It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If Corporations Are People Too...

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   
So corporations are people too. Does this notion seem unnerving and unnatural to anyone else?

Lets look at the nature of corporations for a second. They are created when someone files some paperwork which costs about $300-$500 in many states. Individuals create corporations so they can protect their personal assets in the event the business entity ends up being liable to pay for damages due its own actions in the course of business. Corporations pay taxes. Corporations live forever or until the owners of a corporation dissolve it. Corporations can be bought, sold or merge with other corporations. They can also be for profit, or non-profit. When corporations break laws, they do not go to jail, they just pay fines. Corporations have a net worth.


Now lets take a look at the nature of natural living breathing people (humans). Humans are born of another human, often created after a night of fun which doesn't necessarily have to cost anything. Humans have to eat, sleep, poop, etc. When humans get in trouble with the law they may lose all of their assets or go to jail. Humans pay taxes. Humans die, some sooner than others due to poor decisions. Humans cannot be bought or sold. Humans can merge with each other (marriage). Humans have a net worth.

I can make each list go on for a long time, but I will spare you as I believe the point is starting to become clear enough for me to move on. People and corporations can be quiet similar. However, if the statement that corporations are people too is true, then shouldn't all people be equal? Further, being equal means living by the same laws and standards that govern society.

For example, the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment is basically there to ensure that the notion of "all men are created equal" is the law of the land without question. This amendment was the official end of slavery. During slavery people were bought and sold. Of course, today people cannot be bought and sold as we consider it a heinous crime which would come with substantial jail time. Corporations get bought and sold all the time, however they are people too???

The recent supreme court decision with respect to political campaign donations coming from corporations has allowed corporations the ability to donate unlimited sums of money. Humans cannot donate unlimited sums. Their reasoning was that it was a 1st amendment, freedom of speech issue, and money is the only way corporations can speak. So is a corporation and living, breathing, THINKING entity? Or are humans controlling the corporation's purse and beliefs? A human still has to make a decision as to whom they will support with money. Can the corporation ever really speak it's own mind? It can't seeing as it DOES NOT HAVE ONE of it own.

When a human dies as a result of some other person's actions, they usually go to jail and may lose their personal assets to cover restitution or other damages for which they were found liable. Corporations just pay damages and fines when they hurt people. They do not go to jail... but wait.. they are people too.

Corporations can live forever, humans cannot.

While the idea of having a business entity set up to organize business is not a terrible idea in and of itself, the idea that these entities are people is a very scary thought. There are people among us who are not human. People who enjoy the benefits of all our laws, but none of the down sides. Corporations have been able to pick and choose which laws apply to them, a problem which is being exacerbated by their recently louder political voice. Of course when you rig the game in such a manner it makes all the sense in the world to carry on about your business with some degree of reckless abandon because the corporation is responsible and the people behind it are often not held accountable.

It is about time we wake up to the reality around us and start to make some serious changes to our society. We are continuing down this path to oblivion being dragged, but not kicking and screaming. Humans are just letting it happen because many are more concerned with the next status update from their friend or tweet from some celebrity they don't actually know. We get all excited for the next iPhone, but no one really cares when the supreme court makes a decision that spits in the face of every human and REAL person who supports the government. Our government is supposed to be by the people, of the people and for the people, but we let businesses decide they are people too?

Business is a byproduct of people in the same way poop is. But poop doesn't have any rights, and doesn't need any. If I decide to put my money into a business and my actions hurt someone or break a law, I should be held accountable. In the same way if I poop and decide to use that poop to make a statue, I am allowed to do so. However if I throw that piece of poop at someone and they get sick from it, I cannot hide behind the poop in court. It wasn't the poop's fault the person got sick, it was my fault for throwing it at them in the first place.

Corporations are not people if they cannot be just like the rest of us. There are two things which are certain in life for every person (human) in America (and nearly the entire planet), DEATH and TAXES. If you cannot do both, then you are not a person.




posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Thats why we have sites like ATS.. but I thought we're now drugs ?
Your Body is a Drug - and We Have the Authority to Regulate It, page 1 ATS

A ride along the maritime laws canal is also a little trip

edit on 5-2-2012 by ItsEvolutionBaby because: messed up link



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Whatsreal
 


Bill Moyers recently commented about this saying that he was from Texas and quoted one of his fellow Texas friends who said, " I'll agree to admit corporations are people when we're allowed to put one to death." Nuff said.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   
Yeah... They're people, but for some reason, when it comes to paying taxes they suddenly aren't people anymore.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   
Corporations are people in the sense that they are made up of people, but an individual person separate from its creator they are not. Any judge that says they are is clearly delusional and confused about what a human is, and since that is impossible to not know what a human is there must be a nefarious reason behind their decision.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by vasaga
 


It appears they aren't liable for fraud or negligence like people as well. They are just people when it's convenient.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Whatsreal
 


Corporations are definitely NOT people! In fact, they are the exact opposite of people. Corporations are entities created via a legal document, (not as a result of a live birth) for the sole purpose of protecting it's owners from prosecution for their immoral deeds.

For those ATSers who prefer to have things explained in a more religious manner; Greed is the "Anti-Christ" and corporations are the physical manifestation of unfettered greed.

One more thing that is worthy of noting; The words "corporation" and "shareholder" do NOT appear in any part of the U.S. Constitution and are thereby not entitled to enjoy the same rights and privileges afforded to the "people," who's rights the document was drafted to protect.

