Who On This Board Thinks

[Wiseacre]

A corporation is not a person. It is a legal entity.

Under the law, we treat legal entities different than we treat people.

I thought the question was whether or not corporations can exist without people. I say no, any business entity that has no people is not a corporation. Corporations have stockholders, management and employees, they make something or do something that is profitable or they go out of business. If corp taxes are changed or you change regulations that affect their business ops, the people for work for the corporations could be affected, and so would their suppliers and customers. It's all about people; if you're just talking about some paper institution that does nothing and has no people, that's not a corporation.

I don't really have a dog in this fight but I hear some self-proprietors incorporate themselves (usually in Delaware) for tax purposes.

Regardless, the idea that a corporation is a human being is something that only the profoundly out-of-touch and their apologists would parrot.

Romney: Corporations Are People, My Friend. - YouTube​

Yeah, but that self-proprietor is a person, no? He/she IS the corporation, no?

 

[candycorn]

I thought the question was whether or not corporations can exist without people. I say no, any business entity that has no people is not a corporation. Corporations have stockholders, management and employees, they make something or do something that is profitable or they go out of business. If corp taxes are changed or you change regulations that affect their business ops, the people for work for the corporations could be affected, and so would their suppliers and customers. It's all about people; if you're just talking about some paper institution that does nothing and has no people, that's not a corporation.

I don't really have a dog in this fight but I hear some self-proprietors incorporate themselves (usually in Delaware) for tax purposes.

Regardless, the idea that a corporation is a human being is something that only the profoundly out-of-touch and their apologists would parrot.

Romney: Corporations Are People, My Friend. - YouTube​

Yeah, but that self-proprietor is a person, no? He/she IS the corporation, no?

Legally yes. And yes again to the 2nd part.

When you have 5,000,000 shareholders...are all of them "the corporation"? No. I own a significant amount of stock (to me it's significant) in one of the entertainment giants in the country. I am not the "corporation" any more than I can speak on the behalf of the corporation. Although I am told I own a percentage of the corporation.

I vote in every shareholder meeting.

Okay...economics talk is over.

My making the claim that "every dollar a corporation makes goes to a person" is politically a non-starter when the Chairman of the Board (the person who controls the most stock) is making 3,000 times what the line employee makes.

Mitt's legal-eze may be right.

Politically....wow; the guy is a walking gaffe machine.

So in the next few posts, someone will bring up 57 states. I hope so. The more this thread gets bumped, the better:

Romney: Corporations Are People, My Friend. - YouTube

 

[DontBeStupid]

A corporation is not a person. It is a legal entity.

Under the law, we treat legal entities different than we treat people.

citizens united..

You should read that decision. It doesn't confer personhood to corporations like you apparently think.

 

[DontBeStupid]

A corporation is not a person. It is a legal entity.

Under the law, we treat legal entities different than we treat people.

I thought the question was whether or not corporations can exist without people. I say no, any business entity that has no people is not a corporation. Corporations have stockholders, management and employees, they make something or do something that is profitable or they go out of business. If corp taxes are changed or you change regulations that affect their business ops, the people working for the corporations could be affected, and so would their suppliers and customers. It's all about people; if you're just talking about some paper institution that does nothing and has no people, that's not a corporation.

/sigh

Mom and Pop open a business. They incorporate. It's a small business and they are the only two employees and only two shareholders. Mom and Pop both pass away.

At that moment, does the corporation cease to exist?

Hint: No.

 

[candycorn]

A corporation is not a person. It is a legal entity.

Under the law, we treat legal entities different than we treat people.

citizens united..

You should read that decision. It doesn't confer personhood to corporations like you apparently think.

Correct me if I'm wrong about this but didn't the entire corporate personhood thing come up because the clerk of the court interpreted a decision made by the justices and it became one of those unofficial legalities? Have I just missed something? (Loaded question).

 

[Dot Com]

A corporation is not a person. It is a legal entity.

Under the law, we treat legal entities different than we treat people.

citizens united..

Jurasic PAC

http://www.cagle.com/news/pac-spending/​

 

[Toro]

A corporation is not a person. It is a legal entity.

Under the law, we treat legal entities different than we treat people.

I thought the question was whether or not corporations can exist without people. I say no, any business entity that has no people is not a corporation. Corporations have stockholders, management and employees, they make something or do something that is profitable or they go out of business. If corp taxes are changed or you change regulations that affect their business ops, the people working for the corporations could be affected, and so would their suppliers and customers. It's all about people; if you're just talking about some paper institution that does nothing and has no people, that's not a corporation.

The law are the rules enforced by society by which by live. Society is made up of people. For example, trees don't organize themselves and create legally binding rules by which to live amongst themselves. Only people do that. So to ask whether or not corporations can exist without people is silly.

Corporations are extremely important and integral to wealth creation but they aren't people and shouldn't be treated as such.

 

[Mr.Nick]

A corporation is not a person. It is a legal entity.

Under the law, we treat legal entities different than we treat people.

I thought the question was whether or not corporations can exist without people. I say no, any business entity that has no people is not a corporation. Corporations have stockholders, management and employees, they make something or do something that is profitable or they go out of business. If corp taxes are changed or you change regulations that affect their business ops, the people working for the corporations could be affected, and so would their suppliers and customers. It's all about people; if you're just talking about some paper institution that does nothing and has no people, that's not a corporation.

The law are the rules enforced by society by which by live. Society is made up of people. For example, trees don't organize themselves and create legally binding rules by which to live amongst themselves. Only people do that. So to ask whether or not corporations can exist without people is silly.

Corporations are extremely important and integral to wealth creation but they aren't people and shouldn't be treated as such.

They have to be treated as individuals.

Of course they're not individuals, however they have to be treated as such.

Corporations or any business for that matter is separate from said capital investors.

Usually businesses of any kind are their own entity.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Corporations exist to protect people from the responsibility of being considered people. They are not people.

 

[francoHFW]

Ditto. and the OP is gibberish...

 

[Wiseacre]

Okay, one last shot, then I'm outta here. You can talk about what's legal, what's lawful, all that stuff, but the real point behind the original exchange between Romney and another person is that when you take some action against a corporation then real people are impacted. Raise corp taxes, apply stricter regs, whatever, people are impacted. Some at the top are rich guys, most of the rest are not. That's not just the employees either, but employees at other companies or corps that deal with the orginal corp in question. And the customers, and the suppliers, and the local economy, and so on.

Lib/Dems want to paint corps as a faceless entity that has no humanity involved. Primarily so they can demonize them, as though all our problems stem from big corps. As if they are the enemy, and as a result we become more divided. Some may say these big corps are not people, some may say that some corps exist without people and as a result they can be attacked as though there are no consequences to some people somewhere.

Bullshit. If you wanna demonize the various subterfuges used by liars, chears, and thieves who want to avoid paying taxes and setup empty shell companies to launder money in some way or hide it, that's fine. But let's not lump these things with real corps with real people that actually produce something or provide some service. Real people that do not deserve to be marginalized for political reasons.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I own an LLC. I do not demonize corporations. Your assumptions regarding how liberals view corporations are wrong.

When corporations become intertwined with government as you would have them do......the result is facism. You need to rethink the matter.

 

[Toro]

I thought the question was whether or not corporations can exist without people. I say no, any business entity that has no people is not a corporation. Corporations have stockholders, management and employees, they make something or do something that is profitable or they go out of business. If corp taxes are changed or you change regulations that affect their business ops, the people working for the corporations could be affected, and so would their suppliers and customers. It's all about people; if you're just talking about some paper institution that does nothing and has no people, that's not a corporation.

The law are the rules enforced by society by which by live. Society is made up of people. For example, trees don't organize themselves and create legally binding rules by which to live amongst themselves. Only people do that. So to ask whether or not corporations can exist without people is silly.

Corporations are extremely important and integral to wealth creation but they aren't people and shouldn't be treated as such.

They have to be treated as individuals.

Of course they're not individuals, however they have to be treated as such.

Corporations or any business for that matter is separate from said capital investors.

Usually businesses of any kind are their own entity.

Corporations shouldn't be treated as individuals because we confer rights upon corporations that we don't upon individuals, and vice-versa.

