So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

[PhilT]

http://www.brasschecktv.com/videos/g...r-company.html

[Snowhog]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

The DOJ is enforcing its own wild interpretation of foreign laws, at gunpoint, on American companies and workers. Why? To what end?

Where does this go?

Where does it end?

Thomas Jefferson: "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

Does the U.S. Government fear it's people (any more), or have we reached the point (or gone way past it) where the People now fear it's Government? Sadly, I feel that the latter is more likely to be true.

As a Nation, we (the People) have gotten to complacent as to the roles our Government has taken - that we as a People have permitted it to take - unto its self.

I lived to see the DOJ, the most powerful legal arm in the United States, through it's brazen actions, result in a sitting United States Senator, the most senior and powerful Republican in the U.S. Senate and third in succession to the Presidency, be unseated in his reelection attempt. The DOJ works for the Executive Branch - the Office of the President. That much power is a very dangerous thing - to the People. The potential for misuse of power increases with the amount of power one wields.

[GreyGeek]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

My view is that the DOJ is, for some reason, or for someone, trying to put Gibson out of business. I am copying the content of Gibson's notice of the raid here because I believe that attempts will be made to censure Gibson.

http://www.gibson.com/absolutenm/tem...=1340&zoneid=6

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Gov’t says wood is illegal if U.S. workers produce it
Thursday, August 25, 2011
The Justice department bullies Gibson without filing charges

The Federal Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. has suggested that the use of wood from India that is not finished by Indian workers is illegal, not because of U.S. law, but because it is the Justice Department’s interpretation of a law in India. (If the same wood from the same tree was finished by Indian workers, the material would be legal.) This action was taken without the support and consent of the government in India.

On August 24, 2011, around 8:45 a.m. CDT, agents for the federal government executed four search warrants on Gibson’s facilities in Nashville and Memphis and seized several pallets of wood, electronic files and guitars. Gibson had to cease its manufacturing operations and send workers home for the day, while armed agents executed the search warrants. Gibson has fully cooperated with the execution of the search warrants.

• Raid shut down Gibson factories and cost company money
This is the second time that federal agents have raided Gibson facilities and disrupted production – this time causing lost productivity and sales.

• Wood seized was Forest Stewardship Council Controlled
The wood the Government seized on August 24 is from a Forest Stewardship Council certified supplier and is FSC Controlled, meaning that the wood complies with the standards of the Forest Stewardship Council, which is an industry-recognized and independent, not-for-profit organization established to promote responsible management of the world’s forests. FSC Controlled Wood standards require, among other things, that the wood not be illegally harvested and not be harvested in violation of traditional and civil rights. See www.fsc.org for more information. Gibson has a long history of supporting sustainable and responsible sources of wood and has worked diligently with entities such as the Rainforest Alliance and Greenpeace to secure FSC certified supplies. The wood seized on August 24 satisfied FSC standards.

• Nearly two years later, no charges have been filed
In 2009, more than a dozen agents with automatic weapons invaded the Gibson factory in Nashville. The Government seized guitars and a substantial amount of ebony fingerboard blanks from Madagascar. To date, 1 year and 9 months later, criminal charges have NOT been filed, yet the Government still holds Gibson’s property. Gibson has obtained sworn statements and documents from the Madagascar government and these materials, which have been filed in federal court, show that the wood seized in 2009 was legally exported under Madagascar law and that no law has been violated. Gibson is attempting to have its property returned in a civil proceeding that is pending in federal court.

The Justice Department has asked the judge to stop the court case indefinitely.

• Information sought in raid was already made available
Since 2009, Gibson has fully cooperated with the Government’s investigation of wood and has provided substantial documentation regarding Gibson’s wood-buying activities over the years. Yet, the Federal Government raided Gibson’s facilities on August 24, 2011, without warning or communication of any kind. Had the Government simply communicated with Gibson, Gibson would have cooperated without having to stop its production and send workers home.

• Not about illegal logging, not about conservation, not about the environment
The U.S. Lacey Act does not directly address conservation issues but is about obeying all laws of the countries from which wood products are procured. This law reads that you are guilty if you did not observe a law even though you had no knowledge of that law in a foreign country. The U.S. Lacey Act is only applicable when a foreign law has been violated.

• Gibson is innocent and will fight to protect its rights
Gibson has complied with foreign laws and believes it is innocent of ANY wrong doing. We will fight aggressively to prove our innocence.

For more information, please contact:
Henry E. Juszkiewicz
c/o Gibson Guitar Corp.
309 Plus Park Blvd.
Nashville, TN 37217
(615) 871-4500 Extension 2405
www.gibson.com

About Gibson Guitar:

Gibson is known worldwide for producing classic models in every major style of fretted instrument, including acoustic and electric guitars, mandolins, and banjos. The Gibson Les Paul guitar is the best-selling guitar of all time and bears the name of the late, great Les Paul. Gibson’s line of Robot guitars, including the revolutionary new Firebird X, represents the biggest advances in electric guitar design in over 70 years. The Gibson Foundation is the philanthropic arm of the Gibson Guitar Corp., and dedicates its time and services to making the place a better world for children through its support of music, education, health and human services. Founded in 1894 in Kalamazoo, Michigan and headquartered in Nashville since 1984, Gibson Guitar Corp.’s family of brands now includes Epiphone, Dobro, Kramer, Steinberger, Tobias, Echoplex, Electar, Flatiron, Slingerland, Valley Arts, Maestro, Oberheim, Baldwin, Sunshine Piano, Take Anywhere Technology, J&C Fischer, Chickering, Hamilton, and Wurlitzer.

Visit Gibson’s website at www.gibson.com.

For breaking Gibson News: Press RSS Feed.

Follow Gibson on Twitter at www.twitter.com/gibsonguitar and Facebook at www.facebook.com/gibsonguitar.

Gibson, 1-800-4GIBSON (1-800-444-2766) or www.gibson.com

Contacts:
Jeremy Singer / Gibson UK, 020 7167 2144 / Jeremy.Singer@Gibson.com
Chris O’Hearn / Gibson Australia 61 2 9929 2257 / ThrillHillEnt@BigPond.com

The FIRST raid took place TWO YEARS ago and the DOJ has neither filed charges or returned confiscated property, making a farce out of the Constitutional right to a speedy trial.

Gibson was told that their problems would go away IF they used Madagascar labor instead of American labor. The Gibson exec said that the "promise" was written in a DOJ pleading.

The Gibson CEO is a Republican who contributes to the Republican party. A competitor to Gibson, the Matrin guitar company uses the same Teak materials from the same sources but hasn't been raided. Is it because Matrin is a Democrat who contributes to Democrat politicians?

This event has all the appearances of political retaliation. It reminds me of the restructuring of GM and Chrysler. The highest percentage of dealerships forced to close were those owned by Republicans, even though those dealerships had higher sales volume than dealerships owned by Democrats that were allowed to remain open. Is the message "you appose us and we will destroy your ability to make a living!"? Gibson lost over $1 Million in sales when they had to send workers home while Feds armed with automatic weapons ransacked the plant. The use of automatic weapons gives me a reason to ask "Why?". The Feds KNEW who it was they were raiding. They KNEW that there were no weapons in the plant nor were employees or owners armed. Why the show of overwhelming force? Intimidation.

I am looking for the DOJ pleading which makes the statement that it is the use of USA labor that is the problem.

I saw a news article on one of the major TV channels about the Gibson raid and the given reasons for it. They asked if any musical artists were guilty of violating the Lacy Act or the EPA regs and would the DOJ send them to prison for 5 years for bringing undocumented wood into the country.

I agree with SnowHog.

[GreyGeek]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

I haven't found the "pleading" that the Gibson CEO was referring to, but I've found the "Modus Operandi" that the government is using in cases like this to confiscate the property WITHOUT filing charges or being required to return the property.

It is a tactic taken from the RICO Act, which allows police departments to raid "suspected" criminals, confiscate their property, and then keep it even if they raided the wrong people or didn't eventually file charges. Over 10,000 times per year. The tactic is the old English Common law of "Guilty Property".

A posting on TechDirt spells it all out:

Now, remember, we noted in the earlier story that a similar raid a few years ago resulted in the feds filing charges against the wood specifically -- and not the company: United States of America v. Ebony Wood in Various Forms. If this all sounds familiar, it's quite similar to what we've seen with the feds seizing domain names. These involve "in rem" claims against property, as opposed to "in personam" claims against people or organizations. We've long been troubled by general seizure and forfeiture law in the US, which basically seems like a license for the US government to, at best, bully and at worst, steal from, anyone they don't like. So just as the US government is now claiming that it's not charging Puerto 80 with anything as it tries to keep its domains, the same thing appears to be happening here. The feds never actually accuse Gibson of violating any laws. They just say the wood is illegal and seize it.

