isadore;1244448 wrote:they are given economic personhood, they buy, they sell, they hire, they fire, they sue, they make contracts, as an economic person. They are an artificial entity.

The entity is very real ans are their actions. There's nothing artificial about it. They are given economic "corporatehood". They make contracts as a corporation.

There's a difference between entering a contract as a person as opposed to entering one as a corporation.

[SP][/SP]

isadore;1244445 wrote:I can

It's not you I am referring to with regards to action.

You stated that I can do what I wish.

I can't.

Con_Alma;1244765 wrote:
It's not you I am referring to with regards to action.

You stated that I can do what I wish.

I can't.

the people are the ultimate power.

isadore;1244777 wrote:the people are the ultimate power.

...and yet I can't do what I want like you stated.

Con_Alma;1244764 wrote:The entity is very real ans are their actions. There's nothing artificial about it. They are given economic "corporatehood". They make contracts as a corporation.

There's a difference between entering a contract as a person as opposed to entering one as a corporation.

corporation are artifical creations of government given the economic rights of personhood. they do not exist without government. it is government that allows them all their privileges to economic personhoood. they are artifical.

Con_Alma;1244781 wrote:...and yet I can't do what I want like you stated.

the people ultimately determine the laws of our nation in our representative democracy.

isadore;1244790 wrote:the people ultimately determine the laws of our nation in our representative democracy.

..which doesn't negate the fact that I can't do as you said.

isadore;1244788 wrote:corporation are artifical creations of government given the economic rights of personhood. they do not exist without government. it is government that allows them all their privileges to economic personhoood. they are artifical.

They aren't artificial. They are very real creations just as are their actions.

Con_Alma;1244793 wrote:..which doesn't negate the fact that I can't do as you said.

you are a participant in making law.

Con_Alma;1244794 wrote:They aren't artificial. They are very real creations just as are their actions.

they are artifical, there are artifical flowers with the ome of the appearance of real flowers and there are entities with artifical personhood, corporations.

isadore;1245057 wrote:you are a participant in making law.

It doesn't mean I can do what I want like you stated before.

isadore;1245059 wrote:they are artifical, there are artifical flowers with the ome of the appearance of real flowers and there are entities with artifical personhood, corporations.

The exist. They are real. They are not fake personhoods. The are very different than person. They are corporations.

Con_Alma;1244793 wrote:..which doesn't negate the fact that I can't do as you said.

you are part of the citizenry that ultimately determines what can be done.

Con_Alma;1245124 wrote:The exist. They are real. They are not fake personhoods. The are very different than person. They are corporations.

they are artifical creations of government that are given the economic rights of people.

isadore;1244788 wrote:corporation are artifical creations of government given the economic rights of personhood. they do not exist without government. it is government that allows them all their privileges to economic personhoood. they are artifical.

Precisely. So once again, the answer is simple. Instead of having government dolts two steps behind every problem trampling the rights of the people along the way, you eliminate corporate personhood. No greedy tycoon is going to serve you bad food if his house is on the line.

isadore;1245129 wrote:you are part of the citizenry that ultimately determines what can be done.

...and yet I can't do what I want as you stated....no matter what role I have.

isadore;1245130 wrote:they are artifical creations of government that are given the economic rights of people.

They truly exist. They are not artificial. The do not have the same economic rights as people. They are defined very differently.

isadore;1244644 wrote:the primary purpose of regulation should not be to add economic value but to provide protections from corporate abuses.

'

But they should not unnecessarily destroy value, either. You can't ignore the cost side of the equation, or the efficiency/effectiveness. Regulation for its own sake is a money pit, just a pile of gubmit waste.

If 1000's died in plane crashes every year, the airline industry would be out of business. So the market can, and does, often sufficiently self-regulate. Voting with your wallet is a powerful force, unless you're a liberal because that concept does not create gubmit jobs.

