General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums“From the beginning, I was in it for real”: Ice cream legend’s plan to radically up-end America
From the beginning, I was in it for real: Ice cream legends plan to radically up-end America
Ben Cohen is best known for Ben & Jerry's ice cream. But his new project to transform politics may change all that
Elias Isquith
snip//
For those who dont know already, could you tell us a bit about what The Stampede is and what youre trying to achieve?
The Stampede sells rubber stamps online, essentially at cost, and people buy one of those stamps and then they stamp messages on paper currency that says one of three major statements. One is Not to be used for bribing politicians, amend the Constitution; another is Stamp money out of politics, amend the Constitution; and another is Not to be used for buying elections, amend the Constitution.
The beauty of it is that, usually, if people want to make their voice heard in the political process, the most they can do is sign a petition that hopefully gets seen at some point by the petitions target. In this situation, if you stamp a piece of money with your statement, 900 people see each bill that you stamp, as it gets put in circulation and passed from hand-to-hand. The numbers are kind of amazing: If one person stamps three bills a day for a year, that message gets seen by about a million people. Its actually very powerful.
advertisement
As long as the Supreme Court rules money is speech, corporations and the wealthy are using it by giving piles of it to politicians to pass or not pass laws that they want. Now, the rest of the people, {those} who dont have that money, can actually make their voice heard by using money to stamp a message out.
You launched the campaign about two years ago. How do you think its gone thus far?
In general, the movement to pass an amendment as well as state and national legislation to get money out of politics is gathering a tremendous amount of momentum, and its kind of amazing that already people in the Senate {are debating an amendment}. I understand {the Udall amendment is} not going to pass this time around but just finally having a vote in the Senate is quite ahead of where we expected wed be.
more...
http://www.salon.com/2014/09/04/from_the_beginning_i_was_in_it_for_real_ice_cream_legends_plan_to_radically_up_end_america/
Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)B&J's is awesome on a myriad of levels!
babylonsister
(171,070 posts)I most certainly will! Love their ice cream and allegiance to what's right!
Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)chervilant
(8,267 posts)I'm still bummed that they didn't bring back Wavy Gravy. I would be all kinds of psyched to get that flavor again!
Sopkoviak
(357 posts)In an early tax inversion scheme. (All legal of course)
And maybe making up for the addition of High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) to much of their product line.
Hooray!
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)Also, B&J uses pure cane sugar, not HFCS. Please provide a source for your charge that B&J is guilty of "the addition of High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) to much of their product line".
Thanks.
Sopkoviak
(357 posts)Here's a quick couple.
Took mere seconds to find.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ben-jerrys-drops-all-natural-from-its-sorta-natural-ice-cream/
http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/the_truth_about_ben_and_jerrys
ms liberty
(8,580 posts)ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)"I'm not suprised that you couldn't find anything."
Do you know me? Are you charging me with some sort of dishonesty?
When you make a claim in DU, it is YOUR responsibility to provide cites and references to support your claim. You have done neither.
I read your CBS News link before I responded to your post, it does not support either of your claims. Also, CBS News is a right-wing organization that will make a liberal company like B&J look however they want B&J to look. AFAIAK, CBS News is illegitimate as a news source.
Your second link also does not support your claims and, indeed, betrays them:
"This article aims to dispel the idée fixe that corporate law compelled Ben & Jerrys directors to accept Unilevers rich offer, overwhelming Cohen and Greenfields dogged efforts to maintain the companys social mission and independence. Contemporaneous observers concluded thus, such as the stock analyst who claimed in 2000 that Ben & Jerrys had a legal responsibility to consider the takeover bids.
That responsibility is what forced a sale.3 Cohen says the same thingon a 2010 NPR radio segment on social enterprise, he said that the laws required the board of directors of Ben & Jerrys to take an offer, to sell the company despite the fact that they did not want to sell the company.4 Greenfield agrees: We were a public company, and the board of directors primary responsibility is the interest of the shareholders.
It was nothing about Unilever; we didnt want to get bought by anybody.5
Corporate law has been fingered as the culprit in Ben & Jerrys sale, which has become the poster child, proof text, and Exhibit A for the proposition that the traditional business corporation is fundamentally inhospitable, if not outright hostile, to social enterprise. Consider this passage from the summer 2009 issue of the Stanford Social Innovation Review: [A]mong social entrepreneurs, Unilevers purchase of Ben & Jerrys serves as a cautionary tale of how easily corporate fiat can undermine social responsibility. The board was legally required to sell to the highest bidder, says [an attorney with expertise in social enterprise]. Neither Ben Cohen nor Jerry Greenfield wanted to sell the company, but because it was public they had no choice.6
If the corporate form is bad for social enterprise, social entrepreneurs should use more suitable alternatives. Proponents of new legal formssuch as L3Cs, benefit corporations, and flexible purpose corporationsinvariably cite the sale of Ben & Jerrys to show why such forms are necessary or attractive. (See New Organizational Forms for Hybrids, below.) For example, a legislative report on SB 201, Californias Flexible Purpose Corporation act, states that The story of Ben and Jerrys Ice Cream is an example of why a new entity form is sought. It then repeats the now familiar story: Even though Ben and Jerry did not want to sell out, they had little choice.7"
So, please provide adequate references to support your claim or concede that your were wrong.
