting Texan) since reciting conservative talking points is one of the cornerstones of a typical conservative argument regarding the liberal identity.

Hey Ryan how's Perry working out for ya in Texas? LOL...

qudrcps...good post regarding Mitt Romney's probably thought process. It is very lawyer-like...Unfortunately, Obama has shown a slightly similar thought process in this regard.

Hmmmmm....this is why I despise most sharks/ambulance chasers (aka lawyers) b/c their job, besides maintaining the integrity of the judiciary code is to manipulate the "bejesus" out of words to the point where the connotation of a word begins to take on its own connotation...to a point where the denotation is no longer relevant.

LOL

Pat,

He used this money to lure companies from California, giving them massive tax 'holidays', which are totally counter-productive to the Texan economy

You don't suppose that the revenue the State will gain from all those extra employees might offset the "tax holiday" that the corporations received, do you? And, since those corporations weren't there to begin with, the State would not have had the corporate revenue anyhow. Sounds to me like Texas is definitely coming out with a net gain. California, on the other hand, has lost both the corporate revenue and the revenue from the employees. But then, that's what high taxes will do......

Education does not equal the ability to think.

10,000 people move to Texas every day because thankfully there are still Americans who are willing to work.

In 2009, Texas created more new jobs than the other 49 states COMBINED.

Texas is the leading international exporter among states.

And most importantly, ANYONE BUT BARRACK!

A corporation may have the rights and privileges of people, but they do not have the accountability of people. Corporations are legal constructs to avoid the liability incurred by people. Corporations have the benefits of being people, but not the culpability. As such, in my opinion, they should not be the driver of our politics. It is a set-up, and the people are the losers.

Ryan in Texas

ANYONE BUT BARRACK

ROTFLMAO!!!!

I see you pay the same respect I pay to Barrack Hussein for his exemplary military knowledge.

I adorn him with the Barrack name because of his pitiful disrespect at the prayer breakfast when he acknowledged Navy Corpsman Christian Broussard as corpse-men. Not once but TWICE!!!!!

And then he even changed his name from Christian to Christopher a few seconds later!

Ahhhh the merits of being the Confabulator of Cheese.

I cringe at how he would pronounce Colonel.

Actually Romney is right, people are corporations. Corporations wouldn't exist without people. This is just the stupid rhetoric that follows campaigns. I know this, and still it bothers me every election, that they clog up the media with stuff like this without real substance. Both parties are guilty of it, and all it does is cause a larger divide in the citizens of the country and in Washington. At this rate Washington will never work together again and that in turn will lead to another revolution. I wonder if some people think that would be great? But, in the mean time, let's polarize this country even more! Geesh!!

Markmich --

You articulate your position well and will capture an audience with thoughtful dialogue. : )

Although I agree with you on some things...others I have to question the integrity of your statements. For example...."We denounce proven industries such as energy, manufacturing and agriculture while selectively subsidizing an unproven "Green Initiative" in the hopes that in 20-30 years it may be efficient and profitable. ". Innovation is needed in the energy sector if we truly care about future generations. (250 years from now) Some will prove their worth, while others will not. (Means testing each initiative.) While our current energy industry is working it is not sustainable over centuries. (Oil; who are also taking advantage of "green" initiatives) Drill responsibly because in our world it may be prudent to keep that oil in the ground for an emergency....in other words we need all sources of energy, including "green" to meet all obligations we may face in the future. Innovation without an open mind is an oxymoron. We can do it all.

Most of your arguments are well placed on the legislators shoulders but it should be collective, as in all.

Fair trade, you got it! Export more than we import, you hit the nail on the head. Pro-growth includes expanding globally, so have at it. "Repatriating" profits with reasonable tax or fee, absolutely. Clean taxes, clean legislation and clean initiatives. Smart regulation. All these things will improve our economy.

SS, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, etc....your views scare the @!$%# out of everyone. (Can we save that argument for later) I will say this however, I believe in shouldering my neighbors burden within reason. I do think the poor and unemployed need smarter programs designed to help them succeed. These things can be said without beating up the beaten down, as some do. Most of them are not here to defend themselves. As for the liberals and progressives I think all should have a voice to speak.

C'mon Mark..you would be bored in a world of drones with everyone thinking and saying the same things. You speak wonderfully when one discerns what you trying to say...even if we don't agree on everything.

Til next time buddy!

Markmich --- Really???? Stop you do your party no favors. Take the high ground for God's sake.

Just One Guy: I think Feisty must be one of the PEOPLE who are part of this First Read CORPORATION.

Sammy Sezso

It would not be so bad if you were not ignorant of geography,There is an island called Little Diomede. It looks like a rock plopped into the Bering Strait. Only about 150 Alaskans live on the whole island. And just about two miles away; in full view of every single house on the island is the nation of Russia. Specifically, it is the Russian Island of Big Diomede which sits about 25 miles from the Russian Siberian mainland (which you can also see from the American island.) Most everybody on Little Diomede had relatives who lived on Big Diomede.

As of 2005 more than 56.9 million US households (more than 50%) owned stock, and that number was trending upwards. Yes, corporations are people.

It is about time the DEMs grew a spine and started using the Republicans moron speak against them!

Mike,

Yes, many of us own large quantities of stock, but we still realize Corporations are NOT People.

Giving that kind of political power to corporations(many not US owned) is detrimental to our democracy.

We can always have the government own all corporations, managers all get the same pay, line workers get the same equal pay. Create an enviornment without reward or promotion for coming up with new ideas. Really creates motivation to work harder. Let's make it just like China where the only rich are the political elite, celebrities and sports stars and there is no opportunity for the common Joe to come up with million dollar idea.

Dont_carry_it_all

Really???? Stop you do your party no favors

WHAT?!?!?!?!?!?

Was my last post too abrasive? Guess what? I don't care.

You seem to have me confused with someone who belongs to a "party". I assume you mean a "political party". You, my good friend, couldn't be farther from the truth.

You see, I'm a Reagan Conservative Constitutional Originalist and a Fiscal Libertarian. My disdain for the GOP, RINO's, Democrats and Liberals is universal. My once benevolent Republican party went bye bye a long time ago, as did any semblance of the Democratic party that both my UAW parents denounced in the 70's. Independents, as far as I'm concerned, are just lost souls wandering the political landscape with no direction or conviction. My utter disdain however is for the Faux Progressives that have been masquerading as Liberals and Democrats for nearly 100 years. Their claim of wanting "progress", being "forward leaning" or in general wanting to improve society is just a clever charade for socialism/Marxism/Communism.

If anyone believes the creation of this religion they call government is ever going to help the individual man in its current form is ignorant. Socialism has never existed in a nation our size. And it never will. The only thing that will happen to it is it will degenerate into its least common denominator known as Marxism or Communism. My disgust with Barrack Hussein is his feigned attempt at being knowledgeable and capable. My disdain is that he doesn't at least admit he is a socialist. At least Hillary Clinton admitted to being a "Modern Progressive" in 2007 during the debates. At least PMSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell admits to being a socialist. I give these people respect for being honest.

Politics in America have been replaced with ideologies that in no way resemble what they originally were. This bastardization on both sides of the aisle is what we have left today. The results are obvious. Did you EVER ask your Senator or Representative to create the economic Armageddon we are in? Did you ever ask them to create as divisive a nation as we live in today? Did you ever ask them to allow our children to graduate from high school barely able to read at an 8th grade level? I doubt it. Yet here we are. Our Constitution is trampled on by both "parties" and We The People are worried about keeping up with the Joneses.

In 1982 Reagan created a special commission called the "Private Sector Survey on Cost Control", better known as the Grace Commission. The OMB didn't even know how many programs existed. As it turns out 963 different social programs existed. You could be enrolled in 15-20 of them at the same time even if you didn't need or qualify for them. 161 private sector executives volunteered their time in 36 task-forces. It was funded by $75 million dollars of private funds. Three years later the commission reported they found nearly 2,500 cost-cutting and revenue generating recommendations that could save the government almost $425 BILLION Dollars in the first 3 years. With complete incorporation the plan was reported to be able to save nearly $2 TRILLION Dollars by 1999. Nearly 90% of the recommendations were ignored by Congress.

Since then we've had dozens more commissions to unravel the waste, fraud and abuse in our government. Guess what? We still have Hundreds of Billions of dollars of waste, fraud and abuse. Barrack Hussein admitted to $500 BILLION Dollars of WFA in Medicare. That is the last time you will hear about it until the campaign takes off next year.

The GAO recently reported that there is massive redundancy of programs in our government.

- Twenty agencies operating 56 programs dedicated to financial literacy. GAO and agencies can’t estimate what they cost.

- The federal government runs 80 economic development programs at four agencies at a cost of $6.5 billion. I find this one particularly interesting, especially in our current economic collapse. 80 economic programs and our debt ceiling debate couldn't find a way to cut more spending. The irony is embarrassing.

- The Department of Transportation spends $58 billion on 100 programs run by five agencies with 6,000 employees that haven’t evolved since 1956. If there ever was a need to have a "sunset clause" added to legislation, this is it.

Today our incompetents in Washington continue. Our economy will eventually collapse. Bernanke essentially admitted as much on Tuesday when he stepped over the line and said all he can do is extend overnight interest rates into 2013. Hardly encouraging. He may try QE3, the results will be the same as QE1 and QE2. The fate of our nation will lie in the hands of 12 me on a "Super Committee". Another failed attempt, just like the Debt Commission, to control our profligate spending. I for one am not holding my breath.

These and many other reasons are why I disdain the political parties. There is no more leadership only gamesmanship. Elections costing BILLIONS of dollars for a job that pays $569,000 (including perks). I don't see a very good return on investment.

[I see you pay the same respect I pay to Barrack Hussein for his exemplary military knowledge.]

Much like Captain CodPeice a.k.a Chimpy McFlightSuit? Now here's some stellar military service:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_military_service_controversy

Oh, come on...who are you kidding...you're "angry" because you think Obama called you "the enemy" or a "terrorist"...or that you shoudn't eat cheeseburgers...or there's the whole "black man in the White House" dealie that doesn't sit well with 99% of teabaggers...

...so which is it...?

...c'mon, you can tell me...it'll be our little secret, OK?

Mickey, NY

Mickey, Mickey, Mickey. You Liberal Progressive teabaggee's are so cute when you try to defend your Imbecile in Chief. I understand the projection of your racism is a common defense mechanism but it is far from flattering. You should espouse our Confabulator in Chief. You voted for him. It's his JOB to lead. Unfortunately Barrack Hussein’s only goal was to become the first black (well, half black anyway) president. Along with the adoring Lamestream Liberal media and fawning buffoons that voted for him, here we are.

Almost 3 years into his presidency and the only accomplishments are a downgrade of our once cherished Bond Rating, a car he's been trying to get deeper and deeper in the ditch and more simultaneous wars than any president before him. But hey, he can deflect blame and responsibility better than Johnnie Cochran. Someday, when puberty finally sets in, you Liberal Progressives will finally realize what a horrible mistake you made in 2008. What would be noble is if you finally admitted it. But you won't. Just like you won't admit that none of his domestic or foreign policies have benefitted America.

So, my friendly and vitriolic teabaggee friend, I hope you're proud of your errors, obviously you are. It's Ok, we real Americans will begin the repair process in 2012. We just hope Barrack Hussein doesn't do any more damage until then. A nearly $17 TRILLION Dollar Debt that we will INHERIT will be very difficult to fix.

(By the way, a “teabaggee” is the one who accepts the bag from the teabaggers. You can find a more descriptive definition here, urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=teabaggee)

People own corporations and people are employed by corporations. All these people represent and therefore are part of the corporation. If you work for one that fails, so do you, you're out of work. People who care about their job and also the the people they work for is becoming less and less, and that is one thing wrong with the world today. But for the people who really do care, they work hard towards success of the corporation, they contribute to its success and are therefore part of it. Most corporations wouldn't exist without people or even get started in the first place. I know anybody who has ever worked hard for someone and cared about the success of the company will agree with me on this.

Markmich --

Apologies in thinking you belonged to a "party". I refer to any President as the President. Ideologues = closed mind = arrogance = piss poor solutions. Many I think are without a "party". Why things never change? Apathy. Yes, keep is simple. Most importantly, clean it up so we know what is what. Best practices = good governance.

markmich:

Sounds like got a bit of sand in your vagina...

You make a lot of assumptions in your post, and all I did was call you on G.W.Bush's less than stellar military record.

I'm not going to respond to any of your mindless psychobabble because it is obviously your opinion, and you have the right to post it. You are most certainly enttled to your own opinion, but you are most certainly NOT entitled to your own facts. Your post is nothing more than an emotional and ideological response to a situation you cannot control, supporting the fact that conservatism truly is a mental illness.

What I will respond to, because you evidentally are of the teabagging breed, is this little statement you made:

[A nearly $17 TRILLION Dollar Debt that we will INHERIT will be very difficult to fix.]

Really...

REALLY...?

...yeabut...

...yeabut...

...yeabut...

Michelle Bachmann claims she can turn the economy around in three months?

So, while you sit there with tea bags stapled to your forehead, which is it...?

Re: Ted-803281 (comment #1.19)

Corporations are made up of people. but as to whether they are a benefit or detriment to society is to be determined by each case separately.

People tend to hate, or maybe a better word mistrust corporations because of their actions from corrupting the political process for their benefit (Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Committee ), changing the legislative safeguards put in place decades before to protect the citizens (Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act), and for the massive layoffs that seemed to target as its' largest segment being anyone who was close to retirement age.

Each one of these actions did massive damage to the society as a whole, and further introduced long term implications that threaten the stability and sovereignty of this nation.

I was also working in upper management within a corporation and you need to know that the idea of moving manufacturing overseas was brought up not because the firm was cutting costs to survive but for the simple idea of dropping the costs of labor to make very large profits. I argued against this idea since the quality of the end product would go down and the profits made by this decision would only be realized within the short term.

The nation would be far better served by regulating the the abuses of corporate power and by putting into place a series of bills that would put an end to the true problem in Washington of not overly spending, but that of undertaxing the wealthy and allowing institutionalized corruption by the wealthy and large corporations to legally exist within our political process.

Wow - corporations can be as small as one doctor? Really? Name one corporation that consists of only one or two employees.

Ever hear of an "S corporation"? What do you think the letters "PA" mean, after your doctor's or dentist's names?

Here's a clue- it does not mean "paying attention"- it means Professional Association- meaning, S corporation.

It is so obvious that liberals are clueless on the economy- they have no idea how it works, what the tax code says, or anything else having to do with earning a livelihood.

But, thanks for continuing to display your ignorance.

