User Tag List

First 7891011 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 118

  1. #81
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Confiscation: Monsanto suing farmers who (allegedly) violate their patent. Those farmers are either forced to settle or face bankruptcy, regardless of the viability of Monsanto's claim.

    Imprisonment: How about the private juvenile halls that bribed judges to send children to their facility?

    Oh, you said independently, as though it matters.
    oooh ooh! Does that time when Walmart locked its employees in the building count as imprisonment?
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

  2. #82
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    [QUOTE=Magic Poriferan;1016091
    Now, don't say "Oh good, I can't wait for Obama to lose, hyuck hyuck", because you'd be missing the point. The point is this actually changes the quality of the money in a sense, rather than just the quantity, and that in turn alters the entire political tilt.[/QUOTE]

    If you think I oppose McCain/Feingold because it is allegedly advantagous to Obama (corporations do not have monolithic interests, btw), you would be missing the point, yourself. Outlawing political commercials, from whatever source, is a blatant violation of free speech. Limit direct contributions (so long as such limitations apply equally to all organizations) to candidates and parties all you want, but leave free speech alone. If Emily's List and National Right to Life want to run competing commercials endorsing rival candidates, then more power to them.

  3. #83
    Senior Member htb's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    1,506

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    I don't believe that state actors are benign. Where you came up with that assertion
    From your statement "Take away corporate power and much governmental power isn't necessary," as if regulators (legislative, judicial, executive) simply respond to complaints and never aggrandize.

    The only thing they lack (that citizens have) is the right to vote. They ARE outside the state, with the ability to conduct business globally.
    Stalking us . . . in the shadows! Where this leads beyond paranoia, I don't know.

    The law says they are people.
    No, the law as clarified by the Supreme Court will punish citizens in fewer ways when they organize and express political speech as corporations.

    they have done it by proxy.
    Proxies like what, the state?

    Oh, you said independently, as though it matters.
    I'm surprised you even tried. Both examples confirm my argument. Monsanto highlights a libertarian case against excesses of patent and copyright privileges; and, of course, state power was required for its ends. As for the juvenile lockup chicanery -- it couldn't have been done without law enforcement and the court system.

    But I'm not talking about criminal activity. If I don't buy a car, I won't own a car. If I don't pay my taxes, I'll go to jail. Can you see the difference?

    Anyway. You have nothing more to offer the topic than a bizarre variation of "corporations are evil."

  4. #84
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by htb View Post
    From your statement "Take away corporate power and much governmental power isn't necessary," as if regulators (legislative, judicial, executive) simply respond to complaints and never aggrandize.
    It seems to me that you don't believe that we can reduce the power of the state.

    Stalking us . . . in the shadows! Where this leads beyond paranoia, I don't know.
    /yawn

    All this means is that they're able to avoid any particular nation's laws.

    No, the law as clarified by the Supreme Court will punish citizens in fewer ways when they organize and express political speech as corporations.
    Numerous times courts have found that corporations are protected under the 14th amendment. The concept of corporate personhood is settled law.

    Proxies like what, the state?

    I'm surprised you even tried. Both examples confirm my argument. Monsanto highlights a libertarian case against excesses of patent and copyright privileges; and, of course, state power was required for its ends. As for the juvenile lockup chicanery -- it couldn't have been done without law enforcement and the court system.

    But I'm not talking about criminal activity. If I don't buy a car, I won't own a car. If I don't pay my taxes, I'll go to jail. Can you see the difference?
    Corporations do it by proxy or not, depending on the circumstances. They overthrow governments when necessary (Guatemala) or corporations use their own mercenaries when necessary (Ludlow Massacre). Reducing the power of the state does not mean that corporations will be less powerful. It just means that they'll have to use different tactics to accomplish their goals. How you cannot see this, I don't understand. All you have to do is look at history.

    Anyway. You have nothing more to offer the topic than a bizarre variation of "corporations are evil."
    So this is your summary? Certainly you could have tried to dismiss my argument better than this.

    Corporations are not evil. They are amoral, there is a difference. They have one purpose, to generate profit.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  5. #85
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    I was listening to CSPAN radio for a while last night (I was bored) and they were broadcasting some of the argument before the Supreme Court on the campaign finance issue. I've come away with the conclusion that Scalia is a tool. One of his arguments was that corporations should be allowed to make campaign contributions because most corporations are small, single shareholder enterprises. /facepalm
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  6. #86
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    I was listening to CSPAN radio for a while last night (I was bored) and they were broadcasting some of the argument before the Supreme Court on the campaign finance issue. I've come away with the conclusion that Scalia is a tool. One of his arguments was that corporations should be allowed to make campaign contributions because most corporations are small, single shareholder enterprises. /facepalm
    In consequence, the great share of power is in the hands of ony a few corporations. What matters is the quantity of power, not the technically quantity of corporations. And if ony actually considers this arranged, then it would stand to reason that allowing infinite campaign contributions relatively weakens those small corporations compared to the few big ones.

    But as an aside to all of that, I'm wondering why Scalia thinks the smallness of those little corporations means they should get to make contributions anyhow. I'm not getting from A to B, I'm afraid.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  7. #87
    Feline Member kelric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    INtP
    Posts
    2,169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    I've come away with the conclusion that Scalia is a tool.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  8. #88
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    I was listening to CSPAN radio for a while last night (I was bored) and they were broadcasting some of the argument before the Supreme Court on the campaign finance issue. I've come away with the conclusion that Scalia is a tool. One of his arguments was that corporations should be allowed to make campaign contributions because most corporations are small, single shareholder enterprises. /facepalm

    Scalia is Clarence Thomas without the brilliance.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  9. #89
    man-made neptunesnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5&4 sx
    Socionics
    INFj
    Posts
    1,232

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Scalia is Clarence Thomas without the brilliance.
    Who said Clarence Thomas was brilliant?

    *chortle*

  10. #90
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by neptunesnet View Post
    Who said Clarence Thomas was brilliant?

    *chortle*

    Many people. He is arguably the foremost legal mind in the Supreme Court. Definitely the most libertarian justice, too.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

Similar Threads

  1. What is the source of class distinction?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-17-2009, 11:04 AM
  2. Is the brain the source of faith?
    By JAVO in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 02-05-2009, 05:08 AM
  3. Bank of America getting bail out money AGAIN
    By Risen in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-15-2009, 08:08 PM
  4. Another one of those crazy INFPs
    By BrendenTheMendicant in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-27-2008, 09:54 PM
  5. Evaluating sources of science facts and what is the current scientific viewpoint
    By ygolo in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-14-2008, 08:00 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO