Agreed!A "Corporation" is an entity, without body,
parts or passions.It now has all the legal "rights" as a
human being, but it is NOT a human being.It can break the law,
even "murder to get gain", but can not go to jail or be
executed.It can "manage and control" the Government, but it can not vote per se, but it can "but" votes.It can
take the treasures of the earth, and can buy up armies and navies, and rule and reign with blood and horror.I see the "birth"
of the "Beast" mentioned in the Book of Revelations, and the
"Gadianton Robbers" mentioned in the Book of Mormon who serve it.
Excellent piece by Roland! Completely shreds the activist Supreme Court!I hope repubs are happy about what these activist judges have done.
They've written legislation and overruled the will of the majority to
completely redefine traditional corporation. Traditional corporation did not
have religious views. It was a job. Now that repub activist judges have
destroyed the traditional corporation, our society will greatly suffer. Just look at the slippery slope! What happens if treating your cancer is
against their view? What happens if bearing arms is against their view? What
happens if marrying a woman and having kids is against their view? What happens
if paying you a salary, giving you breaks, and a weekend is against their
view?Corporations were an institution which benefitted families. You
worked, earned a salary, and had benefits.Now, it appears as if a
corporation is just a greedy entity that is made for narcissists who can cut
your benefits and salary at a whim.All thanks, to activist judges
who overruled the will of the majority. Our country will only survive as long as
traditional corporation exists.
A very good point.Corporations don't have a conscience, and
frankly most of their CEO's or directors do as well (in big corporate
America). If people understood the ways in which this notion of
corporate personhood evolved, then they may not be so tricked by the legal
legerdemain that our Supreme Court has foisted upon us. It is a sham, and we
are all going to suffer for it.
Suppose you have a job and over the course of a few years, you receive raise
after raise after raise. You go to the bank and get a loan to buy a house. The
economy suffers. You take out bankruptcy. Do you lose your house? According
to my lawyer friend who handles bankruptcies, you won't necessarily lose
that home, even though you owe tens of thousands of dollars to the bank.
Shouldn't you have to pay for that home? Not according to the law. The
bank will lose, not you.A corporation will lose its assets when it
goes bankrupt, but it will not have to have its employees repay all of their
wages to settle debts. The employees' wages are safe. It will not have to
have the government refund all the taxes that the corporation paid. Taxes are
safe. It will not have to have stock holders refund past dividends. The
dividends are safe. The stockholders WILL lose the value of stock that they
hold. Stock is not protected. The "owners" will lose their investment
when the stock becomes worthless.That sounds fair to me.
Corporations are the new kings and we it's servants.
I hope you all realize that a corportion can be a one person entity, not just a
multi national. So many of you anti corporate types (who by the way have a
great life because of what many corporations have provided. But I digress) seem
to see corporations as only huge multi national entities. American corporate
law provided a good, legal, financial, protection to PEOPLE. That is why those
laws have been enacted. It helps take away much risk that PEOPLE will lose
everything if the corporation fails or gets sued. Otherwise PEOPLE would not
risk investing and working and creating goods, services, and wealth for our
nation. Like I said, many of these corporations, run by PEOPLE, have provided
most of you with things in life that would never have happened if not for the
American corporate law structure, which gives PEOPLE, the ability to do so. And
so many on the left seem to want to boogie man American coroporations. Talk
about biting the hand that feeds you. Corporations are PEOPLE, every bit as
much as unions, political parties, universities, ect. are PEOPLE.
I don't think that non-elected judges should have the right to draft
legislation and change the definition of a corporation. If Roberts wants to do
that then he should campaign, become elected, and pass new legislation through
the defined process.@Mike RichardsWhere in the
Constitution does it specifically state that "corporations are people"?
If you cannot find a bill of rights for corporations then I'll let you in
on a secret... They don't exist! From what I see, the greatest
threat to America isn't marriage. But the redefining of the Constitution to
allow conservatives to invade whatever country they want, bail out whatever bank
they want, subsidize whatever oil company they want, and empower corporations to
hurt the American people in whatever way they want.
@The Real MaverickOrem, UT6:39 a.m. July 17, 2014Just
look at the slippery slope! ====== Agreed!Corporate "entities" are legally "People".with full
protection and Constitutional rights.They exist for one thing, and
one thing only -- PROFIT! [gain]If they do not make Profit [gain] they
Die, So, now it's the Government's duty to protect a
Corporations right to -- LIFE, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness.Think about it -- Corporations now have "Free Speech"
[bribery]Corporations now have "Freedom of Religion".Therefore -- Corporations now also have "the right of the
CORPORATIONS to keep and bear ARMS, shall not be infringed."BTW
- Some these "corporations" build our Thermal Nuclear, Biological and
Chemical weapons...think about it.Corporations are now protected
against "searches and seizures".Courts and Juries by their
"peers" -- i.e., OTHER Corporations and Businessmen, perhaps?How about running for "Office", Imagine a Business "entity",
Because Business can always do things better than Government, Why
not run the Government efficiently -- as a Corporation, BY the Corporation, and
FOR the Corporation! It's like ever Republican's Fantasy
DREAM come true...One other thing, Corporations DON'T
even have to be Americans.....=========== Mike - You
still good with all this?
It's called having your cake and your neighbor's too.
@Mike Richards,If you take bankruptcy, you may claim a homestead
exemption. In Utah, if that homestead includes a personal residence, you are
entitled to a homestead exemption of up to $30,000. You must still pay your
mortgage. The exemption differs by state.
@SCfan;A one-person owned corporation is still a corporation -
specifically designed to separate the owner from the liabilities incurred by the
corporation. If the corporation is the person, then the person should be liable
for the debts and losses of said corporation.
I understand the rationale for corporations in that incorporation aids capital
formation. As a Marxist, however, I wish we could understand that all
relationships are social ones. That all exchanges and actions are between
people. For example, if I work for Walmart and Walmart doesn't provide me
with health insurance, it is not Walmart which denying me insurance, it is the
Walton family - real people. Marx asks us to look past objects and legal forms
to the social relations that are behind everything.
I'll beleive that corporations are people as soon as Texas executes one.
What happens if treating your cancer is against their view? liberal Progressive
view go home and take two aspirin.What happens if bearing arms is against
their view? liberal Progressive gun controlWhat happens if marrying a
woman and having kids is against their view? liberal Progressive abortion and
population control.What happens if paying you a salary, giving you breaks,
and a weekend is against their view? liberal Progressive state controlled
corporations in communist countries like China and North Korea."Corporations were an institution which benefitted families." No
corporations were created solely to benefit their shareholders, period. They
use the management of resources to accomplish this goal for the benefit of their
shareholders."Corporations are now protected against
"searches and seizures". fear mongering at best they have less
protections against this than individuals. "I don't think
that non-elected judges should have the right to draft legislation and change
the definition" -- of marriage. Is that your opinion?And
Vancouver is a city in the southern end of Washington, the state you spent so
much time before returning to Utah,across from Portland Oregon, ( because I hit
my limit on the other thread.
"Corporations now have "Free Speech" Isn't that also called a
newspaper, the ultimate corporate free speech. Should we tell these
corporations they can not say anything? Is not advertising in a newspaper
bribery in the sense advertising in a newspaper that supports your position and
that newspaper uses its voice to influence the government to support your
position. Yes there are slippery slopes and liberals are sliding
right on down them. They don't like freedom of assembly, they
don't like freedom of religion, they don't like armed opponents, they
don't like equity of possibilities for everyone. They don't like
resolving poverty, they want old people to die and go away, they are racist in
they support planned parenthood whose very foundation was to eliminate poverty
by eliminating the lower classes and minorities who they felt were racially
impure. (Read Margaret Sangers works and publications)
"I'll beleive that corporations are people as soon as Texas executes
one." a bit of realityStates and Texas also do execute
corporations, by revoking their charters to operate. Happens all the time. So
does this mean you believe they are people now.
Atlas Smashed“I don't think that non-elected judges should have
the right to draft legislation and change the definition of a
corporation.”But you don’t mind SCOTUS redefining Marriage,
Right? Or the fact that Obama took the Commerce clause and changed it to push
through Obama Care… and SCOTUS (Judge Roberts Specifically) allowed it.
Atlas SmashedPart 2“Where in the Constitution does it
specifically state that "corporations are people"? If you cannot find a
bill of rights for corporations then I'll let you in on a secret... They
don't exist! “Show me one place in the constitution that says
there is a separation of Church and State? Nowhere! “Establish”
does not mean Separate. In Fact show me where it says Marriage is a right.Oh yea, SCOTUS had a ruling that say that. But that is ok because it goes
along with you agenda…But the redefining of the Constitution
to allow conservatives to invade whatever country they want, bail out whatever
bank they want, subsidize whatever oil company they want, and empower
corporations to hurt the American people in whatever way they want.But it
ok for Obama to push the bailout of the Auto Industry from 17.6 billion to over
85 billion, because he deemed that it was wholly inadequate.Or the fact
that he violated the constitution with recess appointments, and allow all his
policies to go into effect by department rules and regulations rather than go
Roland,For one... You're not on the Supreme Court. So what YOU think
doesn't matter as much as what they think.I think they
understand the Constitution better than you do. So I'm going to trust THEM
on this one.Nobody said, "Corporations are people". So you
can probably drop that strawman.What they actually said is...
Corporations have a right to express themselves and fight for their own
self-interest. And part of that right to free speech includes a right donate to
political campaigns, or even make commercials.But nobody on the
Supreme Court actually said they are people.==========I
think corporations have a right to pursue their own self-interest. Some
politicians would try to put them out of business... they have a right to fight
AGAINST those politicians.But people have rights corporations
DON'T have. One of them is freedom of association. We don't have to
go to their business or buy their products if we don't want to. We can go
to ANY business we want (and stay away from any business we want).Don't support the businesses you think are ruining our politics!
Where would you anti-corporation people be without corporations? Would you
build your own cars? Would you build your own appliances? Where would you shop
for groceries, for clothes, for gas? Would you only go to home produced movies,
concerts, and book readings? Would you only listen to neighborhood sponsored
radio and TV? In Utah, where would you go to Church. Where would you bank?
Go ahead and tell us all about those "evil" corporations,
the ones that you use everyday to do the things that you want to do and to buy
the things that you want to own. It seems quite hypocritical to me
that you slam corporations even as you pass your dollars to them.If
you really believe what you're writing on this thread, you'll break
off all contact with corporations. You divest yourself of anything that you own
that comes from corporations. AFTER you've done that, then tell us what
you think about those "evil" corporations.
BTW... the biggest contributors throwing their money around in the hopes of
influencing politics and voters are... the people who advertise every week
during "Meet the Press" (one of my favorite programs).GE,
Boeing, Chevron, etc. Watch the show. Watch who pays millions to advertise
during the show... these are the HUGE hitters in the money being contributed to
campaigns in Washington, investing huge sums in BOTH side's campaigns,
(they can't afford to be on the loosing side so they contribute a lot to
BOTH sides) and spend a LOT of $$$ trying to influence the mind and will of the
people.Barack Obama invited the CEO of one of these companies to
join his cabinet (even though during the campaign he promised NO CEOs would be
part of HIS cabinet). Shows how powerful they are... They (and their money)
can even change the President's mind...
This definition from Wikipedia might help:"Corporate personhood
is an American legal concept that a corporation may be recognized as an
individual in the eyes of the law. This doctrine forms the basis for legal
recognition that corporations, as groups of people, may hold and exercise
certain rights under the common law and the U.S. Constitution. For example,
corporations may contract with other parties and sue or be sued in court in the
same way as natural persons or unincorporated associations of persons. The
doctrine does not hold that corporations are flesh and blood "people"
apart from their shareholders, executives, and managers, nor does it grant to
corporations all of the rights of citizens."To me, the key words
are: "legal concept" and "in the eyes of the law". Others have
said that "under the law, corporations are seen as a person". I have
been part of corporations all my life and I agree with Wikipedia's
@Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, UtahIt seems quite hypocritical to
me that you slam corporations even as you pass your dollars to them.======= And yet -- It seems even more hypocritical to me
that you slam [Anti-GOD COMMUNISTS] even as you pass your dollars to them.We Liberal may support America's God-fearing Unions, but your
sorts support China's God-less Communists.Mark my words --
Corporations are EVERYTHING we've been prophesied and warned about.
