Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Wildgoose 2580 days ago
If Corporations are truly "people" then they are slaves to their owners. The assets they own are actually collectively owned by their share-holders and the actions they take are carried out by their principal officers.[0]

The real difficulty is probably with foregn ownership because then you have the argument about taxing the citizens of other countries.

Taxing where business takes place is also a possibility, but turns into yet another source of obfuscation.

[0]Yes, I know about the idea of corporate "personhood". I just object to it on principle.
1 comments
hannasanarion 2580 days ago
You are thinking about personhood the wrong way. In the law, personhood means being able to own things, sue and be sued, pay taxes, enter contracts, and a number of other things.

Do you think that immigrants don't pay taxes?

link
baselined 2579 days ago
>Do you think that immigrants don't pay taxes?

This is what puzzles me about the immigration debate. Most move here to work and better themselves and effectively pay a higher tax rate than corporations.

link
Wildgoose 2579 days ago
I don't know where "immigrants" came into this. I made NO mention of immigration, just foreign (overseas) ownership of shares in Corporations. What has that got to do with immigration?
link
baselined 2579 days ago
It came from the post above.
link
Wildgoose 2579 days ago
Are you really suggesting that Corporate Officers aren't able to enter contracts, sue people, etc.? And what the Hell have immigrants got to do with any of this?
link
hannasanarion 2579 days ago
Corporate officers are able to enter contracts, sue people, etc, as themselves. Not as the company, which is a separate person from themselves. When you buy a product from Apple and they refuse to respect their warranty, you don't sue Tim Cook, you sue Apple. You can only do that because Apple is incorporated.

>you have the argument about taxing the citizens of other countries

link
Wildgoose 2579 days ago
If a company poisons baby-milk, who do you arrest? The company? It's a "person" after all.

(I presume you know this, but this was an actual case in China).

link
hannasanarion 2579 days ago
You arrest the employees if what they did was criminal (which would be the case whether a company is involved or not) and fine the company, or in extreme cases, revoke the company's charter (aka corporate death penalty).

Being able to be imprisoned is not a defining feature of a legal person, this line of argument will get you nowhere.

link
Wildgoose 2579 days ago
You brought up immigrants, not me. What are you talking about?
link