You idol is even more clueless than are you- and America sees the result.

And they aren't people nj. However, you are correct the size of a corporation doesn't matter; however, it is taxed separately from the stockholders, unless it's a Sub S corporation, then all profits go straight to the stockholders and are taxed on the stockholders return. That being said a Corporation is not a person but a Quasi-Legal entity.

The Supreme Court overturned over a 100 years of legal precedent by allowing Citizens United to have virtually the same rights as a human being.

Wow, Luscious- your dentist is what- a tree? A rock? An extraterrestrial?

Looks like logic and common sense are as elusive as admitting wrong to liberals.

Keep spinning- but, no matter how much you spin, it does not change the facts.

Obama's ineptitude made everything worse.

Empirical ~ There are, in fact, many one- and two-person corporations, including medical practices, veterinary practices, law offices, and other professional businesses, as well as carpet layers, painters, plumbers, computer consultants, and other skilled tradesmen and independent contractors of all kinds.

Around here, they're SC's, as no joe indicates (which means "service corporation") or nowadays, they're mostly called LLCs ("limited liability corporations") because they limit the personal liability of the owners.

And they're people two. Or is that two people?

no joe, no bo, nj

Ever hear of an "S corporation"? What do you think the letters "PA" mean, after your doctor's or dentist's names?

What do you know about people? You'r a witch in the.

Spanky is right. A broom handle with a wig would do it with this crew running the show

Really? Spanky is never right.

no joe, no bo, nj

"Gee, let me see. . .

Corporations can be as small as one doctor or lawyer, with one employee, or as large as, say, GE- which got its "no tax liability" status from whom?

Oh, right- Obama."

The no tax liability status comes from the republicans and their misguided trickle down theory that doesn't work.

It really doesn't help your argument when you blame the wrong President for corporations having no tax liability.

no joe, no bo, nj

Ever hear of an "S corporation"? What do you think the letters "PA" mean, after your doctor's or dentist's names?

What do you know about people? You're a witch in the "S" corporation of Snakes incapable of casting your evil. You're impotent. No one pays attention to the way you twist and distort facts. In fact, thy refute you, your evil ways, and fictional lies about this administration

if barry gets his way and taxes are raised on them who do you think will pay for those tax increases in the long run.......yep we the tax payer. they will just pass it along, which is what every company would do, no matter how big or small.

Boy that citizens united ruling sure has made the tea people GOP sound nutty. Corporations are people, you've got to be kidding. Does anyone really believe that? If they do they need to be put in a straight jacket and moved to a rubber room.

@annamolly - You are wrong. LLC stands for Limited Liability Company and in no way resembles a corporation. It does posses limited legal liability, but it does not have stock holders, and they are not taxed like a corporation. The taxes are passed to the owners just like regular income tax, and are not taxed at the lower interest income rate.

So what is Citizens United anyway? A bunch of citizens "united" together to use the power of a whole rather than the power of an individual.

Kind of like a corporation.

Kind of like a union...

The money doesn't go to all the people. Just the CEO's they get multi million or even billion dollar compensation packages that seems to increase each year but the actual workers salaries have been stagnate for years. The money is held at the top and the bottom gets crumbs.

But still corporations aren't people. Yes, corporations can be one or two people but they form the corporation for a reason-pay less taxes, protect their personal wealth in case of loss, ect. otherwise what would be the reason for forming a corporation?

This argument that corporations are made up of people is simplistic and vapid. If it holds true, then "churches are people" and "political parties are people" and "unions are people" and "single proprietor businesses are people" and so on. Is Romney willing to concede to these claims, too?

On the other hand, it depends on what he is implying by saying that "corporations are people." If he is saying that we should impute free speech rights to corporations because they are full of people, then why limit the free speech rights of non-profits? If it is to say that they should have special tax perks, why not give they to any business, since all businesses are full of people, create jobs, and all the other things that corporations do?

This is a very stinky direction for this country to head down, and I hope that this dogs Romney and influences all candidates away from this position.

Churches are people. If you had no people the church wouldn't exist.

I love it CEOs make money because they negotiated for it, maybe not because they earned it, but who cares.

Many people work a get paid to do nothing of any real value in the workforce. it's the same thing.

Why people hate corporations is beyond me, lets make corporations illegal and watch the US economy recover over night, yeah, lets see how that works.. People are clueless.

Oh and I think Romney is a horrible candidate. I don't like his policies, they are all very simular to Obama and Bush.. Of course I haven't seen a president whos policies aren't more of the same since I turned 18 and my guess is it was the same policies since way way way before I was born.

AM that was the point that I was attempting to make, a LLC is taxed on the individuals return similar to a partnership, and its legal purpose is to shield a professionals assets. and yes their are one and two person Corporations but most are tax avoidance schemes, a corporation has to act in a certain way for it to be actually considered a corporation for tax purposes and not a scheme.

NJ, your just sad. I have no need to spin when I can back my words up with factual evidence. Can you?

I think the ad is spot on. The retort from the audience" they line their pockets" to Romney's statement that corporations are people also true. It resonates with people.

As Anna said, LLC's are the way that professionals and businesses protect themselves from liability.

Small case study: I bought a condo in a new development in my city. The development LLC got tax increment financing form the city (my tax dollars). One of the principals of the development company formed the construction company LLC that built the building.His real estate LLC sold the units. He also had a title company LLC that did the closing. All very legal.

Problem was he was a sleazy developer. Our association sued him for defects to our building. I sat in on his deposition. Our attorney needed a flow chart to track the nine LLC's he created or used in this development project. Our attorney said this guy is notorious for LLC creating in this business. But he never fails to have insurance. In construction business he needs insurance , Our state CIC law also provides some relief to HOAs .But for the most part the law was written for the benefit of builders.

WE settled our law suit, and did a $1million+ fix on a building that was only 4 year sold. Mr. Developer just re morphed into a new LLC that restores historic buildings into apartments and condos. This guy has and will keep the legal community busy for years. For him it is just the cost of doing business!

Multiply this study by the thousands of housing developments that made big money during the housing explosion throughout the country.

The ad is a powerful statement that speaks to the experience and instinct of the average voter. The exchange between Romney and the questioner was in the context of taxes/ spending cut . Mitt vowed never to raise revenue later that night in the debate.

On the other hand, it depends on what he is implying by saying that "corporations are people."

He is implying that if you over tax and over regulate and otherwise punish corporations you will also punish the people who work for the corporations. It truly is a simple concept. Even union workers seem to understand it with the way they characterize corporations as "The Man" and do everything they can possibly do to punish "The Man" with ever more ridiculous demands for higher wages and then whine when "The Man" closes up shop and puts them all out of work.

NorthstarDFL - your post is actually funny and totally supports Romney's contention(note the bold text):

Problem was he was a sleazy developer. Our association sued him for defects to our building. I sat in on his deposition. Our attorney needed a flow chart to track the nine LLC's he created or used in this development project. Our attorney said this guy is notorious for LLC creating in this business. But he never fails to have insurance. In construction business he needs insurance

Well the most sickening thing about Citizens United is that is simply feeds the politicians.......elimination would starve the beast!

Chicago skeptic

On the other hand, it depends on what he is implying by saying that "corporations are people."

