View Poll Results: Do you believe in corporate personhood?

Voters
34. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    3 8.82%
  • No

    26 76.47%
  • Other (Please explain)

    5 14.71%
Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 102

Thread: Corporate Personhood

  1. #91
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO 81506
    Last Seen
    05-30-11 @ 07:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,236

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Invisible View Post
    Personally, I think that corporations should not be considered people.
    True, but people control them, work for them, make all the decisions, and are responsible for success or failure...

    ricksfolly

  2. #92
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    Can you say respondeat superior?
    yep sure can.

    Does it mean that the stockholders of a company that lost money are responsible to pay the loss to the stockholders of the company that lost money?


    Cuz if it don't say that, it's not what catawba was posting and not what Mayor Snorkum was responding to.

  3. #93
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    Well said. These arguments Kandahar and Maggie are making are sort of silly. It's like saying, "Well if you abolish slavery, what about that poor little old lady who only owns one slave, and is really nice to him?" As if that's some sort of an argument. It's plainly ridiculous.

    The fact is a shareholder is a part-owner of a company, and ought to be personally accountable just like any other owner of a company. Would that change the structure of business ownership? Certainly. But only for the better.
    But THEY ARE held personally responsible for the finacial obligations of the company. The degree of their obligation is measured as the value of the stock they own.

    That's what a LIMITED LIABILITY corporation is for.

    Without LLC's the British would not have invested in sailing ships. If a rich man's entire fortune was at risk because he put up 10% of the cost of a ship, then he would not have invested in the ship and the Indians in America would still be running around half-naked scalping each other with stone knives.

    LIMITING LIABILITY is exactly what made the modern world possible.

  4. #94
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    A corporation can't have intent. Another reason its not a person.

    Thank you.
    Of course a corporation can have intent. It has a reason for existence.

    It can't be a person because it's not a person.

    That doesn't mean the persons investing in the corporation surrender their rights and freedoms under the First Amendment and other portions of the Constitution. Hence a corporation engaging in lobbyin activity is nothing more than an expression of the stockholder's freedoms to assemble, just as when a union takes dues money to try to buy a Democrat politician they're engaging in First Amendment activity, except that lobbying is a lawful activity and union bribery is not.

    You people like to pretend the word "personhood" means the corporation is trolling the singles bars trying to get laid.

    That's not what it means.

  5. #95
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Only temporarily, as time goes on the effects of the actions are limited, because of limited liability, so it doesn't really present a problem.




    No not every person should of been sued but the people responsible for the operations, should be liable.
    With their skin on the line, it would cause them to act with greater care to avoid losing their shirts.

    But employees are perfectly aware of when their actions may come under prosecution for negligence. That's why engineers with any sense to the analysis, they don't blindly sign drawings. Their signature makes them liable for jail time if something goes seriously wrong. And cases where Joe Schmoe the chemical dumper gets prosecuted happen often enough in the media, too.

    Then again, it was the Niagara Board of education's fault that the chemicals stored in Love Canal were able to poison and kill people, but it was Hooker Chemical Company that bore the costs and the blame, even though Hooker refused to sell and sold for $1 only reluctantly under threat of eminent domain to ensure the transferred title carried one hell of a scary warning, which the Board of Education promptly ignored.

    Yet, not Board members went to jail. Where was the justice in that? Hooker complied with 100% of extant laws at the time.

  6. #96
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayor Snorkum View Post
    That doesn't mean the persons investing in the corporation surrender their rights and freedoms under the First Amendment and other portions of the Constitution. Hence a corporation engaging in lobbyin activity is nothing more than an expression of the stockholder's freedoms to assemble
    I could maybe buy that if the stockholders had any say on the issue. They don't. I've never once been petitioned by anyone I own stock in for opinions on lobbying. It is a decision made with stockholder money essentially by the CEO's, CFO's and/or BoD's. So as such, it isn't the aggregated power of the stockholders coming together to petition government. It is a corporate entity petitioning government for its own means and desires. It is bribery, it is no different than your Union example (except I think you like one and hate the other so you're trying to make it seem like they're different). The stockholder really has very little say or influence in the system. It's one of the broken aspects of our current market.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  7. #97
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I could maybe buy that if the stockholders had any say on the issue. They don't. I've never once been petitioned by anyone I own stock in for opinions on lobbying. It is a decision made with stockholder money essentially by the CEO's, CFO's and/or BoD's. So as such, it isn't the aggregated power of the stockholders coming together to petition government. It is a corporate entity petitioning government for its own means and desires. It is bribery, it is no different than your Union example (except I think you like one and hate the other so you're trying to make it seem like they're different). The stockholder really has very little say or influence in the system. It's one of the broken aspects of our current market.
    Don't be foolish. The pinko leftists were doing everything they possibly could to get state and local governments, and people, divested of stock of companies doing business in South Africa. They did that to influence corporate policy.

    Anyone who doesn't like a corporation's policy has every freedom to sell their damn stock. Their decision to retain that stock is their sign of agreement with corporate policy.

    The free market is such a wonderful thing when explored by real libertarians.

  8. #98
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO 81506
    Last Seen
    05-30-11 @ 07:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,236

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    The fact is a shareholder is a part-owner of a company, and ought to be personally accountable just like any other owner of a company.
    Only if the stockholder knows what the CEO is doing, and has signed his approval. You can't be held responsible for things out of your loop, beyond your control.

    ricksfolly

  9. #99
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by ricksfolly View Post
    Only if the stockholder knows what the CEO is doing, and has signed his approval. You can't be held responsible for things out of your loop, beyond your control.
    Where are you getting that idea from? It is incorrect. The principal is liable for the actions committed by his agent in the course of business.

  10. #100
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayor Snorkum View Post
    Don't be foolish. The pinko leftists were doing everything they possibly could to get state and local governments, and people, divested of stock of companies doing business in South Africa. They did that to influence corporate policy.

    Anyone who doesn't like a corporation's policy has every freedom to sell their damn stock. Their decision to retain that stock is their sign of agreement with corporate policy.

    The free market is such a wonderful thing when explored by real libertarians.
    They aren't in on all the decisions and books and information. They go by what the company says its doing. If this were more educated decision making process, I would maybe be more inclined to agree. But as it stands, stock holders have relatively no influence but if a company does bad, or cooks its books, or uses some form of government privilege to look better and then fails; who pays the price? The stock holders loose out on that money, but the ones in charge feel no negative repercussions for having performed badly in the business world. If you think this sort of government subsidy and bail outs are part of "free market" policy, I'd have to question your understanding of what free market it.

    In the end, free market economy is a very wonderful thing where people can succeed or fail by their own ability and luck. What we have now is not free market economy, however. It is entangle government corporate economy; which is well different than the free market.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011 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
  •