isadore;1233639 wrote:a government can come pretty close to shutting it down. ex. cambodia under khmer rouge, pretty limited north korea under the kims.
gosh a ruddies we are talking about corporations and there effect on society. and judge marshall has given the legal description of them. government has granted them and "exisiting only in contemplation of the law."

pretty close? O.k.

Commerce existed on this land before it was a country and it will continue to exist no matter the actions of government. People will transact with one another in a variety of ways.

Con_Alma;1234245 wrote:*too

It matters only to you that you extend such patronizing offerings.

my personal amusement is reason enough to do it. you have my hope that you are having a good and productive july 26th.

Con_Alma;1234250 wrote:Of course it's able to be repealed. That means that a majority group has the ability to take away rights from the minority which is why we chose to be a constitutional republic.

gosh the framers wrote that power to repeal into the Constitution because they realized the document should reflect their faith in the will of the people. which of course would has been realized in our representative democracy as we have extended rights and sufffrage to more and more Americans.

Con_Alma;1234251 wrote:pretty close? O.k.

Commerce existed on this land before it was a country and it will continue to exist no matter the actions of government. People will transact with one another in a variety of ways.

pretty close was just an example of understatement. And of course whether some barter is taking place somewhere has just about nothing to do with the subject of this thread which is people's attitude toward corporations? What they are? Is there contribution to our society positive or negative? What is government's role in relation to corporation might be something to be discussed. you know that kind of stuff about corporations, the dominant business structure.

I stand corrected...The govt DOES create corporations, such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - the foundation of the financial collapse. Interestingly, the WSJ points out that in 2005, the Bush administration and Republicans supported legislation increasing regulation and oversight over Fannie and Freddie and the banking industry. The Dems - including Senator Obama - vowed to fillibuster if it ever came to the floor. And the rest of the story is taxpayer bailout history.

isadore;1234378 wrote:pretty close was just an example of understatement. And of course whether some barter is taking place somewhere has just about nothing to do with the subject of this thread which is people's attitude toward corporations? What they are? Is there contribution to our society positive or negative? What is government's role in relation to corporation might be something to be discussed. you know that kind of stuff about corporations, the dominant business structure.

Ahhhh it need not be just barter. ...and it has everything to do with the topic of the thread. However, your multiple posts containing your "wishes" for me clearly do not.

Corporations need not be present for people to engage in commerce. When they were not present, commerce took place. If they are not present , commerce took place. Because they are present, certain commerce is fit into the constructs of corporations but the do not fully determine if commerce is present or not. For that reason corporations will either bes used as a benefit by those wishing to enage or they will steer activity away from the manner that the government might ideally have us function. Either way commerce will exist because it is the people who decide and create it's ultimate presence.

isadore;1234374 wrote:gosh the framers wrote that power to repeal into the Constitution because they realized the document should reflect their faith in the will of the people. which of course would has been realized in our representative democracy as we have extended rights and sufffrage to more and more Americans.

Yes, and if that will be to smother the minority we have protective features to keep it from happening.

isadore;1234372 wrote:my personal amusement is reason enough to do it. you have my hope that you are having a good and productive july 26th.

I appreciate that seemingly very accurate statement that it is amusement as opposed to genuine stated concerns that inspire your comments.

gut;1234381 wrote:I stand corrected...The govt DOES create corporations, such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - the foundation of the financial collapse. Interestingly, the WSJ points out that in 2005, the Bush administration and Republicans supported legislation increasing regulation and oversight over Fannie and Freddie and the banking industry. The Dems - including Senator Obama - vowed to fillibuster if it ever came to the floor. And the rest of the story is taxpayer bailout history.

in this case as in others stricter regulations were needed. And what are corporations:The Constitution mentions the rights of the people frequently but does not cite corporations. Indeed, many of the founders were skeptical of corporate influence.
John Marshall, the nation’s greatest chief justice, saw a corporation as “an artificial being, invisible, intangible existing only in contemplation of law,” he wrote in 1819. “Being the mere creature of law, it possesses only those properties which the charter of its creation confers upon it, either expressly, or as incidental to its very existence.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/22/opinion/22tue1.html
[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%2Fpage16&v=1&libid=1343309115432&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.giga-usa.com%2Fquotes%2Fauthors%2Fjohn_c_marshall_a001.htm&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ohiochatter.com%2Fforum%2Fshowthread.php%3F35277-Why-do-you-hate-corporations%2Fpage17&title=Why%20do%20you%20hate%20corporations%3F&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.giga-usa.com%2Fquotes%2Fauthors%2Fjohn_c_marshall_a001.htm&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13433093903653"]http://www.giga-usa.com/quotes/authors/john_c_marshall_a001.htm[/URL]

Con_Alma;1234387 wrote:I appreciate that seemingly very accurate statement that it is amusement as opposed to genuine stated concerns that inspire your comments.

you are welcome.

Con_Alma;1234386 wrote:Yes, and if that will be to smother the minority we have protective features to keep it from happening.

in our representative democracy the ultimate power is with the people, popular sovereignty.

isadore;1234400 wrote:in our representative democracy the ultimate power is with the people, popular sovereignty.

The majority are unable diminish the equal status of the minority. The presence of tyranny is protected.


While it is clear that democracy must guarantee the expression of the popular will through majority rule, it is equally clear that it must guarantee that the majority will not abuse use its power to violate the basic and inalienable rights of the minority. For one, a defining characteristic of democracy must be the people's right to change the majority through elections. This right is the people's "supreme authority."

For the majority, ensuring the minority's rights becomes a matter of self-interest, since it must utilize the same rights when it is in minority to seek to become a majority again. This holds equally true in a multiparty parliamentary democracy, where no party has a majority, since a government must still be formed in coalition by a majority of parliament members.

This presence eliminates the evidence of pure democracy in our country.

Con_Alma;1234384 wrote:Ahhhh it need not be just barter. ...and it has everything to do with the topic of the thread. However, your multiple posts containing your "wishes" for me clearly do not.

Corporations need not be present for people to engage in commerce. When they were not present, commerce took place. If they are not present , commerce took place. Because they are present, certain commerce is fit into the constructs of corporations but the do not fully determine if commerce is present or not. For that reason corporations will either bes used as a benefit by those wishing to enage or they will steer activity away from the manner that the government might ideally have us function. Either way commerce will exist because it is the people who decide and create it's ultimate presence.

Government determines whether one particular type of business organization will exist. That type of government ordained business organization has marked advantages over other types of business organizations as can be seen by the dominant position it has in our economy in total profit, revenue and assets. This type of business organization has demonstrated when unregulated it will abuse workers and endanger consumers. The government as the definer and creator of these businesses has the right to regulate these organizations for the benefit of society.
Moving away from the discussion of the corporations to the general topic of commerce to the exclusion of corporations in no way answers the question that started the thread.
Gosh a ruddies my personal amusement is the reason for anything I write on here and all ultimately I care about at this site. Have a nice day.

Con_Alma;1234410 wrote:The majority are unable diminish the equal status of the minority. The presence of tyranny is protected.


While it is clear that democracy must guarantee the expression of the popular will through majority rule, it is equally clear that it must guarantee that the majority will not abuse use its power to violate the basic and inalienable rights of the minority. For one, a defining characteristic of democracy must be the people's right to change the majority through elections. This right is the people's "supreme authority."

For the majority, ensuring the minority's rights becomes a matter of self-interest, since it must utilize the same rights when it is in minority to seek to become a majority again. This holds equally true in a multiparty parliamentary democracy, where no party has a majority, since a government must still be formed in coalition by a majority of parliament members.

This presence eliminates the evidence of pure democracy in our country.

gosh a ruddies, yep we are a representative democracy. We have chosen to guarantee rights to minorities, in fact to extend the rights of minorities over the history of our representative democracy. all those rights are in fact repealable legally within our system by the will of the mass of people. we have chosen not to do it for the benefit of the minorities and our general population but the power is there in our democracy.

isadore;1234427 wrote:Government determines whether one particular type of business organization will exist. That type of government ordained business organization has marked advantages over other types of business organizations as can be seen by the dominant position it has in our economy in total profit, revenue and assets. This type of business organization has demonstrated when unregulated it will abuse workers and endanger consumers. The government as the definer and creator of these businesses has the right to regulate these organizations for the benefit of society.
Moving away from the discussion of the corporations to the general topic of commerce to the exclusion of corporations in no way answers the question that started the thread.
Gosh a ruddies my personal amusement is the reason for anything I write on here and all ultimately I care about at this site. Have a nice day.

Whether the "business organizations" exist or not does not determine if commerce is transacted. The people do. That statement i a supporting comment with regards to to answering the question posed which started the topic. I do not hate corporations. See the connection now?

With amusement benign the inspiring motivation for you with regard to your posts, it lends to my comments that your wishes for others have no other benefit to anyone but yourself. See, we do agree on some things!

isadore;1234431 wrote:gosh a ruddies, yep we are a representative democracy. We have chosen to guarantee rights to minorities, in fact to extend the rights of minorities over the history of our representative democracy. all those rights are in fact repealable legally within our system by the will of the mass of people. we have chosen not to do it for the benefit of the minorities and our general population but the power is there in our democracy.