He is implying that if you over tax and over regulate and otherwise punish corporations you will also punish the people who work for the corporations. It truly is a simple concept. Even union workers seem to understand it with the way they characterize corporations as "The Man" and do everything they can possibly do to punish "The Man" with ever more ridiculous demands for higher wages and then whine when "The Man" closes up shop and puts them all out of work

The "Man" is wrong to close up shop, poison our air and water, demand working for virtually nothing, and threaten our existence if we don't regulate him. no matter how se it ; the man is punishment

Chicago skeptic

No matter how see it ; the MAN" is punishment

So there it is Beverly, you agree with Romney: corporations are people, i.e. "The Man". Congratulations on finally seeing the light.

Chicago skeptic, I agree that Romney is defending the special tax status of corporations in the clip.

However, why limit this special tax status to corporations? Why not all groupings of people who employ people and generate revenue?

That follows directly from this argument and every other argument used to grant the special tax status.

HOWEVER, I am certain that Romney also agrees with granting corporations free speech rights on the basis of this same argument, so "corporations are people" is definitely not limited to taxation.

Chicago Skeptic,

Go back and view the ad and reread my post. There was this legal entity of a LLC he created and others participated in.

As Anna Molly said in her post "And they are people two. Or is that two people?"

I am not a lawyer but I do know there is a distinction between the "LLC person" and the builder as a single human being. He was liable as a single human being "Mr. B"when he signed his name as the president of the first the board of directors. He personally had exposure, not like his LLC entities.

My main point is the context of the exchange in the ad. It was about raising taxes/revenue . The questioner said" raise taxes on corporations. "Romney's point was no new taxes " because corporations are people."

Chicago, I do have a sense of humor and I needed it during the three year lawsuit I was involved in with this lawsuit.

But it sometimes wears thin when politicians like Romney absolutely refuse to include tax increases, closing loopholes, closing subsidies for business to help tackle the government deficit spending.

Are you a "only spending cuts " kind of guy?

cynic-2372067: But they get the same subsidies and tax breaks as a corporation.

Are you a "only spending cuts " kind of guy?

Frankly, yes. Our financial problems are not because we didn't collect enough revenue, they are because we spent more money than we collected. It is an addiction that ALL politicians seem to have and giving them more money to spend doesn't solve the problem. If and when we have a President and a congress that demonstrate just the slightest bit of fiscal responsibility I would consider raising more revenue to pay down our onerous debt.

Joe: You are correct. And for those of you that can't seem to get your walnut situated straight-in between your ears....

Mr. Romney is simply repeating that which is true and correct; A corporation is a legal person under the law. A corporation is made up of Human Beings, owning stock, running the machinery, and thus cannot be deprived of Life Liberty or Property. That is the law, as it is within the borders of these United States. And that has been the law since the 19th Century.

For those of whom have jumped to conclusions, and that includes Media, well....that is a very sad commentary on the intelligence and education of the American Public at large. You all have some catching up to do.

FR and her minions are such trolls, they rush to enter the first post and then disappear before they are called for their statements. They were instructed to scrutinize the debate and this is the best they could do? HA

no joe, no bo, nj

Gee, let me see. . .

Corporations can be as small as one doctor or lawyer, with one employee, or as large as, say, GE- which got its "no tax liability" status from whom?

Oh, right- Obama.

G.E. didn't pay any tax when Bush was in office either, or very little compared to their earnings. Avoiding taxes is nothing new for General Electric. In 2008 its effective tax rate was 5.3%; in 2007 it was 15%. The marginal U.S. corporate rate is 35%.

Their 2010 tax return is the largest of any corporation in the U.S. 24,000 pages if you print it out and weighs in at over 700 pounds!

The problem of corporations paying little or no tax on their "income" didn't just start with Obama, granted he nothing to curb it, but, the problem has been around for years!

Both parties own the lowering of effective corporate taxes and neither is doing anything about it!

Corporations were invented so that "people" would not be held accountable for wrongdoing by the corporation.

Ahh yes, the 'invention' of the corporation, I can see it now...

"What to do with this tax code...what to do?? Gadzooks Illingram, I believe I've invented the corporation!!"

aliveinsd

"Joe: You are correct. And for those of you that can't seem to get your walnut situated straight-in between your ears....

Mr. Romney is simply repeating that which is true and correct; A corporation is a legal person under the law"

It appears that you are the one who needs to your pea straight between your ears.

Corporations are not a legal person. What they are is a legal entity.

There is a big difference between a person and an entity.

How come people who lose sooooo bad to people who lost so bad like Romney did to McCain run again? I mean is that was this country is about now? Mediocrity?

"Well, hes a loser twice over and God only knows hell lose again but you know what"? Were going with him. What is that about? Why is that?

I guess when it comes down to it its like your spouse having an affair at work. She or he doesn't have much to chose from so her or his choice is limited. YET! She or he pics one anyway. Not because she or he went out looking or fell in love with her other soul mate etc.

But because he or she was there. Because he or she was there.

"Oh he or she's not sooo great but! He or she was there

Limited choice. Its the NEW great. -or- Forced choice. There Grrrr 8!

There has got to be a slogan in there somewhere; ]]

Cheers

CJ: Not in the eyes of the law. There is no difference.

Your "logic" makes no sense whatsover.

LOL

You must be new around here - NJNB doesn't possess a shred of logic OR common sense...

Only pure hatred of the President 24/7...

Hey, roots man- do a little reading. The government is people- in fact, of the people, by the people, for the people.

"We, the people, in order to form a more perfect union". . .

In a criminal court, the prosecution appears on behalf of the " people of the state of. . ."- or, sometimes, Commonwealth". . .

Remember?

So if the government is people then Grover Norquist wants
to commit murder because as he puts it, he wants to shrink government until it
is small enough to flush it down the toilet.

Gee, Dennis, what happened?

Vilifying the Koch brothers fail? Looking at the results of the last two elections, I guess,yeah, that failed.

Vilifying Eric Cantor fail? Well, given the language that revealed a deep-rooted anti- Semitism in the hearts of liberals, and the fact that it kind of drew a direct line to the anti- Israel policies of the Obama administration- yeah, that failed.

So, now you have a new villain?

Given the history, I'm thinking- yeah, that's gonna fail.

Hey NJNB, the government isn't a person.

Government is FOR the people, BY the people and REPRESENTS the people. But it is not a person. Just like corporations are not people.

It's really not that hard a concept to grasp.

No Joe,

Your total hatred is showing as I have never posted
anything about the Koch brothers, ever and I don’t write about religion.

You motor is running however you are going nowhere but
your temperature sure is at the boiling point.

No Joe = Epic Fail

Dennis, Columbus, Ohio

No Joe = Epic Fail

Always and forever!!! This so- called woman's Witches brew doesn't even work on Halloween. No Joe coming out of den is failed.

Not as stupid as yo uthink

I don't know for a fact, but rumor has it that she graduated cum laude from Screw U.

This is true:

Michele Bachmann - Lying about Her Law Degree

"After earning her law degree, she went on to the College of William and Mary to get an LLM in Tax Law"

Um ... there are TWO huge problems with that lie.

1. William and Mary does NOT now and never has offered an LL.M Degree in Tax Law.

2. The ONLY LL.M Program that William and Mary offer is for "Foreign Students" ... Non U.S. Lawyers ... William & Mary's ONLY LL.M program is titled: "LL.M in American Law." not Tax Law.

William & Mary only offers a FEW tax law classes and they do not offer a Degree in Tax Law.

So, either Michele Bachmann is NOT an American Citizen and went to William & Mary and got an LL.M because she was Foreign Student.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/01/25/938752/-Michele-BachmannLying-about-Her-Law-Degree

Or... she is really the crazy eyed alien most people wonder about!!!

NJNB, as CJ said above, you are mixing your metaphors.

Government is FOR the people. Government is WE the people. Neither says that government is a person. Nor does it say that it can perform as a person or be regarded as a single entity.

Likewise for corporations.

And you presume to accuse the left of big-brotherism.

Any you dare to accuse others of spinning...

The government IS the people. It is made up of its people and its policies are because people vote for the people running it. Why would you think the government aren't people? What is is some robot?

I predict this law degree will be the new birther argument..

Lots of fun..

The supreme court also says that corporations are people!

In his dissent in the 1938 case of Connecticut General Life Insurance Company v. Johnson, Justice Hugo Black wrote "in 1886, this Court in the case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, decided for the first time that the word 'person' in the amendment did in some instances include corporations. [...] The history of the amendment proves that the people were told that its purpose was to protect weak and helpless human beings and were not told that it was intended to remove corporations in any fashion from the control of state governments. [...] The language of the amendment itself does not support the theory that it was passed for the benefit of corporations."^[11]

Justice William O. Douglas wrote in 1949, "the Santa Clara case becomes one of the most momentous of all our decisions. [...] Corporations were now armed with constitutional prerogatives."^[12]

^{Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern_Pacific_Railroad}

Roots: You need to take some business law courses...hell, just open a book FGS.

Corporations are legal persons under the law. That has been the case for more than 100-years time in this country, among others.

Understand. Read it and weep. And if you cannot read, then weep anyway.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

LOL

You must be new around here -.......

New blood!... finally after 3 years of bad news, declining economy and newlyfounded 3rd world status!

Just what this Nation has craved after 3 years of blame and failure from the White House.

Sorry trico77, that's the tea people GOP way of doing things. Don't lump us in with you hateful people.

Anybody else notice when the tea people GOP are doing something like trico77 suggests, it's because their doing it themselves. And the bad thing about it is the stupid media buys into it. Or gets paid off. I'd bet the latter.

trico77

" HMM. I thought all the president needs to do is run on his policies, and record.

What happened to the civility that was asked for by the pres.

Dems. must attack and try to destroy. I think it is in their dna."

Uh, you do realize that the republicans do the very thing that you are accusing the Democrats of, don't you? I would venture to say that both sides sling just as much mud as the other.

Yes, Mo = it is the Republican double standard. It is ubiquitous throughout the RNC and Tea Party.

Looks like they are adamant about having class warfare.

Guess they just can't help themselves... (I think it is included in the RNC handbook.)

Mo - this obviously isn't an add from the Tea Party is it? It is a Democrat attack ad - trying to stick their noses into the Republican nomination process because they know that Romney has a much better grasp of the economy than President Obama. Do you honestly think they would spend the money on an ad like this if they weren't concerned?

that's the tea people GOP way of doing things. Don't lump us in with you hateful people.

so you want to be lumped in with the people that call anyone that doesn't agree with your views a terrorist?

sure don't want to hang with your crowd.

What is wrong with the dems letting more than just the people at the Iowa state fair hear exactly what Romney says?

More from the right...

Criticize the left when they don't do as the right thinks they should. Criticize when the left DOES what the right thinks they should.

Sigh...

Andie - nothing necessarily wrong with it. I'm just pointing out the obvious as to the motivation.

We're not concerned JC, we're amused. And the more ads we can put up showing just how stupid you tea people GOP are, the more laughs you nuts will get. Corporations are people, now that's funny. Keep them coming tea people GOP, everybody needs a good laugh it's healthy.

Mo - the DNC doesn't spend hundreds of thousands of dollars because they are "amused". They only spend money because they believe it is in their best interest to do so. If Santorum had made this same statement, the DNC would not be wasting their money.

The liberal hate machine is running on overdrive out of desperation. Just go to any thread that even MENTIONS Palin and see how ridiculous their hate driven rhetoric is. It's pathetic.

So true Crystal. In addition to that, the Left is no doubt completely relieved that Obama's epic fail last week is out of the spotlight - at least for awhile. Didn't hear a peep from the 'regulars' after the vote in Wisconsin, or a word of Obama after the economic meltdown now did we? Just hate hate hate....(oh the metaphores) Reagonomics, Wall Street, Rush, Tea Party, Millionaires, Repuplicans, The 'Rich' - anybody to hate, but our President for the last 3 years. They literally ran out of fingers to point.

Not as stupid as yo uthink

Yes, Mo = it is the Republican double standard. It is ubiquitous throughout the RNC and Tea Party.

Looks like they are adamant about having class warfare.

Guess they just can't help themselves... (I think it is included in the RNC handbook.)

The republicans HAVE to use class warfare. How else could 1 to 2% of the people that are actually voting their interests have any chance whatsoever? Without duping some of the more gullable people in our population into thinking they are going to be in that 1 to 2%, the GOP simply would not exist as a party.

As for corperations being people, that's more or less right. The vast majority in most corerations work like dogs for starving wages so 20 or so fat slobs can get richer than God. Liberals don't hate corperations, just those 20 or so fat slobs that make life barly livable for their empoyees (read: slaves). If those people had the moral fiber that business owners in the 40's and 50's had, we would still be a strong nation. Instead, they will sell their country out for pennies on the dollar, and complain about having to give some of it back to support the infrastructure they rely on. So those aren't the people of corperations. Their mosters; inhuman. People hate them, and rightly so.

TheCavalier

CLASSTIME!!

Their = (ownership) = their economy, their failed President, their tired old Liberal idealogy

They're = (they are) = they're redundantly insulting, they're spendhappy, they're through in 2012, they're Obama supporters

Look up "S corporation".

And please, do, continue to peeve that liberals are completely ignorant of the tax code and how the economy works.

As if the failures of this administration did not provide proof enough.

What is peeve no joe?

NJ I am by far the least ignorant of the tax code or how economics work. However, you are one of the biggest evaders I have ever seen. Also, I find your knowledge of the tax code and economics to very minimal.

Tell me NJ where'd you get your degree from and what's it in?

I don't know for a fact, but rumor has it that she graduated cum laude from Screw U.

Wow - corporations can be as small as one doctor? Really? Name one corporation that consists of only one or two employees.

i work for a corporation that is owned by 1(one) person.....

@Frank - Then that person is an idiot. He should have set it up as an LLC. The major advantage of a corporation is that you can publicly sell stock to raise capitol. With only one owner he is not taking advantage. Not to mention that he would have to pay taxes on the income made by the corporation and then again on the distribution back to the owner.

Don't go there again Lucious, if you knew no joe's history you'd know she's claimed to be everything from an economist to ruler of the world. She has a degree in everything according to her.

Corporation or company.. LOL. Lets not get those two confused but i have a feeling the people that hate corporations hate companies to, they probably all want us to work for the government, either that or trade our sheep and 24 eggs for a goat and corn.. I'm not sure which but without them this economy would be much much worse :D... Though it will feel like that in 5 more years.. If the dollar littlerally became worthless and we had no real currency corporations would be the foundation for building a new currency. They would create something so they could exchange goods and services without the federal government or Federal reserve bank. While it may fail 100 times before people in general would accept it it would be where a new currency got it start. God knows that would be a complete mess.

NJ, Republican economics has worked since it was introduced by Art Laffer under Ronald Regan, Keynesian Economics got us out of the Great Depression and would have got us out this Recession if the Republicans hadn't blocked all the job creation bills in Congress. But Ronny was one Hel of a Salesman.