Under seizure laws, no actual lawsuit ever needs to be filed. They can just seize, and later file for forfeiture, in which the government gets to keep what it seized. So they never actually file charges against the company, but just get to keep whatever was seized, claiming that the property itself is illegal or was used for illegal purposes. It's an amazingly Kafka-esque situation for those whose property was seized, and seems ripe for abuse. And, not surprisingly, there's a ton of evidence that law enforcement regularly abuses seizure and forfeiture laws.

Here is the docket ticket of the court action where the US Gov is suing Ebony wood. That's right wood. Not some corporation by that name, but plain old simple wood. You see, the wood is, after all, "guilty".

The "ton of evidence" TechDirt mentions are the 10,000 RICO Act cases filed every year in which a large percentage of them seem solely for the purpose of seizing property or equipment which is beyond the budgetary restraints of the particular law agency making the raid. Need a new SUV? A new boat? Some firearms or ammo? Cash? Even a house or storage building? Get a snitch you are currently holding in jail to "suggest" the name of his dealer, then use that "evidence" to make a RICO raid on the property, taking what you need. More than one innocent citizen has found that it is impossible to get their SUV back. Some citizens who have attempted to defend their families from late night home invaders have been shot and killed by SWAT team men in black outfits shouting orders and waving badges. But, who can blame the home owner for trying? Entire families have been slaughtered in California by drug gangs wearing the same outfits and shouting the same orders.

Once there were only three named federal criminal acts: treason, piracy, and counterfeiting. Now there are thousands of federal laws and regulations, and the violation of any one of them, no matter how unintentional and harmless the transgression, can lead to years of imprisonment for the convicted person.

RICO has metastasized from its original intent, which was to deal more effectively with the perceived problem of organized crime. Federal prosecutors have discovered that RICO is a powerful weapon that can be wielded against most business owners, should the feds choose to target them. Rudy Guiliani’s prosecution of Michael Milken and other Wall Street luminaries in the 1980s—the springboard from which Guiliani rose to become first the mayor of New York City and ultimately a popular public speaker collecting $75,000 per speech—involved some of the early attempts to expand criminal RICO provisions to prosecute private business figures who clearly were not mafiosi. Today, federal prosecutors use RICO routinely to win easy convictions and prison terms for individuals who in the course of business run afoul of federal regulations. For every John Gotti who is brought down by RICO, many obscure business owners and managers are also successfully prosecuted under this law.

Much has been written about the RICO statute.

Rather than a summary of this vast literature, we offer a view of RICO from another angle, examining how it has revolutionized federal criminal law and how it has been used—with federal judges, members of Congress, and the press acting as cheerleaders—to overturn the protections inherent in due-process guarantees of the U.S. Constitution. Overturn is not too strong a word in this regard, given that in a RICO case, those charged are treated as guilty until proven innocent.

In tracing the development of RICO, we find that the law was little more than a “bait-and-switch” statute that has had little or no effect in stopping or inhibiting the crimes—murder, rape, robbery, and so forth—that most concerned the public in 1970. Instead, RICO has enabled federal prosecutors in effect to circumvent the constitutional separation of powers between the national and the state governments. Since RICO’s passage, the once-clear jurisdictional boundaries between state and federal law enforcement have been erased as more and more individuals find themselves in the federal dock with almost no chance of acquittal.

It won't matter much Obama is ousted or even replaced by a Tea Party nominee. People who prefer a large government role in our lives have been appointed to bureaucratic positions with life time tenure where they can act according to their agenda regardless of who is setting in office. It will take a complete clean-out of Congress with the new members revoking a raft of laws and executive orders. Even if they were able to do such things the existing bureaucrats and federal lawyers would tie Congress up in courts for years with activist judges placing restraining orders on newly passed laws until the SCOTUS rules on them, which could take years.

[PhilT]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

How terribly sad that lots of "western" capitalist countries seem to be over-run by "big business".

Perhaps Marx was right?

"... As a side-effect of the financial crisis, more and more people are starting to think Karl Marx was right. The great 19th Century German philosopher, economist and revolutionary believed that capitalism was radically unstable.

