isadore;1231624 wrote:no sir, anyone could not do it. for millions no money, no skill and no support, which can include more than not speaking english and not knowing anyone in US, eliminated all possibilities but starvation or factory work.

corporations only exist because of government.

Anyone did do it. I agree that no skill and not speaking English are two different things. That's why I posted them separately. I don't care why or how corporations came into exitance.

There were choices. Some chose poorly.

Con_Alma;1231625 wrote:Anyone did do it. I agree that no skill and not speaking English are two different things. That's why I posted them separately. I don't care why or how corporations came into exitance.

There were choices. Some chose poorly.

no millions could not do it. no skill, no money, and no support which can undermine any ability to have choices as it did for millions.
I am sure you don't care why corporations came into existence but I do. The title of this thread is why do you hate corporations? I am participating in that discussion by mentioning government role in their creation and the fact that corporations are soulless and conscienceless exploiters of workers. That is on subject for the thread. You should try it sometime.

isadore;1231656 wrote:no millions could not do it. no skill, no money, and no support which can undermine any ability to have choices as it did for millions.
I am sure you don't care why corporations came into existence but I do. The title of this thread is why do you hate corporations? I am participating in that discussion by mentioning government role in their creation and the fact that corporations are soulless and conscienceless exploiters of workers. That is on subject for the thread. You should try it sometime.

Skill was not needed. Money was not needed. Support was not needed. Proof are those who had none of those and yet still chose to make it on their own...and did.

My contribution to the topic at hand is stating that if you hate corporations you need not engage with them in any capacity. It has been done and can still be done. Why corporations are able to be in existence is irrelevant if you hate them and other options are available. They are...to all.

Con_Alma;1231657 wrote:Skill was not needed. Money was not needed. Support was not needed. Proof are those who had none of those and yet still chose to make it on their own...and did.

My contribution to the topic at hand is stating that if you hate corporations you need not engage with them in any capacity. It has been done and can still be done. Why corporations are able to be in existence is irrelevant if you hate them and other options are available. They are...to all.

among the other necessities for choice skill was needed to carry out any alternative. millions did not have those skills. money was needed to finance an alternative, support was needed to reach and carryout the alternative. millions lacked one or more of the alternatives. There reason for existence offers an obvious way to stop the actions that cause them to be hated. and that way is by use of government that allowed their creation. they can be changed for the better.

Not so. You don't need the skill. Skill is often times develped. It's not required to have it beforehand. There was nothing to finance. Work for others with shared benefits took place. Options were available to all.

Why companies were formed doesnt matter to me. It changes nothing. They existed. They were a poor choice that many people made. Others chose to put their own security in their ownhands...a much wiser decision.

Con_Alma;1231673 wrote:Not so. You don't need the skill. Skill is often times develped. It's not required to have it beforehand. There was nothing to finance. Work for others with shared benefits took place. Options were available to all.

Why companies were formed doesnt matter to me. It changes nothing. They existed. They were a poor choice that many people made. Others chose to put their own security in their ownhands...a much wiser decision.

no people with no money, needed employment or starvation. since they had no skills and no support they took the only choice available factory work.
And for the subject of the thread, the reason that corporations were created, who granted them powers is significant. And the fact that they can be regulated to alleviate the damage they do is important.

I acknowledge the reason corporations were created may be of importance to you. It's not to me nor does it change the fact that people chose poorly.

People who had no money nor skills had other options besides starving or working for a corporation.

Con_Alma;1231688 wrote:I acknowledge the reason corporations were created may be of importance to you. It's not to me nor does it change the fact that people chose poorly.

People who had no money nor skills had other options besides starving or working for a corporation.

millions of people in the post bellum era found a situation where there only two choices were factory work or starvation.
given the title of the thread the fact corporations exploit workers is significant. and the fact that their conduct could be regulated for the betterment of workers and consumers.

isadore;1231691 wrote:millions of people in the post bellum era found a situation where there only two choices were factory work or starvation.
given the title of the thread the fact corporations exploit workers is significant. and the fact that their conduct could be regulated for the betterment of workers and consumers.

Just because that's what hey found doesn't mean that choices weren't available.

