Page 54 of 66 FirstFirst ... 444525354555664 ... LastLast
Results 531 to 540 of 656

Thread: Corporations Aren't People

  1. #531
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,453
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Corporations Aren't People

    Quote Originally Posted by Federalist View Post
    I understand that every person has material needs he is coerced by Nature herself to satisfy.

    What I don't understand is why giving money to another person can in any way be considered coercive. I would regard it as helpful, myself.
    In a negotiation, the employer says "I have skills you need to make money", the employer says " I have money you need so you don't die".

    Its not the same as an equal exchange.

    And no one is "giving" employees money.
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

  2. #532
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    US, California - federalist
    Last Seen
    11-12-16 @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,485

    Re: Corporations Aren't People

    Would we be worse off by funding unemployment compensation through general taxes on corporations, instead of the way we do it now?

  3. #533
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

    Re: Corporations Aren't People

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    In a negotiation, the employer says "I have skills you need to make money", the employer says " I have money you need so you don't die".

    Its not the same as an equal exchange.

    And no one is "giving" employees money.
    The employer is writing a check to the employee. How is that not giving?

    As you say, every person is coerced by Nature herself to acquire food and shelter. This is a burden placed upon every person at birth.

    I don't see why you are blaming employers for this burden that was imposed by Nature. It is not the employer's fault that every person is coerced by Nature. A person doesn't need to satisfy his needs for food and shelter by becoming an employee. He can go into business for himself if he chooses.

  4. #534
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Corporations Aren't People

    Quote Originally Posted by buck View Post
    If the company is arranging the insurance and (I assume) paying a portion of the benefits, then they are being required to provide BC.
    Very well, then. If that is the case and the employers no longer wants to take on that moral and economic burden, he/she should be willing to give up that tax benefit that comes with administering that fringe benefit, i.e., health insurance to their employees.

    I don't particularly see it as an intrusion in any way. The employee still has the option to be on BC all they want, just not to expect his employer to provide.
    Here again the business world can't have it both ways. You can't say "health insurance cost are eating a deep whole in my profits and I object on religious grounds" yet complain about paying a tax penalty on said benefit if not provided to the employee when it was the corporate world who clamoured for such benefit to begin with as way to lure employees to their doors while also retaining an exclusive tax write-off (because the employee certainly doesn't get to claim his portion of his health insurance on his taxes, only medical expenses incurred).

    If the employer said "if you work here, you are not allowed to be on BC" that would be an intrusion in my view. to say, "if you work here, do not expect me to provide you BC", is not an intrusion.
    Very aptly put. But again, the solution to the problem is simple: "Allow the employee to drop his employer-sponsored health insurance, add the TOTAL amount to his pay not just the portion that is deducted from his salary so that the employee can afford to pay current market price for an insurance plan, and allow the employee to purchase health insurance on the free market." Problem solved!
    "A fair exchange ain't no robbery." Tupac Shakur w/Digital Underground

  5. #535
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    Re: Corporations Aren't People

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    Very aptly put. But again, the solution to the problem is simple: "Allow the employee to drop his employer-sponsored health insurance, add the TOTAL amount to his pay not just the portion that is deducted from his salary so that the employee can afford to pay current market price for an insurance plan, and allow the employee to purchase health insurance on the free market." Problem solved!
    The company shouldn't be harmed (prevented from offering benefits that will attract quality employees) just because the government has decided that the company is required to violate a tenant of their religion just to offer such benefit.
    Last edited by buck; 12-03-13 at 11:11 PM.

  6. #536
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Corporations Aren't People

    Quote Originally Posted by buck View Post
    The company shouldn't be harmed (prevented from offering benefits that will attract quality employees) just because the government has decided that the company is required to violate a tenant of their religion just to offer such benefit.
    But the company won't necessarily be harmed. By some estimates, it would be cheaper for the company to pay the penalty and not offer health insurance to their employees. If such is the case, how exactly is the company harmed? This takes us right back to what I stated earlier: the company does have options that suit both their balance sheet and their conscience.
    "A fair exchange ain't no robbery." Tupac Shakur w/Digital Underground

  7. #537
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    Re: Corporations Aren't People

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    But the company won't necessarily be harmed. By some estimates, it would be cheaper for the company to pay the penalty and not offer health insurance to their employees. If such is the case, how exactly is the company harmed? This takes us right back to what I stated earlier: the company does have options that suit both their balance sheet and their conscience.
    The harm is in the government telling the company that they can not offer the insurance w/o violating their religious beliefs - there is a benefit in a company offering benefits beyond the simple up front cost and the company is prevented from taking advantage.

    Paying a penalty or increasing the pay of the employee, so they can choose their own benefits if they are so inclined, is not the same and does not have the same benefit in attracting or keeping quality employees.
    Last edited by buck; 12-04-13 at 06:08 AM.

  8. #538
    Professor
    Phil_Osophy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    11-11-14 @ 02:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,450

    Re: Corporations Aren't People

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    But the company won't necessarily be harmed. By some estimates, it would be cheaper for the company to pay the penalty and not offer health insurance to their employees. If such is the case, how exactly is the company harmed? This takes us right back to what I stated earlier: the company does have options that suit both their balance sheet and their conscience.
    Why should anyone pay a penalty for not buying a service from a private business???

  9. #539
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    US, California - federalist
    Last Seen
    11-12-16 @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,485

    Re: Corporations Aren't People

    Quote Originally Posted by buck View Post
    The company shouldn't be harmed (prevented from offering benefits that will attract quality employees) just because the government has decided that the company is required to violate a tenant of their religion just to offer such benefit.
    I believe artificial Persons have no basis to care about the subjective value of morals.

  10. #540
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    US, California - federalist
    Last Seen
    11-12-16 @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,485

    Re: Corporations Aren't People

    Quote Originally Posted by buck View Post
    The harm is in the government telling the company that they can not offer the insurance w/o violating their religious beliefs - there is a benefit in a company offering benefits beyond the simple up front cost and the company is prevented from taking advantage.

    Paying a penalty or increasing the pay of the employee, so they can choose their own benefits if they are so inclined, is not the same and does not have the same benefit in attracting or keeping quality employees.
    I believe artificial Persons have no basis to care about the subjective value of morals. Why not simply require a Standard, and let religious authorities claim only true believers should abstain.

Page 54 of 66 FirstFirst ... 444525354555664 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •