| Author | Post |
|
East Lansing, MI
|
#1
Aug 04, 2008 01:43pm
This is complicated for me. I think that it would be useful do this, but how would people organize outside of politics? If I want to contribute resources to a factory, for example, would I have to give to the individual person who owns it? Could multiple people own it, so that more people could have a say in how it is run? I suppose this is the issue – how to have multiple people control a resource and invest in it. So I don’t know yet. |
|
Novato, CA
|
#2
Aug 05, 2008 04:41pm
@bob921: I don’t think this is suggesting abolition of corporations, but simply removing many of the rights they have gained over time due to interpretations by the Supreme Court ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood_debate ). |
|
Dayton, OH
|
#3
Aug 05, 2008 05:09pm
Corporations are not Individuals. They’re huge, conglomerations of Individuals who frequently control vast amounts of wealth and influence—though, admittedly, I tried to start my own Corporation and received neither vast amounts of wealth nor influence, so apparently you do have to work at it. Still doesn’t make them Individuals. |
|
East Lansing, MI
|
#4
Aug 06, 2008 11:40am
@johnbenclark: ah ha. Having read the debate, I am against corporate personhood. |
|
#5
Aug 27, 2008 05:04pm
if it can’t A) serve in the military, B) serve in a jury, C) be arrested for criminal acts and it isn’t physically or mentally disabled then it should not be a person…legally |
|
|
#6
Aug 30, 2008 02:41am
If I form a legal corporation and thus control an entity with the legal status of an individual, then suddenly my will counts as that of two individuals. It’s undemocratic. |