It had a built-in tendency to produce ever larger booms and busts, and over the longer term it was bound to destroy itself.

Marx welcomed capitalism's self-destruction. He was confident that a popular revolution would occur and bring a communist system into being that would be more productive and far more humane.

Marx was wrong about communism. Where he was prophetically right was in his grasp of the revolution of capitalism. It's not just capitalism's endemic instability that he understood, though in this regard he was far more perceptive than most economists in his day and ours.

More profoundly, Marx understood how capitalism destroys its own social base - the middle-class way of life. ...."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-14764357

[ardvark71]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

Perhaps Marx was right?

Hi...

It may sound simplistic but in my mind: In order to make true communism work, you have to have government impose it by force, since it runs contrary to human ambition "or desire to get ahead." With capitalism, you don't need government to impose it by force but rather regulate it so abuses can be minimized. I would choose capitalism that is regulated in a healthy way over communism any day.

I think what has been described in this thread has nothing to do with economics or economic theory but just plain governmental abuse of power.

Regards...

[oshunluvr]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

I agree that eventually true Capitalism totally fails.

In a true Capitalist marketplace; Every boss want to pay his workers as little as possible but he hopes all the other bosses will pay their workers a lot so he has customers. Obviously all the bosses think the same way. They collect the profits and distribute as little as possible back into the market place - effectively converting labor into cash. Eventually, there are no more buyers of products, thus no need to produce anything. No labor and no value to the cash (because there's nothing to buy). The Milton Freedman's of the world failed to see the far-reaching consequences.

Hopefully, the workers revolt, redistribute wealth, setup a new system and it all starts over again.

[Snowhog]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

That's to much of an over simplification of capitalism.

Manufacturers (supply) have the need to make profit. But if manufactured goods are priced to high, consumers (demand) find it harder or impossible to buy them. Three choices are left to the consumer: Increase their income, purchase lower priced ones (implies competition in the market place), or don't purchase them at all.

If the consumer can't increase their income, then the other two options are all they have.

If lower priced ones aren't available (no competition), then the remaining option is all that is available.

In either of the two situations above there is pressure on the manufacturer to lower the price on their goods because fewer of them are being sold, and profits are dropping. A manufacturer depends on pricing plus volume (of goods sold and number of purchasing consumers) to prosper. The more consumers that purchase their goods, the more competitive they can be in the market place.


Of course, my comments are themselves, simplifications.

[GreyGeek]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

I don't think Marx was right, or even remotely prophetic.

The same corruption that corporations (of all sizes) exhibits is also present in Socialist governments. That corporations and our government have a cabal arrangement means it varies little from a Socialist government. Corruption is a defect in human nature. It runs deep, to the slightest behaviors. Here in Lincoln, it is not uncommon to see 7 out of 10 cars violating the speed limit by 5 mph or more. To set your cruise control right on the speed limit is to invite the shouts, curses and middle fingers of 70% of the drivers passing you. In a single drive across town I will see as many as half a dozen cars run through red lights. I've been struck broadside ("T-boned") by one such driver, a professor of English at the UNL. When one will violate even trivial laws without apparent remorse you have to ask yourself what other laws would they willingly violate if advantage or circumstance permits?

One only has to look at the effects of enforced Socialism on the Iron Curtain countries to see that they were just the opposite of the boom & bust cycles of capitalism, and just as bad. Enforced stagnation was brought about because the goods and resources the people in those countries produced were confiscated and shipped back to the USSR, to be enjoyed, for free, by the power elite. When East Germany fell and free peoples had an opportunity see what it was really like inside that country, the most outstanding observation that everyone made was how much the East German infrastructure and living standards were indistinguishable from those of the Great Depression in the US. I.E., East Germany looked like is was a frozen snapshot of Kansas in the 1930s. Even the common folks in the USSR were abused by the same tactics and for the same purpose -- to give a luxury life style to the leadership of the Communist Party, and to fund and fuel Marxist cells in other countries which, they hoped, would lead to the overthrow of the governments in those countries, to be replaced by Socialism, to feed the elite back in the USSR. The education of the citizens of the USSR was dictated to them and they were assigned "jobs" and living quarters by the Communist leadership. They stood in lines for rationed food and clothing, which were always in short supply in the "Worker's Paradise". The citizens of the USSR had a couple of "sayings" that explained things. "We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us.", and, Izvestia and Pravda == News and Truth. "There is no news in the truth, and no truth in the news." That's pretty much how it is today here in America.