Thanks.
Response to Sopkoviak (Reply #10)
Name removed Message auto-removed
PADemD
(4,482 posts)from the Center for Science in the Public Interest
Most "All Natural" Ben & Jerry's Flavors Have Unnatural Ingredients
At least 48 out of 53 flavors of Ben & Jerrys All Natural ice cream and frozen yogurt contain alkalized cocoa, corn syrup, partially hydrogenated soybean oil, or other ingredients that either dont exist in nature or that have been chemically modified.
http://cspinet.org/new/201008121.html
A list of all the improperly labeled flavors and their ingredients is included in CSPIs letter.
http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/benandjerrysunileverletter.pdf
The letter to the FDA contains all of the ingredients, natural and un-natural.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)Last edited Sat Sep 6, 2014, 04:10 PM - Edit history (1)
"A batch of ice cream mix starts with heavy cream, condensed skim milk, and liquid cane sugar."
http://www.benjerry.com/flavors/how-we-make-ice-cream#3timeline
The company uses cane sugar instead of beet sugar and high fructose corn syrup, which are derived from GMOs. - See more at: http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/march2013/ben-jerrys-switch-to-non-gmo-ingredients.php#sthash.2nyNb060.dpuf
Your source, which I saw before responding to Sopkoviak's post, precedes B&J's conversion to non-GMO and pure cane sugar by 3-4 years compared to my sources.
Why am I the one having to prove the OP's claim, right or wrong?
MagickMuffin
(15,943 posts)According to interviews I have seen.
And from the WSJ http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB955522850788928066
Unilever scooped up Ben & Jerry's for $326 million not the 2.5 billion you claimed happened.
Please don't let facts get in your way. BTW, just where did you get your "facts" fauxnews?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)I thought it wasn't.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)DhhD
(4,695 posts)DeadLetterOffice
(1,352 posts)You can read what our lawyer had to say about this and see the relevant sections of the law below. You can also download it here. If your intent is to make the money unusable, its illegal; but we want our bills to be used over and over again! Also, it is illegal to put a commercial advertisement on money. But we are putting political messages on the bills, not commercial advertisements.
http://www.stampstampede.org/pages/stamping-tips
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)RadicalGeek
(344 posts)I had a co-worker who was on a site called "Where's George" where you put a code on a $1 bill and used a site to track the bill.
He learned that arenas and airports can become basically "holding patterns" for them.
caraher
(6,278 posts)I remember writing a little story in elementary school about the "travels of a dollar." My dollar had a lot more fun and even went to the moon!
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)ashling
(25,771 posts)Last edited Sat Sep 6, 2014, 04:26 PM - Edit history (1)
?v=1405358597I always - ok, not ALWAYS, but often - write VOTE DEMOCRATIC on the restraunt copy of credit card receipts when we eat out
I once sent a new $2 bill to Hubert Humphrey for his signature (There had just been some story on the news about somebody getting Gerald Ford's signature on a dollar bill) Humphrey sent the bill back with a letter explaining that it was illegal to sign U.S. currency. Included a pre-signed card.
But since money is speech, why not make it say what I want?
japple
(9,831 posts)sheshe2
(83,789 posts)Tobin S.
(10,418 posts)I'm in it for the money.
Cha
(297,295 posts)lovemydog
(11,833 posts)Huge K & R.
Babylonsister, shake it.
babylonsister
(171,070 posts)lunasun
(21,646 posts)lovemydog
(11,833 posts)Beartracks
(12,816 posts)... the company is now just like any other corporation and is no longer necessarily a socially conscious company that deserves my ice cream dollars?
Glad to see that Ben and Jerry (the people, at least) are still socially conscious.
====================
Ineeda
(3,626 posts)as stated on their web site:
"Big Changes
August 3, 2000: Ben & Jerrys becomes a wholly-owned subsidiary of Unilever. Through a unique acquisition agreement, an independent Board of Directors is created to provide leadership focused on preserving and expanding Ben & Jerry's social mission, brand integrity, and product quality. We call them the B.O.D. (Which means we really like them.)"
Read more here: http://www.benjerry.com/about-us
love the guys, love the policies, LOVE the ice cream
Beartracks
(12,816 posts)Obviously, I've been paying attention...
==================
barbtries
(28,798 posts)i use cash quite frequently.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Hippies to the rescue!
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)I got a $5 bill the other day with a Hare Krishna stamp, it didn't make me want to shave my head.
babylonsister
(171,070 posts)Who knows? At least someone is doing something besides saying it'll never happen.