Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: corporations as persons

Expand Messages
  • irvhal
    Mary, I should add two things to this discussion. The private corporate model is indeed not a person, metaphysical or otherwise, but a network of contractural
    Message 1 of 15 , Dec 7, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Mary,

      I should add two things to this discussion. The private corporate model is indeed not a person, metaphysical or otherwise, but a network of contractural relationships between or among actual persons for efficacious marshaling of their own resources for some common purpose -- be it economic, social, political, or otherwise. (Note if you will, that a nonprofit corporation's right to disseminate speech was affirmed in the Citizens United case.) It is concededly undemocratic or unsocialistic, in that it presupposes voluntarism of action and association, rather than demanding submission and comformity to some supermajority at large. And it presupposes like action for others, and hence too that power is defused rather than concentrated in any singular person, organization or party. Second, to say that voter ID laws (or for that matter, any formal registration scheme) might lower voter turnout is to but acknowledge that life has opportunity costs and trade-offs. Stated differently, some people do prefer sports or kitsch to politics or expending time for a voter ID card, and the growing risks of voter fraud and free riding from porous borders do beckon a more vigilant registration scheme.

      Irvin

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@...> wrote:
      >
      > I disagree that these are merely incidental effects and trade-offs and further assert that new voter ID laws (aka poll tax and show me your papers) suppress representative systems. Those who drafted these draconian measures in order to destroy the margins recently gained by minorities are becoming more transparent every day. Here's a frightening new definition of "class warfare": "The rich are now rich enough to pay half the population to kill the other half of the population."
      >
      > Mary
      >
      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Bill,
      > >
      >
      > Gripe as we will about unmet idiosyncrasies, a competitive private capital model has historically trumped the public model in innovation, diffuse goods and services, and allowance of gadflies, while allowing incidental effects or trade-offs like pollution or income disparities to be mediated through an electoral or parliamentary system.
      > >
      > > Irvin
    • William
      Message 2 of 15 , Dec 7, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@...> wrote:
        >
        > Mary,
        >
        > I should add two things to this discussion. The private corporate model is indeed not a person, metaphysical or otherwise, but a network of contractural relationships between or among actual persons for efficacious marshaling of their own resources for some common purpose -- be it economic, social, political, or otherwise. (Note if you will, that a nonprofit corporation's right to disseminate speech was affirmed in the Citizens United case.) It is concededly undemocratic or unsocialistic, in that it presupposes voluntarism of action and association, rather than demanding submission and comformity to some supermajority at large. And it presupposes like action for others, and hence too that power is defused rather than concentrated in any singular person, organization or party. Second, to say that voter ID laws (or for that matter, any formal registration scheme) might lower voter turnout is to but acknowledge that life has opportunity costs and trade-offs. Stated differently, some people do prefer sports or kitsch to politics or expending time for a voter ID card, and the growing risks of voter fraud and free riding from porous borders do beckon a more vigilant registration scheme.
        >
        > Irvin
        > Irvin, The first time I voted I was shocked when I was simply asked my name and voted on my own recognisance. In my very contrary ,young mind, I was counting the holes in the security system. It is nearly wide open and can be beaten so many ways. Years later as a poll watcher I suspended voting when pre and post voting voters were interviewed togeather. The ward captain hated me for years. Since we are made to fill out a census form I might think it manditory that all vote and possess necessary credentials ,free of course, before national elections. If you really want honest,accurate elections that is a way to get there. Then that is not what a few influential people want. Bill
        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
        > >
        > > I disagree that these are merely incidental effects and trade-offs and further assert that new voter ID laws (aka poll tax and show me your papers) suppress representative systems. Those who drafted these draconian measures in order to destroy the margins recently gained by minorities are becoming more transparent every day. Here's a frightening new definition of "class warfare": "The rich are now rich enough to pay half the population to kill the other half of the population."
        > >
        > > Mary
        > >
        > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Bill,
        > > >
        > >
        > > Gripe as we will about unmet idiosyncrasies, a competitive private capital model has historically trumped the public model in innovation, diffuse goods and services, and allowance of gadflies, while allowing incidental effects or trade-offs like pollution or income disparities to be mediated through an electoral or parliamentary system.
        > > >
        > > > Irvin
        >
      • Mary
        Irvin, The current issue concerns corporations having equal standing with individuals in the courts but having disproportionate resources. Free speech in the
        Message 3 of 15 , Dec 7, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          Irvin,

          The current issue concerns corporations having equal standing with individuals in the courts but having disproportionate resources. Free speech in the public domain is of course a civil right.

          There is a growing body of research that supports the contention that minorities, the elderly, and students who tend to vote Democratic will definitely be disenfranchised. I can provide sources if you like.

          Mary

          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@...> wrote:
          >
          > Mary,
          >
          > I should add two things to this discussion. The private corporate model is indeed not a person, metaphysical or otherwise, but a network of contractural relationships between or among actual persons for efficacious marshaling of their own resources for some common purpose -- be it economic, social, political, or otherwise. (Note if you will, that a nonprofit corporation's right to disseminate speech was affirmed in the Citizens United case.) It is concededly undemocratic or unsocialistic, in that it presupposes voluntarism of action and association, rather than demanding submission and comformity to some supermajority at large. And it presupposes like action for others, and hence too that power is defused rather than concentrated in any singular person, organization or party. Second, to say that voter ID laws (or for that matter, any formal registration scheme) might lower voter turnout is to but acknowledge that life has opportunity costs and trade-offs. Stated differently, some people do prefer sports or kitsch to politics or expending time for a voter ID card, and the growing risks of voter fraud and free riding from porous borders do beckon a more vigilant registration scheme.
          >
          > Irvin
          >
          > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
          > >
          > > I disagree that these are merely incidental effects and trade-offs and further assert that new voter ID laws (aka poll tax and show me your papers) suppress representative systems. Those who drafted these draconian measures in order to destroy the margins recently gained by minorities are becoming more transparent every day. Here's a frightening new definition of "class warfare": "The rich are now rich enough to pay half the population to kill the other half of the population."
          > >
          > > Mary
          > >
          > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "irvhal" <i99hj@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > Bill,
          > > >
          > >
          > > Gripe as we will about unmet idiosyncrasies, a competitive private capital model has historically trumped the public model in innovation, diffuse goods and services, and allowance of gadflies, while allowing incidental effects or trade-offs like pollution or income disparities to be mediated through an electoral or parliamentary system.
          > > >
          > > > Irvin
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.