Another feature of Socialist government gone corrupt is their use of spies. One out of every seven East Germans were spying on their neighbor to avoid punishment or for special favors. It didn't matter that the charges many neighbors leveled against each other were exaggerated or even not true, it merely mattered that it gave a pretext to authorities to arrest "targets" for what ever reasons they wanted or had. It basically all began by applications of political correctness. When 3rd graders are being expelled from school for having in their possession a finger nail clipper or a plastic knife to cut their brown bag sandwich, we have arrived at the zenith of PC silliness, which is when educated folks put down their common sense and behave according to the will of those who dictate PC.

The dodge/excuse that pro-Socialists always bring up is that [insert failed Socialist country here] really wasn't a good example of a "true Socialist State". If Socialism were done "correctly" everything would be sweetness and light. Only if. Only if you could stop people from speeding without the threat of armed force. A people who will not control their own impulses is a people who cannot enjoy liberty for long.

All the problems inherent in Socialism is described by one who lived through a lot of it. Oleg Atbashian. in his own words, is a writer and graphic artist from the former USSR. Born and raised in Ukraine, he used to be a teacher, a translator, a worker, a freelance journalist, and at one time a propaganda artist, creating visual agitprop for the local Party committee in a Siberian town. In 1994, he emigrated to the USA hoping to live in a country that was ruled by reason and common sense. Ironically, he now lives in New York City. He is the creator of ThePeoplesCube.com, a satirical website where he writes under the name of Red Square. He describes his geographical and political journey by writing:

Growing up in the USSR, where the only permitted sources of information were textbooks and the official media, I believed that the Soviet Union was the most advanced society, while all other countries lived in poverty and oppression, devoid of the sun of Marxism-Leninism. I wanted them to become more like the USSR for their own good, and couldn't wait to grow up and live in the communist future, not worrying about money.

With years, as I began to encounter boundaries to intellectual inquiry, coupled with rampant hypocrisy and corruption, I initially attributed it to the wrong, dogmatic interpretation of Marxism by the ruling elites. Next came the realization that Marxism was not the solution, but the cause of the dysfunctional system, and that the communist utopia was only a dead-end exit in humanity's long and stressful journey towards progress. I took on activism, joined political underground, collected signatures in defense of dissidents, and wrote articles and short stories that satirized socialism and the self-delusional Soviet regime. Most of it was never published.

I moved to the United States in 1994, hoping to forget about politics and enjoy life in a country that was ruled by reason and common sense, whose citizens were appreciative of constitutional rights, the rule of law, and the prosperity of free market capitalism. But what I found was a society deeply infected by the leftist disease of "progressivism" that was jeopardizing real societal progress. So I started writing again, this time in English.

I don't think that Oleg realizes yet that Capitalism in America isn't "free market", or, he has traded working for a Socialist master to working for a Capitalist master. But, his site is interesting in its analysis of the hubris of the Left in the USA. The similarities between the Left's thinking and ideology in America and of the Communists of the USSR are mirror images, if not carbon copies, and he gives PLENTY of examples.

IMO, Socialism is a failed political system. Capitalism has also failed. Capitalism =/= Democracy, which China is proving every day. Democracy has not failed. It is slowly being abandon, one degree at a time.

I would rather keep the Constitution and Bill of Rights and one person having one vote, than adopt Socialism or laissez-faire Capitalism. The change that I would make is to renounce the idea that a corporation is a "person" which can enjoy under the Constitution the same rights as a flesh and blood person. What has evolved is that corporations have MORE rights that real people, by virtue of the power of the money at the control of one or a few persons. I would outlaw corporations, and return to the concept of the business charter. I would restore tariffs in order to level competition between workers living in our Democracy, who have a higher standard of living, and workers in dictatorships being paid slave wages, and whose factories do not have to abide by the environmental and biological controls that businesses here must abide by. When manufacturing plants in other countries do NOT preserve and protect the natural environment or the working environment it puts plants in countries that do at a decided disadvantage. Corporations "hiring" slaves living in dictatorships to make products for sale here are eroding the very foundation of our Democracy. That much is clear from the affects of NAFTA. Detroit is only one example.

