[cookiecaper]

It's like asking "When was the last time Congress did something to help feet, instead of shoes?" It's a really weird thing to ask, because like shoes, corporations are a tool used by people. They cannot, therefore, be opposed to anything as such. They're merely mechanisms, tools, in the hands of their principals and agents.

You can suggest that certain uses of these tools are improper and that the agents who effect these uses should be restrained, punished, or otherwise legally addressed, but you don't phrase that as a punishment against the tool -- it is rather a punishment against the agents who manipulated the tool improperly.

Sometimes I wonder if the whole "corporation v people" thing is a propaganda tool intended to misdirect public anger off the robber barons themselves and instead put it onto a formless legal abstraction that can't be held accountable.

[cannonedhamster]

American corporations are tools for people in much the same way that monarchies were tools for people. It pretty much is a tool that's only useful for those with the means to make the most use of it. Small businesses often can't use it to the fullest abilities because to do so requires an army of lawyers and accountants who are able to find every advantage possible. Playing to the rule book is especially advantageous when you get to write the rule book. The other problem is that corporations have more legal rights and power and are considered people in legal terms.

Using another example. Indentured servitude used to be a completely valid legal contract that benefited both sides. The reason it went away was because those writing the contracts started treating it like legal slavery.

The reason people go after corporations is because they are the ones in control of the government and what exactly will going after the people who own the corporations do? They often have private armies, write their own laws, and essentially function as royalty.