View Poll Results: Should Corproations have "personhood" rights?

Voters
99. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, corporations are just like a person

    18 18.18%
  • No, corporations are not just like a person

    81 81.82%
Page 54 of 71 FirstFirst ... 444525354555664 ... LastLast
Results 531 to 540 of 710

Thread: Corporate Personhood

  1. #531
    Student pugetsoundwa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    02-10-10 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    252

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Is it?

    Corporations represent the people who own them.

    The people who own them are protected under the First Amendment, ergo, the corporations cannot be denied Freedom of Speech, because to deny corporations that freedom is to deny the living people who own them that freedom.

    It's not hard, it's not confusing. It's freedom.
    A corporation is an institution that is granted a charter recognizing it as a separate legal entity having its own rights, privileges, and liabilities distinct from those of its members.

    Thus it doesn't represent the people who owns them as a person but only represents their business.

  2. #532
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    06-23-10 @ 11:33 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    I thought corporations weren't persons and can't speak - how can a corporation use anything? It's the PEOPLE using the corporation's money to speak.
    You need to decide if corporations are deserving of personhood or not. If so then corporate actions are those of the corporation and the employees/owners/shareholders are shielded from the actions of the corporation.
    If however you conclude that corporations are not deserving of personhood then actions taken by them are those of the party/parties responsible for the corporations decisions. The guy in the mail room doesn't get to decide where and how corporate funds are used. So which is it?

    And let's not be disingenuous anymore about the "people" who work at these corporations. Only certain of a corporations executives and share holders (in a public company) decide how and where corporate funds are dispersed.

  3. #533
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    06-23-10 @ 11:33 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    I didn't mean that.

    I meant that corporate funds are the funds of those who control them. Although they are also, albeit not directly accessible, the funds of its employees.
    I'm sorry but your premise about the corporate funds is plainly wrong. You did give it an effort though. They are not directly nor indirectly accessible by all of the corporations employees. I'm sorry that you are wrong but you are.

    I would assume that those funds are to be used to maintain and improve the company, as such would be in the best interests of the members, investors and employees of the company (in most cases).
    And it would be reasonable to assume as much.

    If part of that maintenance and improvement involves supporting political candidates who advocate policies which (in the mind of the corporate entities involved) will improve the environment which the company exists in, then it seems only reasonable that the persons who control the company funds would assign some of those funds to such a purpose.

    Such activities would be in the best interests of:
    • The persons who control the funds of the corporation, because they want their company to prosper, as that will both reflect well on them and (probably) increase their salary/bonus.
    • Those persons who have invested in the company and/or own the company, because it will increase the value of their investment and/or company.
    • Those persons who work for the company, in whatever capacity, because it will provide opportunity for advancement in the company (through expansion of the company), and/or increased pay/salary (for the same reason).
    OK, now the question is: Who does the economy serve? The People or Corporations? Do we simply allow corporations to do anything they want to improve their profitability regardless of the damage it might do to "The People" either directly (i.e. poisoning a community's water supply) or indirectly (i.e. causing banking failures)?
    Obviously we do not just simply allow corporations "to get away with" damages but only if caught. We rarely do anything proactively to PREVENT corporations from doing damage. This is because the corporate lobby controls our legislature. We only attempt to fix damages by legislative fingers in the dam. Those fingers are of course directed by corporate interest and in all cases that I am aware of, end up opening other doors or the "fixes" are short lived and overturned or "refixed" to open a door by the congress at some later point when less people are scrutinizing.

  4. #534
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    06-23-10 @ 11:33 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Is it?

    Corporations represent the people who own them.

    The people who own them are protected under the First Amendment, ergo, the corporations cannot be denied Freedom of Speech, because to deny corporations that freedom is to deny the living people who own them that freedom.

    It's not hard, it's not confusing. It's freedom.
    The key word is the owners.
    Why even bother with the Corporations having free speech if as you note, the people who own them already have their right protected? What you are exposing is that the owners, who already have their rights protected, should be allowed to use their company as another vehicle for free speech. Do I understand you correctly?

  5. #535
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    You need to decide if corporations are deserving of personhood or not.
    No I don't.

    If so then corporate actions are those of the corporation and the employees/owners/shareholders are shielded from the actions of the corporation.
    If however you conclude that corporations are not deserving of personhood then actions taken by them are those of the party/parties responsible for the corporations decisions. The guy in the mail room doesn't get to decide where and how corporate funds are used. So which is it?
    Doesn't matter one bit when it comes to freedom of speech. The first amendment protects speech, regardless of its source.

    And let's not be disingenuous anymore about the "people" who work at these corporations. Only certain of a corporations executives and share holders (in a public company) decide how and where corporate funds are dispersed.
    Yeah, those people. They are people.

  6. #536
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 06:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    No I don't.



    Doesn't matter one bit when it comes to freedom of speech. The first amendment protects speech, regardless of its source.



    Yeah, those people. They are people.
    Corporations are NOT people; therefore, THEY HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION.

    Only the confused diziens on the right think otherwise.
    Last edited by Vader; 02-02-10 at 03:56 PM.

  7. #537
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    Corporations are NOT people; therefore, THEY HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION.
    Wrong again.

    I can find non-persons that have rights under the Constitution - even in the First Amendment.

    And corporations clearly have other Constitutional rights, this is not in dispute.

    And the Constitution protects speech, regardless of its source.

    You don't know what you're talking about.

  8. #538
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 06:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    Wrong again.

    I can find non-persons that have rights under the Constitution - even in the First Amendment. And corporations clearly have other Constitutional rights, this is not in dispute.

    You don't know what you're talking about.
    No, it is YOU who are confused.

  9. #539
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    No, it is YOU who are confused.
    Clearly not.

    So if only people have constitutional rights, does that mean:

    - political parties have no right to free speech?

    - religious groups like churches (the organizations, not the buildings) have no right to religious freedom?

    - the government could legally seize, without compensation, all of a corporation's property any time it wants?

    Please answer.

  10. #540
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 06:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    Clearly not.

    So if only people have constitutional rights, does that mean:

    - political parties have no right to free speech?

    - religious groups like churches (the organizations, not the buildings) have no right to religious freedom?

    - the government could legally seize, without compensation, all of a corporation's property any time it wants?

    Please answer.
    The rights are for people... as individuals... NOT political parties, not corporations.

    Religious freedom is not being discussed here. Quit trying to side-step the point.

    The constitution was designed to protect the individual American citizen from government persuction. It was not intended to protect big business and political groups from the consequcnes of their personal attacks.

    The right has always had difficulty accepting the fact that their big business friends are only protected as individuals. The right cannot accept that their businesses are NOT entitled to 1st Amendment protections outside of that which is provided to each individual employee.

    Of course, anytime the right cannot buy off a politican or create a law that favors them and their SIGs, the right gets bitchy and whiney.

Page 54 of 71 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
  •