Thursday, November 8, 2012

Random thought

Posted by dkuehn at 8:54 AM
If corporations are really people, as Romney has suggested, does that mean equity owners are in violation of the 13th amendment?

10 comments:

  1. HumeNovember 8, 2012 at 11:37 AM

    The concepts "we", "We the People", "polity", etc. are all corporatist concepts.

    ReplyDelete
  2. MinNovember 8, 2012 at 2:31 PM

    I felt that Romney suffered unfairly for that comment. I think that he meant it in the same sense that churches are people, gov'ts are people, etc. Without people there are no human institutions.

    OTOH, granting rights to corporations because they are people does not follow, but Romney is not known for his logic. ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. PrometheeFeuNovember 8, 2012 at 2:41 PM

      I think it does make a lot of sense actually because it's not really granting rights to corporations. It's simply allowing equity holders to exercise their rights through the corporation.

      Delete
  3. MinNovember 8, 2012 at 2:34 PM

    Oh, yes! Cute joke! ;)

    ReplyDelete
  4. PrometheeFeuNovember 8, 2012 at 2:48 PM

    Seriously Daniel. Mitt Romney was neither the first nor the most prominent person to ever declare his support for corporate personhood. Now that he's no longer running for President can we stop making it sound like he came up with corporate personhood?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Daniel KuehnNovember 8, 2012 at 3:04 PM

    Oh I KNOW GUYS. I actually agree with what Mitt Romney was saying (although wouldn't agree with every comment he has on corporate America). So in that sense, PrometheeFeu, it is a compliment for me to credit it with him!

    I just thought it was funny.

    Everyone knows what the 13th amendment is? This did not fall flat because I have foreign readers or something like that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. PrometheeFeuNovember 8, 2012 at 7:49 PM

      It is a good joke. I just got sick and tired during the campaign of hearing that line with the media apparently under the impression that Romney invented corporate personhood. Also, pretty tired of arguing with the slew of liberals who repeatedly talk about Citizens United as establishing corporate personhood. Let's just say misconceptions and simplistic arguments about corporate personhood are starting to be a bit triggering. Maybe I should talk to my therapist. ;)

      For what it's worth, I originally tried to make a follow-up joke about Mitt Romney not being the first *person* in support corporate personhood and that the honor might go to Southern Pacific Railway Company. (It's funny because Southern Pacific Railway Company is a corporation and we are talking about corporate personhood) But well, couldn't make it not sound lame.

      Delete
  6. CzarNovember 8, 2012 at 3:20 PM

    My suggestion is that you read your Juvenal if you want to be a stand up comic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Daniel KuehnNovember 8, 2012 at 3:32 PM

      Wait a minute - Juvenal?

      Please God don't tell me this is Gary Gunnels. If it's you, go away, Gary. If it's not Gary - stop. You're reminding me of Gary. And that's not a good thing.

      Delete
  7. Silas BartaNovember 8, 2012 at 7:10 PM

    Well, you misrepresented what he said (and yes, acknowledge it in the comments), but Romney's point *wasn't* what the other commenters claim. In the context of the actual remark, he was refuting someone who thought we could lift taxes off people and make corporations pay them all. In this context, the remark was shorthand for "[tax] burdens on corporations ultimately fall on people".

    Which I'm sure Daniel_Kuehn agrees with, and so shouldn't attributed the literal version to Romney.

    ReplyDelete

All anonymous comments will be deleted. Consistent pseudonyms are fine.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)