HUH! WHAT!! How many trillions have been spent since the collapse? I think you've lost your mind on this one

Ted

i have a feeling the people that hate corporations hate companies to, they probably all want us to work for the government,......

Close but no cigar. The people that hate companies and corporations don't have a good enough criminal record to work for one. Either that, or so lazy that all they NEED is the Federal Government!

I wish I were exaggerating :(

Your right plistna. But tea people GOP like trico77 are trying to convince themselves that the sane observers are not watching. Their what I call wrong. And they know their going to pay for being wrong. They know their going to lose the congress, senate and white house in 2012. That's why they come on here and hyperventilate.

The most hilarious part is that if they do actually win back the presidency and senate, they are going to have to deal with a crappier economy because they wanted to win so bad. They would be in power for one term and then voted directly out. It is hard to change the economy within four years, especially if the four previous years they were waging war on the economy, just to win an election.

Cynic,

Just as nobody expected President Obama to fully recover the economy, nobody will expect the next President/Congress to fully recover the economy. What people are looking for is noticeable improvements that show we are on the right track. They aren't seeing it now (as evidenced by most of the recent poll numbers) and unless something happens pretty soon, it is unlikely by the time the election rolls around.

LOL... I don't think republican policies cause this by themselves. Take the head out of the sand, nearly every policy created this.

Democrats and REpublicans pushed for a balanced budget amendment during clinton, if we had that then we'd be fine now. Why didn't it go through? Because neither side really wanted to limit their power and that is the basis for why we are in the trouble we are in. Power hungry congress and white house.

JC, I don't think improvement in the economy is measured by poll numbers. If you look at the actual statistics, the economy has been improving since Obama was elected. It was improving at a slow, but steady rate until this year when the obstruction of everything that would have built on the stimulus kicked in. If congress had passed some of the jobs bills and other bills designed to continue to stimulate the economy, we would have maintained or improved the rate of growth. Since none of those bills were passed and nothing was done, the improvement rate has slowed considerably.

Heartlight,

I didn't say that the economy is measured by poll numbers, I said that the poll numbers show that the electorate does not perceive any significant improvement. Trying to convince people that unemployment is falling when everyone knows that people are just falling off the rolls because their benefits have run out, just isn't working. Telling people that the economy is improving when you are borrowing 1+ trillion dollars just to keep things going, doesn't give people confidence. When you try to pull the wool over people's eyes on one thing, they wonder if you are doing the same on everything else. Even if some numbers show promise, the President has not done an adequate job of conveying the information. What I don't think he understands is that blaming other people is anathema to the American psyche. Even if it's true, people don't want to hear it. They want results. Something this administration has not been able to demonstrate adequately.

If it's your doctor, dentist, or lawyer. . .

Yeah, they do.

If you want to get technical, yes, a doctor could be an S-corp. But thats not what were talking about and I'm sure you know that.

Don't give no joe any credit for knowing anything Paul. She's proved time and again she doesn't.

NJ for your information most Doctors, Lawyers and professionals form Personal Liability Corporations, which in essence is a flow through designed to shield their assets from a malpratice liability suit, however, most are taxed at the personal income tax rate. And I'm still waiting to the answer of my question, whered you get your degree and what's it in? Don't tell me Wharton or Harvard, what USC?

It's people who know the least that spout off like the graduated Magna Cum Luade and no nothing but what someone told them. You have done little or no research and have no empirical evidence to back up any of your so called economic or tax truths. So do some research and use reliable sources before you open your trap.

Lucious - Telling someone that they know nothing and using "no nothing" is just priceless.

JC my typing has always been poor, lol. Thank you for your assistance.

There is a grammatical quirk in the United Kingdom in the way they refer to corporations as in "Ford are planning to hire more people", or "Apple are about to announce improvements to the iPad." In the UK, company names are collective nouns because they denote an entity made up of many people. The phrasing sounds more "correct" to Americans if we simply attach a qualifier as in, "The people of Ford are planning to hire more people."

Grammar aside, the point is simple: Corporations are made up of people and are in fact the sum total of whatever output those people produce. Romney may have shorthanded it but he is absolutely correct. I understand the desperation you libs are feeling as regards the messiah's re-election but trying to tarnish Romney with this silliness is going to hurt you much more than him.

Chicago skeptic

Grammar aside, the point is simple: Corporations are made up of people and are in fact the sum total of whatever output those people produce

Emphatically speaking, those corporations Mitt speaks of do nothing to advance the American economy and real people.

Beverly,

Since Romney was referring to corporations in general, you are really saying that none of them do anything to advance the American economy? What foolishness. They ARE the American economy.

We've had enough of Fox (aka tea people GOP propaganda machine) talking points LEONA.

Leona, kool-aid is much more harmless than whatever you are drinking, if you are so nasty. Corporations take jobs overseas because they want to maximize profits: they can pay third-world wages to people while charging us top prices, and they take all the profit. At some point, maximizing profit turns to greed. Could you justify your accusation that "Liberals" hate JOB-creating Capitalists? What is a "capitalist"? and what is a "Liberal"? and are they opposite ends of a spectrum, or could there be some overlap there?

Let's stop attacking them with heavy regulations and higher taxes

Here is a better idea Leona:

Let us STOP facilitating their existence AND the business until they pay what they owe. No payment of tax, NO BENEFIT from the United States of America!

It is WAY. WAY past time for the big Corporations to pay up for taking advantage of our nation, government and society which has allowed them to generate their obscene profits. jmo

hey Kate, you are confusing being "nasty" with telling the truth. So, if the Corporations you hate so much are overseas, what do want them to do? Should they bring JOBS back here? How do you propose to entice them to do that? You ask..."What is a "capitalist"? and what is a "Liberal"?" Answer: Liberal= Govt. Free-Loaders & Capitalist= Job creating/Hard working/Tax Payer

"Let us STOP facilitating their existence AND the business until they pay what they owe. No payment of tax, NO BENEFIT from the United States of America!"

Not as stupid...: You should remind Obama of this , instead of worshipping him. His friend/Czar Jeff Immelt (GE) sent all his "green" light bulb jobs to China and BTW......GE paid NO taxes. So, who's telling LIES to the American people?

Not As Stupid - Corporations DO pay what they owe. The fact that they take advantage of the LEGAL deductions and credits that our government has given them is to be expected. I imagine you take every legal deduction you can when you do your taxes. Why would you expect them to do any differently?

If the government agreed to give every corporation a 10% deduction on their taxes if they brought back their jobs from overseas, would you be for it? Or, would you object to the loophole?

Leona, you talk about fewer regulations for business. Have you seen pictures of Shanghai and Beijing lately? You want that kind of air pollution here? You want less safe drinking water? You want longer hours and lower pay for workers? You want health care to be even less than the pittance we now have?

Those are only a few of the things that regulation gets you. If corporations are solely interested in their profits, that's their choice. But there is more to life than just money. Literally.

The regulations and taxes won't change anything. If the minimum wage is eliminated and people will work for nothing, they will bring the jobs back.

Lets buy the argument that corporations are bad because they send jobs overseas, then make it illegal. No more inports no more sending jobs overseas. American coportations have to employ everyone within the US. They can export all they want but no more imports. It'll be great for the economy! Yeah! Isolationists unite!

Does anyone need to be walked through why this would totally ruin the us?