Haven't we covered that already?

There are things the power of the people can't do. There representative can and often do not carry out the will of the people. Although the people can cease the government entirely that we have to gain such will of the majority by doing so we then would not have the system in place that we have and suddenly the strong would devour the minority.

Con_Alma;1234432 wrote:Whether the "business organizations" exist or not does not determine if commerce is transacted. The people do. That statement i a supporting comment with regards to to answering the question posed which started the topic. I do not hate corporations. See the connection now?

With amusement benign the inspiring motivation for you with regard to your posts, it lends to my comments that your wishes for others have no other benefit to anyone but yourself. See, we do agree on some things!

Gosh a ruddies how nice of you to appreciate my “benign” inspiring motivations for my posts.
Whether commerce exists has at best tangential ties to the subject. The central subject is the nature of corporations. We have your generic statement “I don’t hate corporations.” Thank you for that contribution to the discussion.

Con_Alma;1234433 wrote:Haven't we covered that already?

There are things the power of the people can't do. There representative can and often do not carry out the will of the people. Although the people can cease the government entirely that we have to gain such will of the majority by doing so we then would not have the system in place that we have and suddenly the strong would devour the minority.

yes in our representative democracy and actually they can repeal the rights of minorities without changing the basic structure of the government, it can be done through the amendment process. luckily the people are committed to allowing these protections and encouragements to continue.

isadore;1234437 wrote:Gosh a ruddies how nice of you to appreciate my “benign” inspiring motivations for my posts.
Whether commerce exists has at best tangential ties to the subject. The central subject is the nature of corporations. We have your generic statement “I don’t hate corporations.” Thank you for that contribution to the discussion.

Your "benign" inspiration indicates that when you offer such things as wishes for others there's a lack of genuine support behind it for the others benefit. It's only for your benefit that you provide such posts. It's telling.

Without commerce, there is no need for corporations. The activity of commerce is fundamental to a corporation's existence. It's an overlay for commerce which has and will exist whether corporations are in existence or not.

isadore;1234442 wrote:yes in our representative democracy and actually they can repeal the rights of minorities without changing the basic structure of the government, it can be done through the amendment process. luckily the people are committed to allowing these protections and encouragements to continue.

Lol. So it is luck that you rely upon for the protection of minorities. To rid them of such protection the government we have would no longer exist. By repealing such fundamental rights the actions would be such that the definition of our government would change for these rights are considered the essential element of any liberal democracy.

Con_Alma;1234445 wrote:Your "benign" inspiration indicates that when you offer such things as wishes for others there's a lack of genuine support behind it for the others benefit. It's only for your benefit that you provide such posts. It's telling.

Without commerce, there is no need for corporations. The activity of commerce is fundamental to a corporation's existence. It's an overlay for commerce which has and will exist whether corporations are in existence or not.

Gosh when I do something to amuse myself, by definition that mean a way to spend my time, and benign I am being gracious. And on the subject of this thread without government there would be no corporations. The government gives them privileges and charters them into existence.

isadore;1234470 wrote:Gosh when I do something to amuse myself, by definition that mean a way to spend my time, and benign I am being gracious. And on the subject of this thread without government there would be no corporations. The government gives them privileges and charters them into existence.

That "gracious"ness is for the purpose of your own benefit when considering that it is inspired by your seeking of ammusement.

...and without corporations there would still be commerce....this is the supporting point with regards to my opinion that I don't hate them.

Con_Alma;1234449 wrote:Lol. So it is luck that you rely upon for the protection of minorities. To rid them of such protection the government we have would no longer exist. By repealing such fundamental rights the actions would be such that definition of of government would change for these rights are considered the essential element of any liberal democracy.

gosh a ruddies our "liberal democracy" yep that is what we are. And our representative democracy based on power of the people, people have the power to change those protections of minorities but they continue to support them. That is not luck that is faith in the people.

isadore;1234483 wrote:gosh a ruddies our "liberal democracy" yep that is what we are. And our representative democracy based on power of the people, people have the power to change those protections of minorities but they continue to support them. That is not luck that is faith in the people.

Ahhh, so it is faith in people that you rely upon for the protection of the minority. Got it. Without the presence of such protection the type of government we have fundamentally changes....no matter whereby the power exists.

Con_Alma;1234473 wrote:That "gracious"ness is for the purpose of your own benefit when considering that it is inspired by your seeking of entertainment.

...and without corporations there would still be commerce....this is the supporting point with regards to my opinion that I don't hate them.

True It gives me personal pleasure spending my time being gracious to others.
as to corporations and your generic answer that deals in no way with the nature and actions of these dominating business structures.