Corporate Greed

Crockett

Crockett

5,000+ Posts
I think really think that America needs its workers, consumers and government to organize stand up to insatiable corporate greed. In many small towns and big cities across America corporations who are doing quite well, from sports franchises to Wal-Mart to companies run by billionaire Harold Simmons have and seek advantages of using public money to finance construction of their businesses and seek and obtain exemptions from the property taxes most of us have to pay.

This anti-Wal-Mart rant sums up and exaggerates what many of us fear from concentration of wealth and political power in fewer and fewer hands. The Link

Many in this country used to laugh about the "trickle down" effect. As the rich and corporations became richer it would trickle down with good jobs with health care benefits, spending in the American economy and revenues for state and local government. Sadly enough, it seems like a lot of corporations are trying to stop the leaks.
 
Greed is part of human nature. The problem isn't so much corporate greed as it is the fact the rule of law has been destroyed over the past few decades and corporations have accumulated enormous political power. Many of the regulatory agencies have literally been captured by corporations (the banks basically control Treasury, and the SEC; Monsanto, ADM, etc. the Department of Agriculture) and Congress relies on corporate contributions for fundraising.

Greed alone doesn't pose a threat to the general public, but when the rule of law is overturned, suddenly that greed yields serious repercussions to society.
 
Frankly, if a business follows the law and makes a lot of money, more power to the them. My problem is with businesses that make a lot of money in the private economy with one hand while they ask for government handouts (could be cash payments, special tax breaks, liability protections, regulatory waivers not available to other businesses, etc.) with the other hand.

As for Wal-Mart, I'm not a big fan of the company and really haven't been since Sam Walton stopped running it. I have no doubt that they're destroying small businesses especially in smaller communities as well as some not-so-small businesses. I'm also confident that other than the food they sell, probably virtually everything sold in Wal-Mart was made overseas and probably by borderline slave labor.

However, Wal-Mart ultimately isn't doing anything the consumer isn't letting it do. Nobody has to shop there. It's hard to fault them for selling items the public wants to buy but doing it cheaper than anyone else.
 
Steveo?
"Congress relies on corporate contributions for fundraising.

Thanks to the single-most disastrous, short-sighted, and harmful decision the Supreme Court has ever upheld""

Ever heard of UNIONS?
Think they give any money to Pols?

think unions runs any political ads in support of pols?

edit to add this WSJ piece from oct 2010 that may give you Stevoe a bigger picture idea.
The Link
The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees is now the biggest outside spender of the 2010 elections, thanks to an 11th-hour effort to boost Democrats that has vaulted the public-sector union ahead of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the AFL-CIO and a flock of new Republican groups in campaign spending.""



Oh yea that SCOTUS ruling allowing evil corps to give money and ads sure changed the election landscape.
 
No one has to shop a Wal-Mart, but when you pay your federal taxes realize you are subsidizing through Medicaid their employee health costs, that if they open a distribution center of new facility in your town they are seeking rebates on local sales tax revenues. Even shoppers who don't get near the place subsidize 'em.
 
How silly to act like ONLY Wal mart gets any tax breaks for locating in a city.

shouldn't people like a company that provides so many things at prices the poor can afford?
There are many more people that benefit from the lowe prices that there are employees.
IIRC Walmart's wages are competitive with most other retailers.
 
Of course Wal-Mart isn't the only corporation trying to suck every bit of milk it can from the government teat. The company is merely the biggest organization sucking so hard on so many government teats.

Like pretty much every one else, Wal-Mart pays the least pay and benefits they can to get a competent productive workforce and they coach them to tremendous productivity for benefit, not so much to workers but to the stockholders and executives. Is rewarding the owners more important than paying their fare share of school taxes, health care costs and other burdens of local government? I honestly don't blame Wal-Mart. Why they hell shouldn't they negotiate hard to get the best deal they can. But what's so dishonorable about workers, local governments, etc. banding together to get some power in the deal instead of having to bend over and get screwed in every interaction? Why is the income of the folks getting rich in Wal-Mart worthy of more favorable tax treatment than the guy in the store busting his *** 40 hours a week?
 
so corporate greed for keeping/returning profits to investors = bad and greedy
government greed for other peopled money that they had no hand in earning,and redistributing to those who didn't earn it after taking their 70 cents on the dollar of course = economic justice.

