Talk:Corporate America

	United States portal This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This disambiguation page has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disambiguation

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Business

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles

Untitled comments[edit]

personally i dont see anything benificial to "corporate america", like the first diffenition implies.. greed, a lack of social responsibility, and resistance to entitlements. i dont see how corporations have anything positive about them they only benifit their pockets and not the average person, and small businesses, fuck corporate america. Money Money Money 05:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymous (talk • contribs) [reply]

You don't even know what you are talking about. You need to get more education in order to understand anything about corporate america. America wouldn't be America without business and corporations. And learn how to spell!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymous (talk • contribs)

The discussion here isn't about whether or not you agree with the phrase Corporate America nor whether or not you like the subject. The purpose is to discuss the validity of the entry and whether or not the article is relevant to Wikipedia, which it clearly is. 66.255.170.42 22:09, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page claims that not-for-profit corporations are part of CA. I'm not sure that's how the word is usually used, and it doesn't seem to make sense in the context of what follows in this page. Presumably the person who first wrote it had a reason, can they provide a reference? If nobody can think of an example I suggest cutting the phrase. David Bofinger 06:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised that this article talks about the positive and even neutral connotations of the phrase, yet there is no discussion of the negative connotations of Corporate America. Perhaps this should be changed? -km 68.85.97.73 01:40, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think "competition" and "individualism" should be listed as negative connotations of corporate America. It's really the lack of competition that often makes corporations go bad in the public eye. Furthermore, individualism is a philosophy on which the United States was founded, has emerged throughout its history (e.g. Thoreau and Kerouac) and is still prevalent. Splat (talk) 10:31, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Positive connotation?[edit]

I could be wrong, but I kind of get the sense that the "positive connotations" described in the first paragraph are a somewhat awkward attempt to achieve NPOV. I've never heard the phrase "corporate America" used in any positive sense (though again, it could be my own lack of experience). Generally, when the system is referred to in a positive light people use a different term, such as "free enterprise" or "economic liberty", or though the use of more neutral terms such as "capitalism" or "market economy".

Also, not only does "corporate America" refer to the system as a whole, it also refers to the experience of individuals working for a major American corporation (such as those working in a Dilbert-esque environment describing their woes as "that's corporate America for you").

At any rate, I think it would be more accurate, less awkward, and just as NPOV, to introduce "Corporate America" as a chiefly derogatory phrase (whilst still using a word like "chiefly" to imply that there are exceptions to the negative way it's used, but also to imply that they are in fact exceptions).

Am I way off-base here? I'm not a particularly political individual and have not been in the thick of things, so I could most certainly be wrong about all this. Thus I am not touching the article at all, merely voicing my thoughts on this page. Mbarbier (talk) 13:48, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization[edit]

This page and its Boston album reference are exactly backwards. As the album is a proper noun, it should be capitalized. I'm pretty sure concepts aren't proper nouns, so as such shouldn't be capitalized. -- Joe (talk) 00:44, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really understand what you're suggesting - are you saying the article should be renamed to "Corporate america" (it cannot, as far as I know, begin with a lowercase letter, i.e. it cannot be "corporate America" or "corporate america")? Given that "America" is a proper noun, and given the constraints I just mentioned on capitalization, I don't see why the article title's capitalization should change. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 14:47, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]