uncle ken makes an error

Well it sounds like I am a biblical figure: Uncle Ken 12:19:14. I’ll stand by the first statement. In the second statement, in the first sentence I seemingly deny the first statement, but in the second sentence I deny the first sentence (trying to goad you into an argument about whether there is such a thing as evil, one of those muddy philosophical discussions which are as useful as debating the number of angels dancing on a pin, but have a certain logic for the sake of logic charm). And then in the third sentence I reaffirm the first statement. But oops I don’t, I misspoke, I meant to use the word amoral, but instead I used immoral. The corrected last sentence should read: I am really just saying that it is amoral. My error.

But then I see that you persist in confusing big business with corporations. A corporation can consist of one person. A big business can be as big as Walmart and yet not be a corporation. I think it is now a corporation, but let me look at the wiki.

Ah it is more complicated than I thought. Walmart is a corporation, but it is also a family-owned business, which I assume means that the family owns a majority of the stock, which means they have total control of what happens. So how does that effect my now shaky theory of how corporations are more amoral than businesses because they lack the milk of human kindness?

What if the Walmart family finds Jesus, and the Jesus they find is one of those eye of the needle Jesuses, so they raise the wages of their workers, and quit doing all those crooked shenanigans, like paying bribes, that we all know those big corps do. This causes Al Walton, the black sheep of the family to quit in disgust and form up Al’s Hedge Fund Corp, whose motto is Lie, Cheat, and Steal, and he makes piles of money. When it comes time for you to invest your nest egg, where are you going to put it?

Well it’s all got kind of confusing to me because it is hard to draw a line between corporations and non-corporate businesses, like it’s hard to draw a line between businessmen and politicians. My argument that corps are worse than moms and pops because mom and pop might be good people but the ceo inherently could never be good, was weak to begin with. I was just responding to your daughter’s comment that it would be better to let the corps run America than the politicians which still seems not very well thought out to me.

In your next to the last paragraph you seem to be saying that corporations are the method that can pull the poor out of poverty, which makes one wonder why they haven’t. You have to have money to get in the game, and the poor, by definition don’t have money.

And in your last paragraph you ask me which laws I would like governing corps. Well I haven’t got all day. How about Dodd-Frank, and any law prohibiting a politician to raise an unlimited amount of money.