Do the ruling class not pursue corporate criminals because they need their votes?

Question

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9785-2004Aug17.html

Answer 1

The ruling class ARE the corporate criminals.

Answer 2

The article cited bears no relationship to your question. In answer to your question, Conrad Black was given a multi-year prison sentence today in Illinois. So, it seems that the "ruling class" and its judicial system does pursue corporate criminals.

Answer 3

I am supposing by "ruling class" you mean our politicians.  The politicians have been bought and paid for by the "ruling class", better known as  large corporations.

Answer 4

No.  The ruling class owns the political process, and the mass media that is used to influence voters, most of whom are unaware of how thy are being manipulated

Answer 5

This society disenfranchises anyone who does not have money or connections.

Answer 6

probably. even if amerika does not admit it, the corporate criminal holds an extreme amount of power. if the leader of the bloods said he did not like bush, he would probably be out the next day. corporate criminals are the yang to the presidentuial yin. amerika would become very unstable if the corporate criminals power was shaken in the least bit. so in answer to your question, yes, i do believe they are not pursued for this very reason

Answer 7

Funding and influence-peddling

Answer 8

It is a well known fact that there is a revolving door between private corporation board members/high paid consultants and statesmen.....So you are correct

Answer 9

White collar crime is more widespread that one cares to imagine. There's alot of people at the top because of ill gotten gains.

Next time you see someone rich dont look and think Oooh! they must be real clever they've got the knack how to make money.\ Half the time its bull**** as they probably did something underhand to get it they just dont advertise the fact.

Its quite common.

Answer 10

Your government is an oligarchy of plutocrats.

Answer 11

Amen, Bill. Money talks

And even if they are convicted, they get pardoned as the president leaves office (see, Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton, and just wait and see what happens to Libby andthe like when W leaves.)

Answer 12

Huh?  Remember Enron- they sure as h**l were pursued.. and caught!!

Answer 13

NO just their money

Answer 14

No, the ruling class doesn't pursue corporate corporate criminals because the ruling class ARE the corporate criminals.

LOL Blueridge.  Ya' beat me to it!

Answer 15

Simply put....they need their money.

Answer 16

Your question has nothing to do with the article. The article is about whether convicted felons have the right to vote.

Anyways...back to the question. Have you missed the news? Enron, Price Waterhouse - busted! William McGuire from United Health - busted!

Thanks to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, we busting even more.

We have criminals from the streets to the highrises, and there are laws meant to catch all of them. There's  just not enough law enforcement agents to keep up.

Answer 17

No, because they need the campaign donations.

Answer 18

I follow on the heels of four answers.  They affirm that the ruling class and the corporate criminals are the same.  

I am following a story about a fulfillment center for a large on-line retailer that is importing and housing seasonal labor from urban enclaves of unemployment to rural settings of cheap taxes, compliant labor, and accommodating local authorities.  

The importation of labor by labor contractors has brought criminal activity to the rural community that in turn draws in locals in complicity or spurs hostilities that involves reaction to imported labor or facilitates the commission of criminal activity by locals on locals.  

Corporate activity is pretty much moral neutral.  The most morally repugnant outcome for them is to have a bad quarter and suffer the wrath of the stockholders and the stock pickers.  It is all very complicated.  Any time some corp-speak droid delivers a statement of how proud they are of their processes and output, you can bet that they are covering hind parts from some reported outrage.  

"We had no intention of facilitating this unfortunate    _______ (enter descriptor) outrage.  We just wish to provide  value for our customer and a fair return to our stockholder."  

Moral neutrality is a precursor to outcomes that must be sorted out in the courts and in the bought ballot caster.  Is that criminal or an unfortunate misunderstanding?  

LB