For example, corporations are subject to limited liability, which individuals do not have. Limited liability is a good thing IMO, but it is different from the liability to which individuals are subject. Because legal entities are treated differently than people from a legal standpoint, they shouldn't be treated like people under the law.

 

[Wiseacre]

I own an LLC. I do not demonize corporations. Your assumptions regarding how liberals view corporations are wrong.

When corporations become intertwined with government as you would have them do......the result is facism. You need to rethink the matter.

So you don't demonize corps, good for you. I would suggest most of your lib/dem contemporaries have a different opinion about them. As for intertwining corps and gov't, LOL, can't imagine why you'd think that. Furthest thing from my mind, I want the least gov't intervention as necessry.

 

[DontBeStupid]

The law are the rules enforced by society by which by live. Society is made up of people. For example, trees don't organize themselves and create legally binding rules by which to live amongst themselves. Only people do that. So to ask whether or not corporations can exist without people is silly.

Corporations are extremely important and integral to wealth creation but they aren't people and shouldn't be treated as such.

They have to be treated as individuals.

Of course they're not individuals, however they have to be treated as such.

Corporations or any business for that matter is separate from said capital investors.

Usually businesses of any kind are their own entity.

Corporations shouldn't be treated as individuals because we confer rights upon corporations that we don't upon individuals, and vice-versa.

For example, corporations are subject to limited liability, which individuals do not have. Limited liability is a good thing IMO, but it is different from the liability to which individuals are subject. Because legal entities are treated differently than people from a legal standpoint, they shouldn't be treated like people under the law.

Exactly.

Not to mention, if you do a hostile take over of a person, you get to go to jail. If you do a hostile take over of a corporation, you get the GOP nomination for President.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I own an LLC. I do not demonize corporations. Your assumptions regarding how liberals view corporations are wrong.

When corporations become intertwined with government as you would have them do......the result is facism. You need to rethink the matter.

So you don't demonize corps, good for you. I would suggest most of your lib/dem contemporaries have a different opinion about them. As for intertwining corps and gov't, LOL, can't imagine why you'd think that. Furthest thing from my mind, I want the least gov't intervention as necessry.

But you want corporations to be able to advertise on behalf of candidates without limits. That is intertwining. Why can't you see that?

Your suggestion is wrong. too.

 

[Ravi]

but do they?

Yes. Of course they do.

Unless you count the ONE person it takes to incorporate their own self.

Its a well known method of hiding money and the ultra-wealthy, like your heroes, do it every day.

One doesn't incorporate ones self..

A corporation is its own entity.....

Also, it would make no fucking sense to use a corporation as a "front" for anything.

Yeah, one does. It is a good way to pay less in taxes.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Yes. Of course they do.

Unless you count the ONE person it takes to incorporate their own self.

Its a well known method of hiding money and the ultra-wealthy, like your heroes, do it every day.

One doesn't incorporate ones self..

A corporation is its own entity.....

Also, it would make no fucking sense to use a corporation as a "front" for anything.

Yeah, one does. It is a good way to pay less in taxes.

No you wish that was real.

That's not how it works...

 

[Mr.Nick]

Yes. Of course they do.

Unless you count the ONE person it takes to incorporate their own self.

Its a well known method of hiding money and the ultra-wealthy, like your heroes, do it every day.

One doesn't incorporate ones self..

A corporation is its own entity.....

Also, it would make no fucking sense to use a corporation as a "front" for anything.

Yeah, one does. It is a good way to pay less in taxes.

No you wish that was real.

That's not how it works...

You would get taxed more in that scenario anyways.

Not to mention the transfer of all ones wealth into capital investments...

It's blatant ignorance on your part....

 

[candycorn]

Corporations exist to protect people from the responsibility of being considered people. They are not people.

That is what I've always heard; it represents you as the entity instead of the actor is the way it was explained to me. It also tends to subject the entity to judgement by the law as opposed to the CEO or the person in charge.

Like if Paulitician is out there delivering the Pepsi and is texting his latest conspiracy theory and mows down a bunch of people. Pepsi would be liable; not the CEO. I'm sure he'll blame the main stream media for putting it in his hands.