Socialism cannot exist without capitalism and profit.
 
Corporate greed is not especially evil, but neither should it be honored as virtue above reproach. It's powerful and there needs to be countervailing forces.

Government taking money from people who legitimately earning it and redistributing it to people who make no effort gets no defense from me, but I'd really like to see people who work hard for their money receive decent compensation packages including health care benefits if the organization they work for makes enough profit to provide them.
 
The danger lies in seeing every situation as a "good guy" vs. "bad guy" exchange. Has Wal-Mart done a lot that is wonderful for America and do a lot of people deserve to get rich from the effort? No question Yes. Should they get a better deal on property taxes than the 70 year old guy gathering carts on the lot to supplement his retirement income? Am I cruel to say "No"?

Jerry Jones is a gifted businessman and entreprennuer who has a lot of wealth because he's done creative things to acquire that wealth. Does that mean that if I buy a hamburger in Arlington I should be glad he gets a piece of the tax revenue?
 
Walmart offers their employees insurance. They have to pay for it but it is offered and while it is high priced, they offer it. They also offer a Wal-Mart card that is basically 10% off everything in the store. They offere a number of other benefits too that you don't read about in the media. Wonder why?
 
Crock, SH, et al,

You guys are right that Wal Mart pays its employees crap and that overall, they're bad for a local community.

However, you guys aren't proposing a solution. What are we supposed to do about a company like Wal Mart? They aren't breaking the law. They're just selling stuff for cheap and paying a wage that people are willing to work for (fairly or not) primarily because the government enables it.

What is the answer?
 
Crckett- I understand what you are saying, but do not agree with your position. if you really look at independent studies on the economic value of having a WalMart/Sams in your community, it is an overwhelming positive to the community as a whole from a finacial standpoint. The tax incentives used to lure the companies do not go on for ever but it is a competitive world. You really need to look at life 15 years after a decision to have a WalMart and compare the relative position of the 2 communities that were vying for it. The ones that got it are doing so much better than the other in almost all cases.

The absolute biggest advantage is outside tax revenue. Local stores recycle local dollars. There can be no growth. Walmart/sams attract people from outside communities to shop there. Those outside dollars are what grow communities. No city can survive without growing and no city can grow without attracting revenue from outside of their borders. In city speak it is refrred to as the "death spiral" for cities that rely exclusive on local revenue.

Dell computer (just as an example) is worth more to Austin/Texas than a thousand local businesses because it brings in outside revenue to Texas. Texas gets tax revenue from a person living in Lima, Peru.

Someone mentione Jerry Jones and the stadium. What does the cooton bowl area look like now versus what it would have looked like if Jerry World were there? It was the biggest single screw up for the Dallas council from a financial position they ever made.

The beauty of these types of tax deals is that you are only giving up a portion of taxes that yu would have never had in the first place. It doesn not reduce current tax revenue one penny. But all of the ancillary services all grow so total tax revenue goes up.
 
Alot of people that are employed by Walmart are having a hard time finding any work, in good times or bad. Thus keeping them off the unemployement roles, and paying into SS and some actually might have to pay taxes at the end of the year, not many but some!!!!
 
Corporations have always been a part of politics but I believe we are at the beginnings of a slow but huge escalation of that ability to influence. And unfortunately most of the incremental adjustments to law, policy and enforcement capabilities will be unappreciated by most of us until after the damage is done, a la banking reform and the resulting financial implosion.

I don't think that "single-most disastrous" tag is too extreme. I think it is just about right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top