Subject:
|
Re: The constitution has been abrogated
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 10 Jul 2002 02:58:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
476 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > No, our constitution is not what it was once. Nor is our government.
>
> No argument.
>
> I'll make one more point in light of today's "W" farce. Corporations are
> dangerously powerful. They supposedly operate for the public good, and
> indeed much trust is placed in their ability to create jobs and in various
> ways serve the public interest. To better serve those public interest ends,
> corporations are often granted perks by states and localities where they
> set-up operations. Corporations have limited liability for debt and can
> declare bankruptcy often with impunity.
Well in the past I have argued against that. My thinking in this area is not
all that well formed but I tend to favor strict liability, and in general, a
weakening of what corporations (as opposed to individuals) can legally do
and what powers they have. One facet of that is (as I've argued before) no
ability to duck personal responsibility for decisions, with the CEOs of
corporations potentially being tossed in jail on a regular basis when their
corporation does things like pollute or act negligently.
(I'd extend this notion of liability to government officials as well, by the
way)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: The constitution has been abrogated
|
| (...) Right. But don't forget that 16 is essentially null and void -- it's a pretense of a new kind of tax when there are only two kinds of taxes: direct and indirect. See: (URL) in mind that I am of the political belief that a tax upon wages is a (...) (22 years ago, 9-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
