Serious Question About Foundations

[Steely_Dan]

My wife and I were talking tonight about the fact that since Reagan, corporations have increasingly lost their morale compass. More specifically, we are old enough to remember when corporations would feel a "social obligation" to those less fortunate because after all, these corporations would not have been successful without the benefits of living and working in this country.

Remember when you were about to watch "Frontline" on PBS. There would be a short 5 second announcement that this program is brought to you by the "________" Foundation? Often that foundation was tied to some corporation.

Has there been a decrease in the number and frequency of foundations in this country? Wasn't there a time when corporations simply felt the obligation to give something back? Or are we dreaming?

-Paige

[REP]

1. Those charitable foundations were most likely tax dodges with cushy jobs for spouses

Charitable foundations "underwriting" public broadcasting is not a good place to look for philanthropy.

[Chulanowa]

2. Used to be they got tax breaks for such contributions

Now they just don't have to pay taxes

[snot]

3. I.m.h.o., you're dreaming.

There have been periods when corp. pirates were less brazen; but plunder was no less their aim. 'Cuz that's what corps. are built to do.

And it seems to me that foundations have, if anything proliferated. Elites would prefer to fund those and use them to shape the world to their own advantage or as they see fit, instead of having to fund the more democratic agencies of government through more progressive taxation. In many cases foundations function not so much as charities as nodes in the propaganda machine, or for contracting services to for-profit corps., etc.

Sorry to be a wet blanket. But what we need is to restore/redesign various laws so as to restore/reinforce the democratic system, and to STOP supposing that we ever could or should rely on people with more power than is good any of us to simply not "be evil."

Here's a couple of quotes on the subject I came across recently (thanks to DU):

"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."
– James Madison, Independent Journal, Wednesday, February 6, 1788, The Federalist

". . . We forgot that the question is NOT, how do we get good people into power. The question is, how do we limit the damage the powerful can do to us?"
– Chris Hedges, "The Failure of the Liberal Class in the United States," address to the Poverty Scholars Program, April 10, 2010.

Finally, I also recently came across this really fascinating article on how people are affected by power (from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704407804575425561952689390.html?mod=WSJ_LifeStyle_LeadStoryNA ):

AUGUST 14, 2010
The Power Trip
Contrary to the Machiavellian cliché, nice people are more likely to rise to power. Then something strange happens: Authority atrophies the very talents that got them there.

By JONAH LEHRER

When CEO Mark Hurd resigned from Hewlett-Packard last week in light of ethics violations, many people expressed surprise. Mr. Hurd, after all, was known as an unusually effective and straight-laced executive.

But the public shouldn't have been so shocked. From prostitution scandals to corruption allegations to the steady drumbeat of charges against corporate executives and world-class athletes, it seems that the headlines are filled with the latest misstep of someone in a position of power. This isn't just anecdotal: Surveys of organizations find that the vast majority of rude and inappropriate behaviors, such as the shouting of profanities, come from the offices of those with the most authority.

Psychologists refer to this as the paradox of power. The very traits that helped leaders accumulate control in the first place all but disappear once they rise to power. Instead of being polite, honest and outgoing, they become impulsive, reckless and rude. In some cases, these new habits can help a leader be more decisive and single-minded, or more likely to make choices that will be profitable regardless of their popularity. One recent study found that overconfident CEOs were more likely to pursue innovation and take their companies in new technological directions. Unchecked, however, these instincts can lead to a big fall.

(snip)

hile a little compassion might help us climb the social ladder, once we're at the top we end up morphing into a very different kind of beast.

(Much more at the link.)

[Steely_Dan]

5. Thank you very much...

Very informative. I'm learning all of the time. I will click on the link.

-P

[readmoreoften]

4. You're dreaming.

There just used to be a stronger labor movement to keep them in line.

[sandnsea]

6. They're still there - however

Those corporations always pushed a Christian Capitalist agenda. I think a lot of them have just gone a more direct route, from the Birchers to Heritage to all the crazy religious groups out there.