To "Roland Kayser" once again your lack of understanding is put on
display.If the company that you establish goes away, eventually you
will no longer be able to be paid. If at one time you had a salary of $100,000,
but now that is the total sales of your business you can't expect to be
paid anymore. If you cannot be paid anymore, then you are directly effected by
the business.Plus, depending on how you establish the business will
determine your liabilities. If you set up your business as a Sole, General, or
Limited Proprietorship, then you will be responsible for any debts the company
has. In fact, under most business structures you are personally liable for
debts that the business incurs.Nice try, but try again after you do
a Google Search on how businesses are formed and the liabilities of the owners
of those businesses.Plus, think about this. If businesses
don't get the same rights as people, then why does the NY Times get
protection using Freedom of the Press?Also, the recent ruling does
not grant corporations person status. It grants the owners of businesses the
right to determine what will buy.
Open Minded Mormon,Wow! What hyperbole!Where was the
cell phone in your pocket made? Where was your computer, your TV, your stereo
made?You talk of "God-fearing Unions". Which unions are
"God-fearing"? Do they start union meetings with a prayer? Do they
base all decisions on the Bible?I've worked for two companies
who were approached by union organizers. Their "heavy handed" tactics
were far from being "God-fearing". Maybe some unions are
"God-fearing", but no one that I know knows anything about that type of
union.Apple is an American corporation. It has huge manufacturing
facilities in China. I'm typing this from a Mac Mini Server that I'm
setting up for J Thompson, who is one of my clients. He's running through
some tutorials on a Mac in another room. He likes Apple products. So do I. Is
Apple evil? Are their manufacturing facilities "evil"? Corporations allow people like you and me to invest in a business that we
could never own ourselves. We are only financially liable to the extent of the
stock we own. Are we "evil" for buying stock?
jsfCenterville, UT"Corporations now have "Free Speech"
Isn't that also called a newspaper, the ultimate corporate free speech. Newspapers are specifically mentioned by name.
@The Real Maverick:"Completely shreds the activist Supreme
Court!"The court made a significant error in ruling about
contraception/abortion in healthcare insurance. It shoulda ruled that health
insurance need not cover ANY contraception/abortion expenses.Health
insurgence is designed to cover unforeseen health situations that are beyond the
control of individuals insured. All conditions involving pregnancy or the
prevention/termination thereof are under the control of the person(s)
involved... (with the exception of pregnancy from rape).
This is another situation where the constitution has not kept up with the times.
The idea or corporations in the way they exist today wasn't even a thing
when the constitution was written, and even in the early 1900's
corporations were more of a time sensitive venture, and didn't exist in
perpetuity like corporations of today. In fact in olden times major companies
were never set up as corporations(look at Carnegie and Rockefeller, their
business's were all set up as trusts), due to the fact that they had strong
restrictions that limited them from growing to large. Clearly the founding
fathers couldn't fathom an entitiy like GE, Wal Mart or Exxon in the late
1700's. We as Americans need to be more proactive at changing things that
weren't factored into the original document(BTW, that is one thing we do
know that the founding fathers did intend to happen, unlike speculation as to if
they would approve of current interpretation)
"The court made a significant error in ruling about contraception/abortion
in healthcare insurance. It shoulda ruled that health insurance need not cover
ANY contraception/abortion expenses."That's not what then
out ruled.The court ruled that corporations have religious
beliefs.By the court's ruling, corporations no longer have to
abide by the EPA, not discriminate Mormons, or even pay salaries if it's
against their "religious beliefs."Is this really the
"freedom" that the radical right constantly talks about? Gee, thanks Supreme Court for opening this can of worms.Robert and
his fellow repub cohorts have helped to create the worst Supreme Court ever.
They're an utter train wreck.