The fact that corporations may have exploited people may be significant to the original topic. It doesn't lend to my expansion of the topic that people had choices....whether they thought they did or didn't. Choices were available. They chose poorly.

isadore;1231656 wrote:I am participating in that discussion by mentioning government role in their creation and the fact that corporations are soulless and conscienceless exploiters of workers. That is on subject for the thread. You should try it sometime.

Actually, corporations are groups of people aligned for a common purpose - the generation of products or services that others will benefit from. And all of those people have hearts, souls and a conscience.

Raw Dawgin' it;1221573 wrote:because starting a cellular company or any other business is easy and everyone has the money to do it :rolleyes:

Most people that "do it" do not have the money to do it, but they believe in themselves and their product to the point that they go out and raise the money to "do it". They either borrow the money or sell equity in the business to "do it". And generally they risk everything they have to "do it". Most fail, at least once, but many ultimately succeed, and society is better off for them having done so.


PS - obama has great disdain for these people, as evidenced in his outrageous recent remarks. http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/309976/obama-so-worried-about-businessmen-taking-too-much-credit

QuakerOats;1231817 wrote:Actually, corporations are groups of people aligned for a common purpose - the generation of products or services that others will benefit from. And all of those people have hearts, souls and a conscience.

actually they are government chartered artificial institutions. These entities are given the economic rights of a person to buy, sell, hire, fire, borrow, lend plus issue stock. They are also given political rights. They are given the advantage of the grant of limited liability toward their investors. So the corporation can act in a soulless, conscienceless way
and the investors can escape extended liability or blame. They can say I know nothing and i am not responsible as the corporation abuses workers and consumers.

Con_Alma;1231694 wrote:Just because that's what hey found doesn't mean that choices weren't available.

The fact that corporations may have exploited people may be significant to the original topic. It doesn't lend to my expansion of the topic that people had choices....whether they thought they did or didn't. Choices were available. They chose poorly.

how can it be an expansion of a topic when it removes the purpose for which the thread was started. why people hate corporations?
It seem like more of an amusing derailment than an expansion.
But millions of people forced off the farms or immigrants during the post bellum era found no choice but work for exploitive corporations or starve.

isadore;1231830 wrote:actually they are government chartered artificial institutions. These entities are given the economic rights of a person to buy, sell, hire, fire, borrow, lend plus issue stock. They are also given political rights. They are given the advantage of the grant of limited liability toward their investors. So the corporation can act in a soulless, conscienceless way
and the investors can escape extended liability or blame. They can say I know nothing and i am not responsible as the corporation abuses workers and consumers.

You are uniquely out of touch. People are entirely free to move as they choose; they may choose to align themselves and offer their talents with another group of people performing in a different sector, location, industry, or marketplace. All of these groups of people produce goods and services that others need, want, and/or value. And all of these people have been part of an economy that has led to a an incredibly high standard of living for billions of people worldwide. Free market capitalism is the greatest solution to human condition.

QuakerOats;1231841 wrote:You are uniquely out of touch. People are entirely free to move as they choose; they may choose to align themselves and offer their talents with another group of people performing in a different sector, location, industry, or marketplace. All of these groups of people produce goods and services that others need, want, and/or value. And all of these people have been part of an economy that has led to a an incredibly high standard of living for billions of people worldwide. Free market capitalism is the greatest solution to human condition.

unreined free market capitalism has produced great suffering. But as to the subject of this thread, corporations, they are not a true institution of laissez faire capitalism. They are creatures of government. chartered by government, given special economic rights by government, even given political rights by government. given by government with a method to allow its investors to escape risk and guilt of the conscienceless acts of corporations.

isadore;1231860 wrote:unreined free market capitalism has produced great suffering. But as to the subject of this thread, corporations, they are not a true institution of laissez faire capitalism. They are creatures of government. chartered by government, given special economic rights by government, even given political rights by government. given by government with a method to allow its investors to escape risk and guilt of the conscienceless acts of corporations.

So then, truly, your beef is with big govt. They created these corporations, give them special advantages to make a load of money, then tax and tax so they can buy votes.

to your other point, net-net corporations have produced a much better way of life and standard of living than "great suffering". Where is this great suffering in the world caused by corporations you speak of?

isadore;1231860 wrote:given by government with a method to allow its investors to escape risk and guilt of the conscienceless acts of corporations.