IF corporate "person hood" cannot be reversed, then outlaw donations, directly or indirectly, from corporations of any type, or groups of individuals, to politicians, and outlaw politicians accepting donations from any except single individuals. Political donations from single individuals (citizens only) should be limited to less than $500 per person per election. And to avoid or eliminate the abuse by incumbent politicians, donations, campaigns, and TV ads should be limited to a period of no more than six months before the current election.

Corporations found to be influencing, or attempting to influence, politics should have their corporation papers rescinded and their assets sized and sold at public auction, with the proceeds being given to the laid off workers and to fund retirees retirement accounts.

Do these ideas have a ghost of a chance of being enacted? No. But, anything less would be a mere bandaid on a carotid hemorrhage, and a person has to lose only 40% of their blood to reach systemic collapse, from which there is no recovery.

[GreyGeek]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

....
Of course, my comments are themselves, simplifications.

As are all of ours!

[bsniadajewski]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

@GReyGeek

I mentioned this in another thread before, but what do you think of Christian (or Centrist) Democracy or Distributism. They look like what you could be looking for.

[SteveRiley]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

Manufacturers (supply) have the need to make profit. But if manufactured goods are priced to high, consumers (demand) find it harder or impossible to buy them.

IIRC, one of Henry Ford's goals was to mass-produce cars at a price point his own employees could afford. I forget where I first read that, but it's stuck with me ever since as a very rational approach.

corporate "person hood"

Probably the stupidest thing our Supreme Court has ever allowed to stand. Yes, even stupider than anointing George Bush.

[GreyGeek]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

.....
IIRC, one of Henry Ford's goals was to mass-produce cars at a price point his own employees could afford. I forget where I first read that, but it's stuck with me ever since as a very rational approach.
.....

The WikiPedia has an article explaining that. Detroit was already a high wage city, but Ford offered more than double the current wage to stem the turnover of having to hire 300 people a year to fill 100 slots. According to the Wiki $5/day was like $110/day today. In 1922 he reduced the workdays from 7 to 6, and in 1926 he dropped Saturday, creating the 5 day work week. He introduced profit sharing. He setup and paid for schools that taught English and American customs to new immigrant employees. He succumbed to his wife's demand to submit to UAW unionization rather than break up the company, which was what he wanted to do. She said if he destroyed the family business their children wouldn't be able to "lead Ford into the future", and she would leave him. He was, surprisingly, anti-immigration, anti-labor, anti-liquor, a pacifist and an anti-Semite, although he claimed to be shocked and "unaware" of the anti-Semite content of a newspaper he owned. But, in 1927, he shut down the paper and recanted his views in a public letter. Regardless, his racist views were popular in pre-war Germany and were praised by Hitler.

Like most people, Ford was a complex person who was constantly changing.

[dibl]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

The change that I would make is to renounce the idea that a corporation is a "person" which can enjoy under the Constitution the same rights as a flesh and blood person. What has evolved is that corporations have MORE rights that real people, by virtue of the power of the money at the control of one or a few persons.

The "personhood" of corporations is just a legal nicety to establish their standing in our judicial system. You have to be a legal person to bring a suit, to be sued, and otherwise to be subject to decisions of the courts. It's not the same as "citizenship", which conveys the right to vote, and the rest of the Bill of Rights. If you went to a charter system, who are you going to sue or otherwise hold liable when the train goes off the track?

I would outlaw corporations, and return to the concept of the business charter.

Well, I suppose if reasonable inducements for investors were in place, then that could work. What inducements would you offer, to compensate investors for risking their capital?

Personally, if I were King, I would keep the stockholder corporation (and the various other business organizational methods), but I would require every business over a rather small size, like 15 employees, to adopt a model ESOP and share both profit and the value of stock appreciation with the employees. No gimmicks allowed -- the employees must do equally well (or badly) as the most advantaged stockholders in the business.

[SteveRiley]

Re: So, why are Gibson guitars being subjected to a Federal witch hunt?

The "personhood" of corporations is just a legal nicety to establish their standing in our judicial system. You have to be a legal person to bring a suit, to be sued, and otherwise to be subject to decisions of the courts. It's not the same as "citizenship", which conveys the right to vote, and the rest of the Bill of Rights.

Ah, but in Citizens v. United, the Court essentially granted First Amendment rights to corporations. Have we thus embarked upon a path that, eventually, allows corporations to establish citizenship? That's frightening! Corporations are creations of the state, and thus should never be elevated to the same level as natural persons.