Con_Alma;1232259 wrote: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.

government does more than permits the corporation. it sets up a system that created an economic person, granting this person the right to buy, sell, borrow, lend, hire, fire, sue, be sued and issue stock. It is not "the people" who are responsible for these things but the artifical entity that has done these things. The employees are given limited responsibility for the actions. The investors are not held responsible for the actions of the corporation and financially limit liability. All because of the government. Gosh they even give this entity political rights.

O.K. The government sets the system up. Great. It's people that function inside thesystem and create any particular corporation.

P.S. The people would create value and commerce whether that system was "set uo" or not. They did before such a system existed and will even if itis changed or dismantled.

Con_Alma;1232435 wrote:O.K. The government sets the system up. Great. It's people that function inside thesystem and create any particular corporation.

P.S. The people would create value and commerce whether that system was "set uo" or not. They did before such a system existed and will even if itis changed or dismantled.

a charter issued by the government creates a corporation. The government created artificial entities dominate our economy. Since the government has "established the system" and issued the charter to creates each corporation, it obviously has the right to regulate or to abolish these artificial entities.

dominate the economy
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0744.pdf

The "charter" may create the corporation but it takes the people to put forth the capital and desire and intelectual fortitude. Without it, there's no chartr for the governemnt to issue. There would be nothing for them to regulate. there would be no reason for the governemnt to even be active.

It's the people who crate value and opportunity. In it's puresest essence it's the people that have driven and woud drive commerce and if the governemnt was present or not.

Regulate all you want....the people have transacted before government intervention and will transact no matter the action of government in the future.

The subject of the thread was, “why do you hate corporations.” Corporations are conscienceless and soulless artificial beings. They do very destructive things but their employees and investors escape full responsibility for the acts, because the corporation is an “entity.” These entities have achieved a dominant position in our economy. Since the government established the system to create these entities then charters them into existence, the government has right and the duty to regulate them to prevent the destructive actions of the corporations.

Yeah...we covered that already....should we keep repeating it or mature the conversation to additional points???? I choose the latter.

I don't hate corporations. The people that make them of worth created value before they we available and will continue to do so no matter how the governemtn might continue to regulate them.

and I have answered the question why I hate corporations and a way that hatred could be assuaged. The destructive acts of corporations could be diminished.
you seem to have this deep admiration for business, but not that opinion of government of the people?

isadore;1232711 wrote:and I have answered the question why I hate corporations and a way that hatred could be assuaged. The destructive acts of corporations could be diminished.
you seem to have this deep admiration for business, but not that opinion of government of the people?

Yes, we have covered that. Let me be clear if you are still assuming what my opinion is.

I care not for nor am I opposed to "business"es. I do wish people would choose to accept accountability for their own actions and make their own actions the ultimate impacting action in their lives. I wish government was not sought ought as the first and immediate potential solution to any and all problems.

In short, I don't hate corporations. There's no reason to if a person chooses wisely.

and what do corporation do but allow people not to be responsible for their actions. the investors get limited liability and no legal responsibility for the acts "their" business has taken and the same is true to a large extent for the management of the corporations with their golden parachutes.
a democratic government is much more reflective of choices and responsibilities.

isadore;1232743 wrote:and what do corporation do but allow people not to be responsible for their actions. ...

Let me be clear. I don't care personally. People can decide if they wish to engage or not with such entities. If they are permissionary entities from the government like you say, then it's on the government. How inept are they to have such a climate.

Democratic governments can easily destroy the minority. That's not the perfect oversight that I would envision. Neither did the framers.

Con_Alma;1232759 wrote:Let me be clear. I don't care personally. People can decide if they wish to engage or not with such entities. If they are permissionary entities from the government like you say, then it's on the government. How inept are they to have such a climate.

Democratic governments can easily destroy the minority. That's not the perfect oversight that I would envision. Neither did the framers.

People learn and then sometimes unlearn lessons. They allowed government to establish corporations because it would aid in the growth of the economy. Then they saw how these entities could be destructive, so they increased tax and regulation on them. The reason for those rules begin to fade, corporations claim we need deregulation. And then we begin to see abuse rise again.
Democracy a threat?
Framer were pretty smart guys but
Gosh a ruddies if the framers were so perfect why did they not include a Bill of Rights in the original Constitution.If they were so perfect why would they write a document that would allow freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, right to bear arms, right to trial by jury be taken away from you. They allowed any of those things to be taken away from you in the government they created.

isadore;1232815 wrote:Then they saw how these entities could be destructive, so they increased tax and regulation on them.

BULL$I!!. They found them to be a great source of tax revenue to be confiscated by government in order to fund government existence and government growth. That is why the corporate tax rate has been massively increased by a factor of 35, from its original 1% to today's 35%. Government only gets bigger, and it does so by confiscating more and more and more and more of what is produced by the producers.

Get in the game!

QuakerOats;1232857 wrote:BULL$I!!. They found them to be a great source of tax revenue to be confiscated by government in order to fund government existence and government growth. That is why the corporate tax rate has been massively increased by a factor of 35, from its original 1% to today's 35%. Government only gets bigger, and it does so by confiscating more and more and more and more of what is produced by the producers.