You have now proved that you are uniquely out of touch. I can understand how a radical like obama can get elected in a free country when I read your jibberish.

QuakerOats;1231871 wrote:You have now proved that you are uniquely out of touch. I can understand how a radical like obama can get elected in a free country when I read your jibberish.

if you find it "jibberish" don't read it. i realize the writings of a person with a conscience is hard to understand for a supporter of "the market" no matter what the cost.

gut;1231870 wrote:So then, truly, your beef is with big govt. They created these corporations...

I think this point need not be lost. I have no beef with "corporations" per se but it is important to understand that they don't exist in a free, unregulated market free from the government meddling in the marketplace. In a free market individuals choosing to align themselves for a common purpose could only do so in the form of a general partnership unprotected from liability in tort or contract. In the words of Founding Father/Supreme Court Justice Marshall " A corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of the law." But, all in all I think the invention of corporate form has been a good example of the government fostering capitalism in a way that allows average joe's to participate in the marketplace and grow wealth without being skilled managers.

gut;1231870 wrote:So then, truly, your beef is with big govt. They created these corporations, give them special advantages to make a load of money, then tax and tax so they can buy votes.

to your other point, net-net corporations have produced a much better way of life and standard of living than "great suffering". Where is this great suffering in the world caused by corporations you speak of?

actually it is a form of crony capitalism allowing when they allow corporations to operate without strong regulation. In the post bellum period we saw the corporations in America operate without restriction destroying lives of workers and consumers. Working children 14-16 hours a day, putting people to work under the most dangerous conditions, throwing them out the when they were injured or sick, selling consumers dangerous and at times deadly products. This was your corporations in action without regulation in your free market.

isadore;1231837 wrote:how can it be an expansion of a topic when it removes the purpose for which the thread was started. why people hate corporations?
It seem like more of an amusing derailment than an expansion.
But millions of people forced off the farms or immigrants during the post bellum era found no choice but work for exploitive corporations or starve.

That what an expansion is....moving further and beyond.

There's nothing amusing about this topic for me.

Just because people "found" no choice doesn't mean it wasn't available. They chose porrly if the chose to work for a factory. P.S. More people didn't workfor factories that did! Shhh. don't tell anyone.

isadore;1231860 wrote:unreined free market capitalism has produced great suffering. But as to the subject of this thread, corporations, they are not a true institution of laissez faire capitalism. They are creatures of government. chartered by government, given special economic rights by government, even given political rights by government. given by government with a method to allow its investors to escape risk and guilt of the conscienceless acts of corporations.

Government permits corporations. They don't create them. Just because a government allows a corporation to legally exist doesn't mean the government created them. People create corporations. People decide to use the rules available to them and maximize their opportunity.

BoatShoes;1231885 wrote:I think the invention of corporate form has been a good example of the government fostering capitalism in a way that allows average joe's to participate in the marketplace and grow wealth without being skilled managers.

It is pretty rare to grow wealth without being a skilled manager nowadays, given the intrusive overreach of government that must be contended with. In fact, our own government is the biggest impediment and enemy of growth, innovation and wealth creation. You need to be highly skilled and effective to ply your way through the government minefield, before you ever even reach the real playing field of the global economy where your competitors are located.

Most people don't know how to make a widget, let alone run a business enterprise, especially the guy in the White House. His War on Entrepreneurship must end.

Con_Alma;1232252 wrote:That what an expansion is....moving further and beyond.

There's nothing amusing about this topic for me.

Just because people "found" no choice doesn't mean it wasn't available. They chose porrly if the chose to work for a factory. P.S. More people didn't workfor factories that did! Shhh. don't tell anyone.

an expansion keeps the core, the basic center and builds on it. yours was a derailment that took it completely out of its origins.
millions of people found no choice because none was available to them. people who did not work there had another choice or choices available to them. millions went into factories did not.

isadore;1232419 wrote:an expansion keeps the core, the basic center and builds on it. yours was a derailment that took it completely out of its origins.
millions of people found no choice because none was available to them. people who did not work there had another choice or choices available to them. millions went into factories did not.

...didn't take it "out of it's origins". It's implied the origin is still the foundation... being that it's still there I chose to add on to it.

Finding no choice does not mean one doesn't exist. It did.those not acting on it chose poorly.