@ wrz and RedshirtSo why is Viagra still covered? Isn't that a
personal decision as well?And if Hobby Lobby is as religious as it
pretends, why does it continue to support an evil and repressive communist
regime? If they really want to live their religion, then they would
give up all their child labor made Chinese junk.In fact, why not get
rid of the whole corporation model? I'd love to get back to small
businesses. Give the power back to the people. Make them accountable. That way,
when they fail, my tax dollars won't be spent because a group of banks and
corporations have bought off the Republican Party.
Corporations were classified as persons to limit actions such as suits to the
business entity only, thus protecting owners from such action. This situation
was needed where ownership began to be spread far and wide such as ownership
(stock) being traded on a stock exchange such as NASDAQ. Can you imagine
someone having to sue several thousand stock owners for redress of wrongs rather
than just the corporate entity itself?The Hobby Lobby ruling covered
just closely (family) held corporations. If Hobby Lobby were to ever go public
spreading ownership across thousands of buyers, the court's ruling would
likely cease to be applicable. Indeed, the Hobby Lobby ruling does not apply to
publicly held corporations.Then there's the concept of
'Piercing the Corporate veil' which means stockholders (owners) can be
sued despite the protection accorded the corporate ownership. Usually a
corporation is treated as a separate legal person, which is solely responsible
for its debts but when the corporate veil is 'pierced' owners become
liable. This legal concept applies only in very limited ownership companies.
To "Atlas Smashed" and anybody else who has the misguided thought that
corporations have been granted personhood and can "have a religion". Go
back and read the ruling. It only applies to businesses that are owned by 1 or
just a few people. Companies like GE, GM, Apple, Boeing, or any other
publically traded company cannot do what the Greens have decided to do with
Hobby Lobby. The SCOTUS ruling restores the right of an individual to spend his
own money as he sees fit.You may not like it, but, as you have so
often said to conservatives "its the law, so suck it up."To
"The Real Maverick" Does Viagra kill innocent children? That is all
that the Greens are standing up for. I read today where the Greens pay for
hormone treatments for transgenderd people going through sex change
operations.Again, the issue is killing a developing baby, not
sex.Your ilk would impose socialism or communism, which would make
the current corporate structure look like paradise.
We Liberal may support America's Unions, Mark my words Corporations are
EVERYTHING we've been prophesied and warned about.IRS
application requirement for a union to organize as a labor organization exempt
from federal income tax. Each application for exemption must be accompanied by
an exact copy of the organization's organizing document: Articles of
incorporation for a corporation.IMO you support unions, and in the
same paragraph you tell us they are everything we have been warned about.
Unions are corporations. Tax exempt status does not make it any less than the
corporation it is. Please reconcile the inconsistency in the argument you
presented. My last post so other than what I presented I can't comment any
further.Happy Valley Heretic"Newspapers are specifically
mentioned by name" The clause is directed toward the free speech
of individuals. The Free Press Clause protects the right of individuals to
express themselves through publication of information. It does not distinguish
or identify corporate owned newspapers specifically by nameOthers
can discuss how the Court rejected the "suggestion that communication by
corporate members of the institutional press is entitled to greater protection
than the same communication by non-institutional-press businesses.
@Atlas Smashed:"That's not what then out ruled."Whaaat?"The court ruled that corporations have religious
beliefs."Not so. The court ruled that owners of closely held
corporations can exercise religious beliefs in what they spend business
resources on. Closely held corporations are treated more like LLP's. "Gee, thanks Supreme Court for opening this can of worms."Are you confusing this ruling with SSM rulings?@The Real
Maverick:"So why is Viagra still covered?"Didn't
know it was. Of course, it shouldn't be."If they really
want to live their religion, then they would give up all their child labor made
Chinese junk."In which case you might not have a computer to
type your comments on."In fact, why not get rid of the whole
corporation model?"You want chaos in the business world?"I'd love to get back to small businesses."Our
economy would collapse. Can you imagine a ma & pa store down the street
manufacturing steamships, army tanks, 747's, etc.?
@Redshirt1701"Does Viagra kill innocent children? That is all that the
Greens are standing up for." Um, no, they aren't, considering
that none of the birth control listed in the SCOTUS ruling would kill a fetus.
Abortions(regardless of the method) aren't mandated to be covered by the
ACA. Birth control pills work by creating hormonal conditions that prevent a
womans egg from being fertilized. Abortions kill the fetus. There is a huge
To "Noodlekaboodle" go back and read what the Greens have said. Go to
the USA Today article "Hobby Lobby case: What birth control is
affected?" It clearly states "The companies in the case and their
supporters object to IUDs and morning-after pills, saying they cause abortions
by blocking a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. Groups that lobby
for reproductive rights contend the drugs and devices prevent fertilization from
occurring, which can lead to unwanted pregnancies and surgical abortions."
Tell me what is the difference between killing a fetus when it is 100 cells vs 1
million cells? Killing a child is still killing a child.That is
what the Greens have said all along. The drugs in question abort babies through
Mike Richards,Nobody has argued on this thread that corporations are
evil. They've argued that the Bill of Rights was intended to grant rights
or recognize rights of individual human beings (i.e. persons). People have
freedom of speech and freedom of religion.Just because I don't
think the founding fathers intended to grant corporations freedom of religion
doesn't mean I am against corporations.
MY the left is silly.The courts never said corporations are a
person.What the courts have said is people have rights no matter how
they assemble themselves,Whether it be a union, a church, a
organization, a club, any form of assembl;age, and yes, even a corporation.And show me where in the first amendment where it delineates who or
what get rights. The rights are a blanket right, and congress must not and is it
not allowed to abridge them.So please can we stop this
silliness.It is not up to the left or congress who gets rights.We the people already have them, they are God-given rights, we the
people have them in the first place, no matter how we organize ourselves.
My dog has always wanted to be a human. So if I incorporate him, he will become
a "person," right?
Mike Richards has written some very insightful comments on this article, and I
agree with his thoughts. When a famous person said
'Corporations are people," I think he was saying that corporations are
legally organized groups of individual human beings.I don't
think you can incorporate your dog ... but you could form a corporation yourself
and then employ your dog. Of course, you may have to pay income taxes on what
your dog earns. (That, of course, would be an example of an evil corporation,
since it enslaves the dog.)
“I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes
me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been
enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money
power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the
prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the
Republic is destroyed.”—U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov.
21, 1864(letter to Col. William F. Elkins)
"I hope we shall take warning from the example and crush in it’s birth
the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our
government to a trial of strength, and to bid defiance to the laws of their
When Texas executes one. It's a valid point, a differentiation between a
person who can take responsibility for their actions versus an organisation that
cannot. Or when one versus the other can have 'justice' imposed upon
Closely held Corporate Manifesto:When closely held corporations
begin paying the tax rates real people pay, I will consider a closely held
corporation to be a real person.When a closely held corporation
offers the opening or closing prayers at Church, I will consider a closely held
corporation to be a real person.When Mitt Romney is elected the
POTUS, I will consider that corporations are people, my friend.
Fun fact Viagra is used to treat hypertension as well as ED. Just as an FYI.
Corporations have been deemed legal persons going all the way back to the Middle
Ages. The first U.S. Supreme Court decision recognizing the doctrine of
corporate personhood, and that corporations are protected by the rights
enumerated in the Constitution, was decided in 1819.This is not
hard. People like Mr. Kayser really have no excuse for remaining ignorant.
"When closely held corporations begin paying the tax rates real people pay,
I will consider a closely held corporation to be a real person."They do. Higher, actually. We have the highest corporate tax rate in the
entire developed world.
Geez Louise Richards. Who said there is no place for corporations? They just are
getting all the rights and are absolved from the same consequences of their
actions as the individuals are. If I kill 13 people by my negligence I am thrown
in jail. They do it they get a slap on the wrist and a fine that is minimal in
relationship to their income. BTW, since you are such an expert
Constitutionalist, where does it say that SCOTUS can make laws? Read it.
