To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 10397
10396  |  10398
Subject: 
Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Thu, 10 May 2001 22:06:15 GMT
Viewed: 
933 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:

Sometimes they are. Steve Jackson Games won a suit against the government I
believe...

That's 'cause the government didn't bother to read the rules to Illuminati:
Weird Groups (Gamers) are immune to Government Groups (Secret Service).  Fnord.


The upside of small corporations is that it's possible to win against them.
The downside is that they may not have many assets. The upside of large
governments or corporations is that they have lots of assets. The downside
is that it's hard to win against Phillip Morris.

I'm aware that individual employees can't be sued for the actions of the
gov't, but how is that different from a private individual's assets being
separate from his incorporated assets?  A man's house can't be seized for
the wrongdoing of his corporation even if his corporation is sued into
bankrupcy.

Libertopian corporate officers whould have no such protection if what they
did was egregiously negligent, although I grant such is the case today.

Yeah for Libertopia!  These corporate sharks rape the system for all it's
worth, cash in their stock options, and then let the company take the fall
for their crimes.  It's one reason why I don't trust corporate america at
all - they are extremely short-sighted.  The company and consumers will
catch hell?  So what?  I'll just cover it all up as best I can, and by the
time it all comes out, it's someone else's responsiblity.  Get some good old
fashioned personal responsiblity in there and you'll see a lot of that go away.

Bruce



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
 
(...) away. I'm confused. I expected this to be anti-libertarian and so read sarcasm into it. But I don't think that it's warranted. Are you serious, Bruce? The opinion (sarcastic intent or not) is exactly how I feel. Put the ass of policy makers on (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
 
(...) many cases, not all cases. So no, what you think I said isn't right. (...) Sometimes they are. Steve Jackson Games won a suit against the government I believe... The upside of small corporations is that it's possible to win against them. The (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

246 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR