Hello, My name is Optrader and I’m a facist…

WuWei · 2022-09-04T21:59:14.736Z

Good Lord.

Supreme_War_Pig · 2022-09-04T22:42:09.900Z

I used to think it was North Korea, but yeah: China wins the Orwell prize.

Gaius · 2022-09-04T22:52:33.789Z

1.4 billion people.
(Fortunately, so far they use the announcer drones only druing Covid shut down.)

Gaius · 2022-09-04T22:57:34.864Z

Smyrna:

Optrader:

Hello Smyrna, glad you could join us!

It wasn’t intentional but Brandon decided I was in this group.

image529×519 35.8 KB

e7alr · 2022-09-05T03:00:53.097Z

That entity is the property of the shareholders, the owners. Their ownership interest is private property. Again, who is anyone to say they can’t use their private property in furtherance of their individual or collective political opinion.

WuWei · 2022-09-05T03:01:54.922Z

Guvnah:

The corporation isn’t a person.

Actually it is.

FreeAndClear · 2022-09-05T04:29:28.533Z

e7alr:

That entity is the property of the shareholders, the owners. Their ownership interest is private property. Again, who is anyone to say they can’t use their private property in furtherance of their individual or collective political opinion.

Again to their own benefit.

You Dress it as opinion but it’s not only opinion. It’s also financial benefit.

FreeAndClear · 2022-09-05T04:31:09.190Z

WuWei:

Guvnah:

The corporation isn’t a person.

Actually it is.

If piercing the corporate veil wasn’t a thing in this country then you’d be right.

It is in every way not a person when it stand to lose but suddenly becomes a person when it stands to gain benefit.

JayJay · 2022-09-05T09:57:41.790Z

e7alr:

Humans act individually and/or collectively. Every corporate action is determined, and implemented by the human, or humans, holding the decision making positions in the corporation. Same is true about unions, social organizations and governments. In each case it is actual humans actually setting the policies and making the decisions. Who are any of you to tell individuals that they can’t use their private property (their equity in the corporation) to individually or collectively express their opinions and engage in the political process.

Do you truly believe the millions of shareholders are really enabled to “express their will” by the law that makes corporations persons?

Might want to think about the past forty years of American politics, and the past 20 since CU was passed.

WuWei · 2022-09-05T12:15:59.633Z

FreeAndClear:

WuWei:

Guvnah:

The corporation isn’t a person.

Actually it is.

If piercing the corporate veil wasn’t a thing in this country then you’d be right.

It is in every way not a person when it stand to lose but suddenly becomes a person when it stands to gain benefit.

It is, by definition, and always has been.

Guvnah · 2022-09-05T13:52:53.308Z

e7alr:

That entity is the property of the shareholders, the owners. Their ownership interest is private property. Again, who is anyone to say they can’t use their private property in furtherance of their individual or collective political opinion.

I agree with all that.

I only take issue with defining a corporation as a person. That’s all I’ve done regarding that in this thread.

It denatures the actual meaning of person.

JayJay · 2022-09-05T14:11:06.476Z

e7alr:

That entity is the property of the shareholders, the owners. Their ownership interest is private property. Again, who is anyone to say they can’t use their private property in furtherance of their individual or collective political opinion.

It’s not a collective political opinion.

It’s the opinion oftentimes of management, many of whom own very little of the stock of the corporations they manage.

Or if it is the opinion of the shareholders, it’s a small number of shareholders that happen to own a majority of the stock.

If it was a one shareholder one vote type of situation, you would have a point.

But it’s not, so this idea fails.

WuWei · 2022-09-05T14:13:49.341Z

A corporation is an organization legally authorized to act as a single entity to preserve rights.

WuWei · 2022-09-05T14:14:54.832Z

JayJay:

If it was a one shareholder one vote type of situation, you would have a point.

Why should a person with one share have the same vote as a person with 1,356,742?

e7alr · 2022-09-05T15:20:25.817Z

each share holder has the right to retain, or divest, if they are in conflict with the political expression of the majority of shareholders. If they were forced to be shareholders there might be an argument, but they are not.

JayJay · 2022-09-05T15:30:11.777Z

So you are saying that the political speech of one shareholder should be 1.3 million times as important?

See the problem with giving corporations a “personhood” status when it comes to political speech?

JayJay · 2022-09-05T15:31:47.849Z

That doesn’t change my premise in the slightest.

It’s not the “collective will” of the shareholders in the slightest.

FreeAndClear · 2022-09-05T15:35:55.637Z

WuWei:

A corporation is an organization legally authorized to act as a single entity to preserve rights.

And yet legally those who organize it and run it are not legally liable unless certain conditions are met.

So again the benefit of personal rights and protection against personal liability.

Strange that.

WuWei · 2022-09-05T16:45:25.852Z

JayJay:

So you are saying that the political speech of one shareholder should be 1.3 million times as important?

See the problem with giving corporations a “personhood” status when it comes to political speech?

I’m saying those with the bigger risk stake have the bigger say.

e7alr · 2022-09-05T17:33:56.298Z

Sounds like an argument is being made for redistribution of equity.