Similarly it is foolish to regulate the airline industry to a point where there are no deaths or crashes in a year. I'm not willing to pay an extra $2000 per ticket for a trivially infinitesimal reduction in risk.

And the funny thing is, when industries can pass on the cost of regulations and lawsuits to the consumers - such as, I don't know, healthcare - people bitch up a storm. So, yes, we must consider the cost of regulation especially when consumers are picking up the tab (and likely do not agree with the necessity or effectiveness of said regulation, nor do they support being forced to pay it).

Con_Alma;1245319 wrote:...and yet I can't do what I want as you stated....no matter what role I have.

gosh a ruddies people have the ultimate power.

Con_Alma;1245320 wrote:They truly exist. They are not artificial. The do not have the same economic rights as people. They are defined very differently.

they are artifical entities created by government that are given economic rights of a person.

gut;1245353 wrote:'

But they should not unnecessarily destroy value, either. You can't ignore the cost side of the equation, or the efficiency/effectiveness. Regulation for its own sake is a money pit, just a pile of gubmit waste.

If 1000's died in plane crashes every year, the airline industry would be out of business. So the market can, and does, often sufficiently self-regulate. Voting with your wallet is a powerful force, unless you're a liberal because that concept does not create gubmit jobs.

Similarly it is foolish to regulate the airline industry to a point where there are no deaths or crashes in a year. I'm not willing to pay an extra $2000 per ticket for a trivially infinitesimal reduction in risk.

And the funny thing is, when industries can pass on the cost of regulations and lawsuits to the consumers - such as, I don't know, healthcare - people bitch up a storm. So, yes, we must consider the cost of regulation especially when consumers are picking up the tab (and likely do not agree with the necessity or effectiveness of said regulation, nor do they support being forced to pay it).

No U.S. airline fatalities in 2010
http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/2011-01-21-RWaircrashes20_ST_N.htm
Annual Aviation Statistics For 2011 Released:
No Fatalities On U.S. Airlines or Commuters, General Aviation Accidents Increased
April 27, 2012
http://www.ntsb.gov/news/2012/120427.html
Obviously too much regulation for you, we are not killing anyone.
And how about the economic value lost when you could not work nine year olds 12 hour days in factories at half wage? I am sure the consumers were furious when they were eliminated and rises rose.

Cleveland Buck;1245317 wrote:Precisely. So once again, the answer is simple. Instead of having government dolts two steps behind every problem trampling the rights of the people along the way, you eliminate corporate personhood. No greedy tycoon is going to serve you bad food if his house is on the line.

gosh! it could be.

isadore;1245381 wrote:gosh a ruddies people have the ultimate power.

Where the power exists doesn't change the fact that I can't do what I want as you previously stated.

isadore;1245384 wrote:they are artifical entities created by government that are given economic rights of a person.

They are not artificial. They exist just as they are defined in the incorporation papers. Their economic rights are different than that of a person.

isadore;1245389 wrote:No U.S. airline fatalities in 2010
http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/2011-01-21-RWaircrashes20_ST_N.htm
Annual Aviation Statistics For 2011 Released:
No Fatalities On U.S. Airlines or Commuters, General Aviation Accidents Increased
April 27, 2012
http://www.ntsb.gov/news/2012/120427.html
Obviously too much regulation for you, we are not killing anyone.
And how about the economic value lost when you could not work nine year olds 12 hour days in factories at half wage? I am sure the consumers were furious when they were eliminated and rises rose.

Yeah, but there have been crashes and deaths in other years (and that's just commercial, freight and private/charter is a different story). Like I said, you don't need more regulation to make the risk absolutely zero.

As for 9-yr olds working 12 hours days...no one ever held a gun to their head, well except maybe their parents (and I hope you don't own an IPhone or a pair of nikes). Funny how you keep blaming corporations for the decisions of people you want to make choices for and give handouts to (which is pretty much the liberal agenda). Granted, we probably do need to protect some of those people from their own incompetence.