"Leona, you talk about fewer regulations for business. Have you seen pictures of Shanghai and Beijing lately? You want that kind of air pollution here? You want less safe drinking water? You want longer hours and lower pay for workers?"

No, I don't but there has to be a balance between making this country "business friendly" and taxing/regulating beyond what companies are willing to sustain. The Obama admin. wants business to hire but then increases all the restraints on them to do so. On top of that, Obama demonizes businesses for media consumption to score political points.

Leona --

You are failing to realize multi-nationals go overseas for growth. If you were to take away all taxes, streamline regulations, they will still expand globally. Regulations are not just tied to any one party. And please look who signed the bill regarding light bulbs. Regardless, light bulbs should be the least of your worries.

So you object to the unions buying democrats? Especially the Big O? Good for you!

What do you think of limiting ALL campaign contributions from ANY entity to below $2,000? Unions, Corporations, Soros, the Koch Brothers, etc. Why should the number of repetitions of a campaign ad (which costs money) decide elections. Say it one time. Print it on a flyer (at government expense) and distribute it. Give the little guy a chance to run for office, not just the Rich and the preselected by monied interests?

I'm all for it. TV time is valuable. I think they should shorten the campaign season to 9 months and the incumbent President should not be allowed to campaign except the last three months for a rebuttal only. His or her record should speak for itself.

That would limit Gorge Soros ( Socialist Billionaire) from donating millions to Obama and other Liberal causes. The " Messiah " Obama wont like that.

George Bush would have been out the door after his first term if we'd had Doug Ponders system in place at that time. Think of all the young men and women who would still be with us today had that happened.

I wonder what the "Advertising Agency Lobbyists" think of the idea of limiting campaign contributions? For that matter, the media in general. Do you think the NY Times, MSNBC, Fox News, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, and every local paper in the country are going to get behind the idea when it will reduce their revenues?

That would also limit the Koch brothers, citizens united, Karl Rove and other anonymous donors (capitalist crooks) from donating millions to the tea people GOP also LEONA.

Are you saying that the American public cannot make up their own mind and as such corporations and advertising for the president is whatgets them elected?

If so, maybe it's time the emphasis should be put on americans actually obtaining facts and thinking for themselves beforevoting?

Maybe we should force some sort of test to make sure the voter has competancy in the what the candidate stand for befoer they vote, LOL.

The problem in the voting process has nothing to do with money, it has to do with rather or not the person is informed. Thatrequies far more than sound bites on TV. Maybe instead of even allowing any ads or yard signs what so ever we should suspend the first amendment and ban all ads for political office. Then people would have to learn on their own?

I imagine people vote about 80% of the time based on party affiliation. Heck it has to be bigger than that, most people dont even know who their legislative body is. Push the button for all Democrat or all Republican. Yeah great idea..

If the issue is that corps can buy TV space and influence people then drop the ads altogether. You do know that corps support both sides..

Mo - I imagine it would also limit the unions, Oprah, Bill Gates, etc. We all know that big money comes from everywhere, on both sides of the aisle. Picking out examples from one side or the other is pointless. It is just like robbers breaking into a safe. Over the years they have made safes harder and harder to break into, but the robbers still find a way. Same is true with politics. Those who want to exert power and influence will find some method of doing so. Just look at McCain Feingold. Does it look like it was effective to you? Seems to me we have more money than ever in politics.

Charlie, i am a liberal and agree with you 100%. how do we get all these haters and nay sayers from both sides to insist their congressmen and congresswomen purpose and pass legislation that imposes these guide lines and make them an admentment? this would definately work much better than the ideas i have seen so far. we would see real contituent representation then.

No..legally speaking..."corporations are an entity unto themselves".....basic first year law.

stubby, your right, they can exercise rights the same as people, but they are not people.

Nobody is trying to take down the corporations. I for one, do not think that corporations should be taxed at all. That way they would stay in the U.S. and spend that money on research and investment in new plants & tools (and therefore jobs). I do have to tell you though, that I think for public corporations, the top managements renumeration should be a multiple of the average salary of the average worker. That way if the CEO and top management want to make more money it will be in their interest to raise the salaries of the average employee.

Charlie,

If by "public corporations" you mean utility companies, etc. then that would be a reasonable position. If, on the other hand, you mean publicly traded corporations I would have to disagree. The value of a corporate executive is purely an internal matter. The stockholders depend on these people to make decisions that will result in a gain on their investment. Would you rather pay an executive 1 million to run a multi-billion dollar company with a .10 per share return, or 25 million and a .25 per share return. It actually takes skills to effectively run large, multi-national corporations. And people (retirees, 401K managers, private investment firms, capital management companies, etc.) who are counting on the returns expect competent people to make good decisions on their behalf. If they don't, it is unlikely they will continue to have a job. Either that, or the value of the stock will plummet. The market actually does work.

Hey there is a great idea in there somewhere..

If you're american corporation has all of it's employees based within the US AND you do not purchase goods or services that exceed X amount from overseas (to prevent scams like buying all the parts to build your new cars from foreign manufacturers yet not prevent the purchase of things that cannot be found in the US) , your tax rate is zero. That would entice people to not only stay and be in america for the tax break but also to move certain otherwise unprofitable goods and services companies into america. It might cost more for that goodor service but when taxes are taken into account it is less. While I'm personally against the government getting involved that might actually provide an interesting twist to keeping jobs here.

charlie, you are spot on with the middle of the road ideas. this is the rhetoric we need in congress. most liberals realize if you sink the corporation you also drown as a worker. it is so sad to see less posts from the conservative side like yours and less posts from the liberal side that are not caught up in the raise taxes rhetoric but instead offering solutions that work. personally i feel if we close the deductions for all we surely will be able to lower the actual tax rates as well. once we get a handle on this debt train wreck we could surely lower them further.

Conservatives have been trying for years to make liberals embarassed to be liberals. Worked for a while. I assume it was a stategy devised by good ol' Karl Rove. Years ago being a conservative was an embarassment because it labelled you as a heartless, hypocritical, greedy, self-absorbed, the world revolves around me type person. So, if you want to persist in labelling I could really give a flying you-know-what... Bottom line: what I want, what I feel America deserves, is a fair deal for all. As part of the "middle class" I'm fed up with the wealthy sitting in their ivory tower and looking down on all the worker bees below carrying the tax burden on their backs. As far as corporations providing jobs because of their outrageous tax breaks, I haven't seen it. When are they going to start hiring? When they know the Tea Party has secured their tax breaks and loopholes? If that doesn't happen, they'll just refuse to hire? Come on you conservatives, you know what's what and you know corporations are not "people". As far as the money corporations make, Romney knows better than most, that the money is put in the pockets of the top echelon executives of the company. Not the worker bees.

Conservatives have been trying for years to make liberals embarassed to be liberals. Worked for a while

*stands & applauds*

I'm a PROUD kool-aide drinking tree hugging liberal who refuses to allow the 'haves' destroy this country!

If liberals keep trying to destroy the haves, we will all be have nots.

Hey badguy if you owned a business that was struggling to compete with your competition and realized you were way overstaffed would you keep those people on anyways? So lets see which is better a company that goes bankrupt or a company that makes good profits?

Eliminate the bad and keep the good, eliminate all and move over seas. Thats not patriotic

farmer760 - You're absolutely right. Layoffs are needed at times....but....where does a guy whose skilled in layoffs get off saying he's skilled a creating jobs. The two are opposites. ANYONE can wreck the lives of workers....Someone special is needed to improve their lives. It may not be Obama. But it surely isn't Romeny!