"By the court's ruling, corporations no longer have to abide by the
EPA, not discriminate Mormons, or even pay salaries if it's against their
"religious beliefs."Not true.The Hobby Lobby and
Conestoga decisions held that under RFRA (legislation passed by a bipartisan
97-3 majority in the Senate, and unanimously in the House, and signed by Bill
Clinton), legislative acts that impose undue burdens on sincerely held religious
beliefs are subject to strict scrutiny -- a judicial term which means that the
measure must be the least restrictive means available to accomplish a
significant government interest -- and that this rule applies to people who do
business as closely-held corporations as well as as sole proprietorships, since
RFRA did not alter the U.S. Code's standard definition of "person"
as including corporations.But that's too complex for the
average partisan, so go on with your "war on women" silliness.
@Kayser,How long ago did Lincoln say that?... 150 years ago? And has the
Republic been destroyed? Nope. Have the rich people even TRIED to
destroy the republic... or to help it? I think many have tried to HELP it.IMO you don't need to be so afraid of money, or people with money.
Many people do GOOD with money.But you SHOULD be wary of EVIL
people with money (who have already destroyed countries and currency (like
George Soros in Hungary and in England) (The man who broke the Bank of England,
and reference his Insider trading conviction in 1988 as well if you think
he's a "good guy").Not every person with money is
"evil". But some are...I like the historical perspective
though. The country has been through a lot of bad times since then, and a lot
of GOOD times. Seems like the people with money are usually instrumental in
@ugottabkidn:"If I kill 13 people by my negligence I am thrown in
jail. They do it they get a slap on the wrist and a fine that is minimal in
relationship to their income."Corporations can't kill.
They exist only as ink markings on a piece of paper.
The hysteria behind the entire boogie man of "corporations are not
people" comes from a Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission court
case; where the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment prohibits the
government from restricting political expenditures by corporations,
associations, or labor unions. The FEC had allowed Michel
Moore's film Fahrenheit 911 to be shown during elections, but banned
Hillary; The Movie as being political speech. The hypocrisy is obvious and the
court rightly ruled in favor of more, not less, free speech. Much to the
chagrin of the fashionably intolerant who believe that free speech only applies
to them and their politically correct causes It is ironic that the
same leftists who whine about corporate speech, support union speech; those who
support Apple or Costco having a social conscious, come unglued at the idea that
Hobby Lobby might also have one.This letter, and the support from
the usual suspects, is a classic Orwellian case of anti free speech hypocrisy
and hate. If corporations have no free speech - then who is next.Being anti-free speech is illiberal, but typical left wing. Which is why
high-information voters have such a healthy distrust of political correctness.
FedEx was indicted on Thursday for trafficking in illegal drugs. The corporation
could be indicted separately from the employees who actually committed the
crimes because of the 'juridical person' principle. Under the law for
this purpose, FedEx is a 'person' in the eyes of the court. If a
corporation can be prosecuted s a person, then justice demands that corporations
also receive some of the legal protections that live human beings get.
To Mike RI got the impression that you were belived in strict &
literal interpretations of COTUS. Hmmm!? I was wrong.in regards to
jsf(("I'll beleive that corporations are people as soon as
Texas executes one." a bit of reality States and Texas also do execute
corporations, by revoking their charters to operate. Happens all the time. So
does this mean you believe they are people now.))So, there are alot
of business incorporated in Delaware. If Texas executes on them (pun intended);
does the Civil War start up again?
SCFan,How could you not know that corporations are not people. They
are pools of assets for the government can take from whenever people do not want
to pay for the goodies they get from Uncle Sugar Daddy Sam. The government
wants money, just take 35% of all of the profits of the corporation. (Note that
when you have a loss The government wants health care for all but does not to
pay for it. Legislate that the corporate money tree has to pay. Tell the
corporation who it has to hire, who it cannot fire. What it has to pay for
salaries.The mantra during the American Revolution was no taxation
with representation. I have no problem with corporations not being able to
contribute to politicians, just as soon as progressives cannot use corporations
as their own personal piggy banks.Note that none of these people
were protesting the massive amounts unions donate. The left is all for free
speech - as long as they agree with its content.Also where were all
of these people when unions were giving money to politicians. FreeThat was OK
because they all lean left.
“Corporations are people, my friend,” Mitt Romney,Iowa State Fair,
let's go all the way with this. We need to make corporation declare
citizenship and male or female so their mergers can be declined on moral
grounds.Let's have it YOUR way for everyone.