Following on

from the teflon debate soso that I don't hijack that thread.

Why do we insist on calling companies like DuPont, Monsanto, et. al, multinationals??

To my way of thinking they are transnationals. They ave themselves firmly planted in
one country but spread their tentacles all over the world.

For those planted in the good old USA this is mostly because they began life there. However,
over the years the size and influence of these companies has enabled them to gain an unhealthy
level of legal and political protection.This means that people and countries outside the States
have even less chance of redress for any problems than do the residents of the USA.

A particular case in point, and this doesn't involve the USA, is James Hardie. Remember how it
shifted itself to Netherlands?? I am cynical enough to believe that it saw the looming asbestos
cases and moved there to avoid its obligations here.

I think it is high time that sovereign states had the guts to tackle these companies head on with
countervailing legislation or direct action. A better way, of course, would be through negotiated
treaties and agreements.

I look forward to the day of Saint Never.

Arthur

Sounds like you are suggesting something akin to an extradition treaty. No problem there to my mind. If a company has reaped huge financial rewards it should be accountable too.

Only problem I have is that it is the lawyers who reap the main benefits. I think you are right on the money with Hardie's moving offshore.

Regards
Paul

Hear hear. The multi/transnationals behave like selfish psychopathic spoilt children the very moment that their veneer of corporate respectability is seen through.
As for doing something about it I think the recent G20 had a fix for international tax avoidance on the agenda.
But for people who can't wait that long...What about Jonathan Moylan who so brilliantly fooled the media into thinking that ANZ had dropped Whitehaven Coal ? Then ASIC comes down on him like a tonne of bricks although they have been conspicuously weak against corporations. It seems that the smaller you are the more likely you will be punished which is the reverse of natural justice.

A problem is that we tend to treat companies as if they are people instead of looking at the people in those companies who are making the decisions that affect us and most of the world. I know this is the idea of company law but someone or some group of someones make these decisions and decide what the company ethos and mission statement is. If a company makes a decision that in the case of an individual making it would end up as a prison sentence then, the directors should face prison or, at the least, the company should be taken out of circulation for the equivalent of a jail sentence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toymaker Len

Hear hear. The multi/transnationals behave like selfish psychopathic spoilt children the very moment that their veneer of corporate respectability is seen through.
As for doing something about it I think the recent G20 had a fix for international tax avoidance on the agenda.
But for people who can't wait that long...What about Jonathan Moylan who so brilliantly fooled the media into thinking that ANZ had dropped Whitehaven Coal ? Then ASIC comes down on him like a tonne of bricks although they have been conspicuously weak against corporations. It seems that the smaller you are the more likely you will be punished which is the reverse of natural justice.

---

Len

The fact is that the law is unreachable for the majority of ordinary income earners. This leads to the conclusion that the law is only for the rich. The large companies can afford to take a legal path that will force their opponents to drop off. A bit like an industrial game of poker. He who bluffs for longest and has the deepest pockets has the best chance of winning.

Regards
Paul

I just noticed that the O'Farrell government has moved to rename 'coal seam gas' as 'liquid natural gas from coal seams'.
Sadly this will fool a large number of people.
They are also changing planning law so that local communities and councils have less say in heritage and environment matters.
So roll on big business being served by big government being watched by the ignorant, disempowered, television doped, peasants of the twenty-first century.

Now back to woodwork.

I knew he'd start behaving like this, I just didn't think it would be so soon.:C