Get in the game!

What vulgar gibberish! Why shouldn’t the government tax an entity it created. An entity that it granted special rights to and then chartered. And why shouldn’t it regulate these entities when they take actions that damage people.

isadore;1232866 wrote:What vulgar gibberish! Why shouldn’t the government tax an entity it created. An entity that it granted special rights to and then chartered. And why shouldn’t it regulate these entities when they take actions that damage people.

The govt didn't create the corporation, the shareholders did. And it's not like the corporation is some US govt phenomenon or creation.

gut;1232892 wrote:The govt didn't create the corporation, the shareholders did. And it's not like the corporation is some US govt phenomenon or creation.

all these shareholder together do not have a corporation. The government create the entity, defines a corporation, grants special rights to it, charters it as economic entity.

isadore;1232902 wrote:all these shareholder together do not have a corporation. The government create the entity, defines a corporation, grants special rights to it, charters it as economic entity.

The govt doesn't create anything - you don't need to incorporate to operate, although 99% do. The govt RECOGNIZES a group of shareholders that have organized a business to operate subject to certain rules/laws and guidelines - some favorable, some unfavorable and actually choosing to incorporate (especially choosing the right structure doesn't grant any sort of windfall). Samsung, for example, is not incorporated in the US - has not been given or granted anything by the US, but pays various US taxes.

isadore --- just go vote for obama and keep getting more of what you're getting. Good luck.

gut;1232892 wrote:The govt didn't create the corporation, the shareholders did. And it's not like the corporation is some US govt phenomenon or creation.

Yes, they do. I can incorporate my company in the Cayman Islands or virtually anywhere else in the world and do business in the US. The US govt did not create my corporation in any sense of the word. What the US govt has done is create laws that corporations are subject to.

gut;1232920 wrote:The govt doesn't create anything - you don't need to incorporate to operate, although 99% do. The govt RECOGNIZES a group of shareholders that have organized a business to operate subject to certain rules/laws and guidelines - some favorable, some unfavorable and actually choosing to incorporate (especially choosing the right structure doesn't grant any sort of windfall). Samsung, for example, is not incorporated in the US - has not been given or granted anything by the US, but pays various US taxes.

Corporations dominate the economy

[URL="file://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&key=0684ce2837c054d34aab4a7a8850c3ac&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ohiochatter.com%2Fforum%2Fshowthread.php%3F35277-Why-do-you-hate-corporations%2Fpage15&v=1&libid=1343168819077&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.census.gov%2Fcompendia%2Fstatab%2F2012%2Ftables%2F12s0744.pdf&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ohiochatter.com%2Fforum%2Fforumdisplay.php%3F6-Serious-Business&title=Why%20do%20you%20hate%20corporations%3F&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.census.gov%2Fcompendia%2Fstat...es%2F12s0744.pdf&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13431700315793"]http://www.census.gov/compendia/stat...es/12s0744.pdf[/URL]
Gosh you claim you don’t need to a corporation to operate, then admit “99% do”
As you admit the government sets the rules. Actually they define what a corporation is, what rights they will have and then they grant them a charter to operate. You talk about that the rules, some favorable, some unfavorable. Gosh they must be highly tilted toward the favorable if 99% want it. No government, no advantageous business structure, government definitely as the granter of all these advantages, retains the right to regulate.
Who cares about the choices a South Korean conglomerate.

gut;1232922 wrote:Yes, they do. I can incorporate my company in the Cayman Islands or virtually anywhere else in the world and do business in the US. The US govt did not create my corporation in any sense of the word. What the US govt has done is create laws that corporations are subject to.

a government chartered it.

QuakerOats;1232921 wrote:isadore --- just go vote for obama and keep getting more of what you're getting. Good luck.

and good luck to you during President Obama's second term

isadore;1232947 wrote:a government chartered it.

What does that mean, really? It's a piece of paper, essentially, that recognizes a group of people banding together to conduct business. Saying govt created corporations is a completely ignorant bastardization of the reality.

gut;1233225 wrote:What does that mean, really? It's a piece of paper, essentially, that recognizes a group of people banding together to conduct business. Saying govt created corporations is a completely ignorant bastardization of the reality.

the government has defined what the business is, an economic entity, they have granted it certain special rights, and they have by chartering it brought it into existence. That is reality.

isadore;1232815 wrote:...
Democracy a threat?
Framer were pretty smart guys but
Gosh a ruddies if the framers were so perfect why did they not include a Bill of Rights in the original Constitution.If they were so perfect why would they write a document that would allow freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, right to bear arms, right to trial by jury be taken away from you. They allowed any of those things to be taken away from you in the government they created.

Yes, democracy can squeeze out the little guy or the minority. You don't really want that do you? I don't know where you get that it's a "threat" from, however. A democracy can have 51% ill minded people destroy the less fortunate. That's certainly not ideal. Is it?

Who said the framers were perfect? Why would you imply that I did? That's a bit of an exaggeration for effect don't you think?