Government control?

But seriously, I'm glad someone mentioned the government not having total ownership of some of these resources. That needed to be clarified.

[MENTION=5956]hadriel[/MENTION] brought it up early as post #7. And some posts get close to the mark but hit on a different point such as [MENTION=10201]Niernen[/MENTION]'s post in #18 that brings up the fact that America is being run as an inverted democracy where high profile institutions can lobby self-serving congressman to adjust or add to legislation that favors them i.e. Monsanto riders.[SUP]1,[/SUP][SUP]2[/SUP] Certain corporations like General Motors are quasi-owned by the government either due to legal stipulation post Chapter 11 or considered so by the government's initial 25% stock buy in of the company. However, that doesn't indicate that the government completely owns the company and conducts all it's decisions like the fatal ignition defect that resulted in thirteen deaths and was known to be an issue ten years ago with absolutely no action being taken by the company. This boundary between government and private interests has been a recurring motif in our current events. With the reveal of Prism, Edward Snowden launched himself into the public eye being a hired employee from Booz Allen Hamilton, a private firm providing contracted services to the government. Lawmakers in reaction to the bill announced that in the future there would be more restricted access to private contractors. However, the issue according to testimonies from people who were interviewed by journalists and were coworkers with Snowden explained that he was a genius and his ability to get things done was unprecedented enabling him to gain access to even bigger tasks because he was so incredibly useful to the NSA that he was even offered a position on Tailored Access Operations, however turned it down in order to take the contracting position at BAH.

The Snowden leaks though involved that the government can have an influence on industries that aren't business related. Nacchio was convicted for multiple counts of insider trading, he stated, after he refused to cooperate with the government for giving customer data approximately February of 2001. In addition, the government has also solicited Google, Yahoo, and many other private companies to divulge customer information although all companies have denied any knowledge of the program and having any cooperation with the government.[SUP]3[/SUP] Nacchio's confession that he was directly asked leads one to question why the government wouldn't directly query bigger players in the market, the fact that a leaked NSA document reveals that these companies were cooperative furthermore points to the fact that these companies, much like the President himself were fully aware of the program and cooperating with it's execution despite denying awareness of it completely. Not to mention the government also hacking into companies like The New York Times and even the aforementioned companies by trying to obtain information stored via Cloud.[SUP]4[/SUP] Having a discussion on the level of absolutism has no pragmatism because it's not reflective of what is actually true of what it actually concerns. Its expression it merely artistic since it's interpretation is fictional and while art may be a good starting point for conversation on real topics, discussion of art itself with abstract arguments hardly touches upon the reality of the situation.