Maybe Badguy because he understands and knows why the companies pickep up and left. Maybe because he has been in the real world and not just a community oraganizer, educator or a politician all his life

He is not a destroyer of companies, he is a liberator of them. Sound faniliar?

Farmer - Romney may very well have known why corporations left the USA...but...that was not his concern. His concern was HELPING them to divest of troubled companies (so, possibly THEY COULD move overseas). Assuming he DOES know the reasons why corporations left, I don't think he'd be willing or smart to tell the American people the truth. If he were to say that, under a Romney administration, they had better be prepared to work for 50 cents/hour and not drink the water out of their lakes and streams, in order to bring unemployment down to 0%, I don't think he'd be very popular.

farmer, I am not against Corporations that act like responsible "citizens", the ones that limit their pollution as much as possible and care about the county's welfare the same as you and I do. However, I am against any "citizen" that takes advantage of others and abuses their rights.

I think must of us consider ourselves good citizens in the none cyber world, we respect the rights of others and try not to take advantage of our fellow citizens. You have good corporations just like you have good people.

Here are some facts. Corp profits are at record highs. The Gap between the rich and everyone else continues to grow. GOP says so what. GOP says greed is good. All empires collapse as a result of wars and shrinking middle class. Corp are not people, they are made up of people. Money is not speech, per elementary vocabulary.

When the corporations layed off millions of workers to move factories to Mexico and China and "dropped" the unemployed on the government and taxpayers to take care of, I lost all sympathy or love of big corporations. The government should restrict their import capability and raise taxes on their operations. A cap should be placed on CEO pay. Anything more than 10 times the lowest paid worker is theft from the owners of the companies, the stock holders. If they don't comply they should be arrested and thrown in prison as the felons they are.

Lucious you are correct but there are bad people in every group and how do you know some of these people are that bad. We only hear about all the negative things businesses do anymore and never hear about the good things they do. This administration has taken class warfare to the next level and it is sad to see how it has divided this country. This country needs a uniter again to get us back on track not some one that tells the other side "to go to the back of the bus" or a party that demonizes a group like the TEA party buy calling them names like tea baggers or astroturf. If you disagree then do it in a civil way and with facts not just snappy one liners and slogans.

Ok badguy answer this why did they pick up and leave this country? Badguy have you tried running a business here lately? I have and it is getting ridiculous the amount of red tape you have to go thru to get anything done and the amount of paperwork that I have to do anymore because some dumb a$$ politician thought it would be a good idea to pass a new regulation that one o his little pet donor groups pushed on him. I love my country but things are getting out of control

farmer, trust me I know about the good they do, but I also know that some take advantage of loopholes for reasons other than the congressional intent of the tax code. The President is doing nothing but trying to draw attention to the abusers.

I bet your tax rate is around 25%, I know mine is even with the use of itemized deductions you pay a lot more taxes per capita than most corporations. Trust me I know.

farmer - The Tea Party did themselves in. They ranted and raved about not being required to pay their fair share of taxes. They ranted and raved about how great the upper classes were and how bad the lower classes were. They ranted and raved that Social Security and Medicare should be eliminated. They ranted and raved that Blacks and Hispanics were leeches and needed to be contained. They ranted and raved that the Rich and Corporations should not pay higher taxes. Hey.....They have a sympathetic following of a minority of Americans. This will not help them in the 2012 elections.

what world are you living in? You have any proof of what u just said. They stand for lowering our deficits, lowering government control of our lives and keeping tax rates from going up anymore. We are an overtaxed nation and it has to stop. Figure out what you pay in taxes total between federal, state, local, gas, utilities, air travel, beer, cigarettes, property, and I am sure I missed some. Unless you are part of the fifty percent that pays no federal income tax

farmer - I worked the Chinese market for 10 years. I KNOW their system. In the early 80's, they were truly a 3rd world country. No technology. Very little engineering talent. The management decided they needed an infusion of technoloy from the West. They lured American Corporations with very cheap labor, no environmental rules and low taxes. 50 cent/hour wages trumps ANY tax breaks the Republicans or Democrats could give corporations to stay in the USA. Unless American workers were willing to work for 50 cents an hour AND the corporations could dump their garbage in the streets, lakes and rivers, unrestricted by government, there was NO WAY the corporations were going to keep manufacturing in the United States.

Don't blame the workers in the USA for American Corporations leaving us "high and dry". They got a deal "they couldn't refuse". Greed overcomes all obstacles. The problem is: The American government didn't have to let them move and re-import their goods back into the United States. It could have put trade restrictions in....but it didn't. So...Yes the American government is responsible. But, not in the way you suggest. We should have locked the borders to goods manufactured overseas. We didn't. The wealth production and the taxes NOW go to the Communist Chinese government and we're near bankruptcy. 1% of our population now has more wealth than the bottom 90%. The top 400 rich people have more wealth than the bottom 50%. That just didn't happen overnight. It took the efforts of our biggest institutions, the Corporations and federal government complicity to "sell out" the American public.

wow so you are an isolationist badguy. Tell me what happens when we pass tariffs on another country's goods that they are bringing here? They pass tariffs on our products is what happens. So you want to destroy the jobs of the people that work for the companies that export goods from this country now? Nearly 40 percent of what I produce gets sent overseas because we have an abundance here and are the most efficient producers in the world. So you want to destroy my livelyhood and the lively hood of millions of other americans. Tell me what will happen to prices of goods once you put the tariffs on them? People will pay even more for a pair of jeans, a tv, a car, almost everything they consume. Just like this whole fallacy of minimum wage and how it helps the poor. I watched minimum wage go up here a couple of years ago here in CA. Guess what happened the price of everything went up. The producer takes the extra cost plus whatever his percentage of markup is on that extra expense and tacks it on to the selling price. He sells it to a distributor who then does the same thing. Distributor sells to the retailer and he does the same thing. So in all actuallity that minimum wage increase actually probably hurt the person in the long run. The same thing will happen if we become isolationist and put tariffs on goods. Tell me what cost less at the store anymore than what it did ten years ago, besides technological goods?

It is called a "contraction" gingerrob.

well gopisextinct do not worry about me I own the company I work for. So I do not need to be lectured by you and yes their profits are up, thanks to there oversees markets in developing countries. I do not fall for their sob story. Tell me why do these corporations move out of the country? Can not just be wages?

They're = they are (contraction)

Their = possessive (belonging to)

There = denoting position

Tell me why they didn't move out of the country during the period of saaaaaay,.....1946 through 1990.

Grease, taxes are a cost of doing business according to the tax code and as such Corporations have every right to factor taxes in the price they sale their products and services; however, if a corporation pays no taxes, and they know their tax burden long before filing, then they should also factor in the tax savings into price of goods and services.

Agreed if you lower corporate taxes cost of goods either will go down or they will hire more people putting more money back into the economy

GREASEMUNKAY

Agreed if you lower corporate taxes cost of goods either will go down or they will hire more people putting more money back into the economy

Okay, MUNKAY

Why didn't it work under the Bushes and Reagan?

But they are not people. Its like saying a bolt is a airplane. No bolts make up airplanes, but they are not airplanes.

The guy m'sade millions by coaching CEO's on how to downsize their troubled firms (and protect themselves with "generous" bailout packages). And HE is gonna solve our unemployment problems?