????isadore;1249348 wrote:you have a means to be used for change, you refuse to use it.
I haven't refused. My efforts have not nor will they enable me to do what I want. I can't do what I want like you previously said I could.
????isadore;1249348 wrote:you have a means to be used for change, you refuse to use it.
Using your speech and having the right to do so doesn't mean that your speech will enable me to do what I want. I can't do what I want like you previously said I could.isadore;1249657 wrote:you can use your freedom of speech to persuade your fellow citizens who have the ultimate power over laws.
That doesn't mean I can do what I want like you previously posted.isadore;1250012 wrote:you are part of the people who have the ultimate power over the law.
Being only "part" means I can't do what I want as you previously stated.isadore;1250170 wrote:because of popular sovereignty you are part to the group who ultimately determine our laws in our representative democracy.
freedom of expression are used to influence the people who have ultimate power.Con_Alma;1250213 wrote:Being only "part" means I can't do what I want as you previously stated.
of course they do, you are one of the people who have the ultimate power and freedom of expression to effect it.Con_Alma;1250403 wrote:"Ifs" don't change the fact that I can't do what I want like you previously stated I could.
One of the people doesn't necessarily make the collective enable the one to be able to do what they want like you previously posted.isadore;1250540 wrote:of course they do, you are one of the people who have the ultimate power and freedom of expression to effect it.
they are granted the right that is given to people they can hire, fire, borrow, lend, etc. and are artificially created by government.Con_Alma;1249137 wrote:This simply isn't true. They have very different economic rights than that of a person and as an entity they are very real.
Being involved doesn't enable me to do what I want as you previously posted.isadore;1250561 wrote:in a nation where our representative democracy is based popular sovereignty you are enpowered to be involved with law making.
The ability to hire, fire, borrow, lend, etc, doesn't eliminate the differences that exist between people and corporations. There are many. Those differences make them very different than a person.isadore;1250565 wrote:they are granted the right that is given to people they can hire, fire, borrow, lend, etc. and are artificially created by government.
you as part of the collective that has the ultimate power and the right to express and persuade.Con_Alma;1250544 wrote:One of the people doesn't necessarily make the collective enable the one to be able to do what they want like you previously posted.
Even after expressing and persuading I cannot do what I want as you previously posted.isadore;1250641 wrote:you as part of the collective that has the ultimate power and the right to express and persuade.
That didn't answer my question?isadore;1250642 wrote:corporation are artifical entities created by government charter with the economic privileges of a person.
because of being part of the ultimate power in a representative democracy you can participate and effect the law.Con_Alma;1250659 wrote:Even after expressing and persuading I cannot do what I want as you previously posted.
government creates corportions by chartering them and granting them the economic rights of a person.Con_Alma;1250661 wrote:That didn't answer my question?
Now you are saying corporations were "artificially created? Can you expand on that for me? The process used to create them isn't artificial at all.