I fully support Sen. Bernie Sanders, (I-VT.) and his drive to end corporate personhood via the Constitutional Amendment he proposed, (S.J. Res. 33) on Dec. 8, 2011 and I would strongly urge others to do the same.

thehill.com...

Sanders's amendment, S.J.Res. 33, would state that corporations do not have the same constitutional rights as persons, that corporations are subject to regulation, that corporations may not make campaign contributions and that Congress has the power to regulate campaign finance.


www.politicususa.com...

Sen. Sanders’ proposed Saving American Democracy amendment states,

SECTION 1. The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons and do not extend to for-profit corporations, limited liability companies, or other private entities established for business purposes or to promote business interests under the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state.

SECTION 2. Such corporate and other private entities established under law are subject to regulation by the people through the legislative process so long as such regulations are consistent with the powers of Congress and the States and do not limit the freedom of the press.

SECTION 3. Such corporate and other private entities shall be prohibited from making contributions or expenditures in any election of any candidate for public office or the vote upon any ballot measure submitted to the people.

SECTION 4. Congress and the States shall have the power to regulate and set limits on all election contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own spending, and to authorize the establishment of political committees to receive, spend, and publicly disclose the sources of those contributions and expenditures.


With the overwhelming opposition to the "Citizen's United" decision, I believe that this could be the most rapidly adopted constitutional amendment in american history. Provided that the "people" of this nation are willing to stand up and be heard.

Thanks for the OP, S&F.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 


Wow, I did not know about this. Thanks for bring this to everyone's attention. Now people just need to contact their congresspeople and pressure them to support Bernie Sanders' amendment!!



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by RSF77
reply to post by vasaga
 


It appears they aren't liable for fraud or negligence like people as well. They are just people when it's convenient.


I agree with your post but I also noticed in your signature that you are a Ron Paul supporter. While I agree with many of his positions, his stance on corporate rights and personhood is not one of them. If you think that Ron Paul has any intention of limiting corporate rights, you have another "think" coming. He has clearly stated that he supports removing federal regulations and enforcement thereof. He has publicly stated that if a corporation harms an individual and/or his property, it's up to that individual to hold them accountable, (I presume in a court of law). I ask; "How many individuals here in America have the financial resources to stand alone against a corporate legal team in a court battle?" NONE!

If Ron Paul were elected, corporations would be free to trample the individual rights of "people" into non-existence forever. Therefore, if you truly believe that the SCOTUS has overstepped it's bounds in passing the "Citizen's United" decision and that corporations are not people, you should know that Ron Paul is NOT the man to change that decision.
edit on 5-2-2012 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flatfish

Originally posted by RSF77
reply to post by vasaga
 


It appears they aren't liable for fraud or negligence like people as well. They are just people when it's convenient.


I agree with your post but I also noticed in your signature that you are a Ron Paul supporter. While I agree with many of his positions, his stance on corporate rights and personhood is not one of them. If you think that Ron Paul has any intention of limiting corporate rights, you have another "think" coming. He has clearly stated that he supports removing federal regulations and enforcement thereof. He has publicly stated that if a corporation harms an individual and/or his property, it's up to that individual to hold them accountable, (I presume in a court of law). I ask; "How many individuals here in America have the financial resources to stand alone against a corporate legal team in a court battle?" NONE!

If Ron Paul were elected, corporations would be free to trample the individual rights of "people" into non-existence forever. Therefore, if you truly believe that the SCOTUS has overstepped it's bounds in passing the "Citizen's United" decision and that corporations are not people, you should know that Ron Paul is NOT the man to change that decision.
edit on 5-2-2012 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)


you are not correct..
in fact Ron paul would look at how the founding fathers dealt with it and the evolution of the corporations

for about 150 years NO Everyone was allowed to become a Corporation. You had to PROVE to the state your business had a special social benefit and thus apply for a charter...a corporate charter. then you would get the status, different tax structure or limited liability as a separate entity. 1900s and beyond the idea that everyone should be able to open a LLC, etc and the only real reason is to have a free pass at financial or legal responsibility at this point..as well as writing off your life


the LEGAL mandate of a corporation is to MAKE PROFIT...
profit is good

but if the overall system its being made in, as in today, is corrupt or a corporatocracy...and the ethics of the people in charge are compromised, profit could be a bad thing too

its all relative

we need a new ethic of the golden rule to sprout back up again. we need to actually level the playing field again, prosecute judges or elites who have secret society allegiances, change the corporate lobby power, among other things

until then most people are jaw jacking about the american dream being open to everyone



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 09:47 PM
link   
From 1 USC 1:

www.law.cornell.edu...


§ 1. Words denoting number, gender, and so forth
In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise—
words importing the singular include and apply to several persons, parties, or things;
words importing the plural include the singular;
words importing the masculine gender include the feminine as well;
words used in the present tense include the future as well as the present;
the words “insane” and “insane person” and “lunatic” shall include every idiot, lunatic, insane person, and person non compos mentis;
the words “person” and “whoever” include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;
“officer” includes any person authorized by law to perform the duties of the office;
“signature” or “subscription” includes a mark when the person making the same intended it as such;
“oath” includes affirmation, and “sworn” includes affirmed;
“writing” includes printing and typewriting and reproductions of visual symbols by photographing, multigraphing, mimeographing, manifolding, or otherwise.


The Supreme Court has held on several occasions that some rights of natural persons are also held by corporations, but not all rights. By looking at the context and the case law you should be able to determine the reasoning for any particular "right" granted by the doctrine of corporate personhood.



new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join