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

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.