Its not you limit down its the ideas that you articulate and that are echoed by others in this thread. The level of thought is really superficial and inchoerent.
To talk accurately about corporations, you have to understand that Public C-Corps, Private C-Corps, Private S-Corps, LLP's & LLC's, and Sole Proprietorships all come under what we call private corps or private business...but they are all very different. Despite this the superficial commentary focus's on 'Corps' as if they are all Public C-Corps... and referred to as "in-human."
(This smear of 'inhuman' is crap on its face. The truth is that all corps are absolutely human, they are an expression of humanity, they are associations of humans...just like the Government).
Public C-Corps really should not be thought of as private businesses...they are better understood as public assets held and operated in trust by private board. The government has a stake in the maintenance and growth of these assets that in part define the wealth of the nation. These Public C-Corp Assets, provide much of the revenue on with all levels of government depend....primarilly though the taxes paid directly by their employees and indirectly collected though excise on their business inputs, directly on their property, and directly on the dividends they pay and the transaction that take place becuase of the wealth they create...and not so much through corporate tax directly.
I will not go through the difference is the other corporate forms becuase I just don't now want to take the time again. Suffice it to say that their tax revenu payment, needs and behaviors are completely different from Public C-Corps and thy should not be treated as the same.
Your focus on the TARP policy and funding of the Bush II administration as the source of general public upset "with having had these unscripted indentures forced upon them..." is wrong and misleading. The current fiscal well we have fallen in was created by Obama's false stimulus response to crises that was passed in 2009. TARP is worthy of critcism by being a crony designed hysterical solution to a systemic crises that could have been managed a lot more efficiently, but it is not responsible for the acceleration of our long term accrued public debt. Almost all the TARP funds extended to the banks has been paid back already. To my surprise it even appears that the funds used to bail out the GM Unions, the AIG crony driven bail out, and the CITI crony driven bail out, all look like they will get paid back too. TARP is not a money hole, it was structured as an investment, not a good one, but an investment nonetheless and it appears that it will not lose money...it might even make a profit. So, TARP as structured and applied by the Paulson,Barnanke,Geitner troika under Bush II is not the problem, nor the taxpayer loss that demands "restitution and participaton." After all, although the prior sharholders in those enterprises took tremendous losses, most of the employees in those 'bailed out' enterprises continue to pay taxes at the highest rates. As a move to preserve an important tax revenue flow to Government, these perjoratively characterised 'bail outs' were a profound success.
The real problem was the false 'stimulus' that didn't invest in anything that can ever pay back the 1T that was wasted in rolling over excess and unaffordable consumption expenses for 18 months on an obviously silly idea that spending money on consumption makes wealth. At least the TARP spending was invested in maintaining real assets...those Public C-Corp Assets that define our wealth and whose employees provide the most important tax revenue flows to support our Government...where is all that "faux" stimuls spending from 2009 now? What was it invested in so that it can pay itself back?
The problem in the U.S. is a tax structure that promotes consumption instead of investment. The action you appear to favor, through moral outrage and restitution for directed government investment to support crony Public C-Corp assts, will only make the dysfunction worse. The current U.S. Corp tax structure and regulatory structure discourages the growth of all domestic corps and domestic production in favor of domestic consumption and leverage. That will not be fixed by repatriating foreign earnings that have already paid foreign tax where they were earned. it would be immoral to repatriate that capital at an addition cost of 35% tax...when you can simply use it as collateral to borrow the like amount of funds at an interest rate of less than 5%...and deduct the interest. It would be immoral to do that to your investors, your employees, your suppliers and ultimately you domestic government, becuase to do so would be to weaken your enterprise and risk the ultimate demise of the whole enterprise as a domestic corporation.
