General Discussion

fasttense

(17,301 posts)

149. NO, your LLC should have absolutely NO Rights to anything.

Tue Jun 16, 2015, 07:59 AM

Jun 2015

You on the other hand should have the right to keep the money in the LLC's account. And to sign contracts. You should have the right to sue clients. And if you get a partner, he should have rights too.

Nope no matter who owns the LLC, the S-corp, or the C-corp, the corporations should have absolutely NO RIGHTS. The people who form the corporation on the other hand do have rights.

You are really blind if you do not see the corporations all around you that are destroying the planet and the economy. I'll name just 10, Wal-Mart, BP, Monsanto, Tyson, Goldman Sacks, JP Morgan, GM, Ford. McDonalds and Byer. I came up with those in less than 2 minutes.

Yes, there are a few corporations that are merely disguises for small businesses. But those businesses should have absolutely NO RIGHTS. The people who own them on the other hand have the rights.

The world will not end tomorrow if all the rights the Dancing Supremes have given corporations were taken away. Business would run and free enterprise would still be functioning.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

156 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

My main concerns with the TPP, TISA, TTIP, etc. are not job losses but the [View all] cali Jun 2015 OP

I think the word is fascism, and I think your right . orpupilofnature57 Jun 2015 #1

Agree peacebird Jun 2015 #5

Completely agree Betty Karlson Jun 2015 #52

Easiest solution in the world is to better regulate corporations. randome Jun 2015 #2

except as has been demonstrated repeatedly over recent years, it's one cali Jun 2015 #3

Yes, well, I meant 'easy' in concept. randome Jun 2015 #4

True, but it will happen sooner or later because they always go too far! Dustlawyer Jun 2015 #39

You really do buy into the corporate mind set. fasttense Jun 2015 #21

Corporations are given the right to function by the state. The state has every right to regulate Dont call me Shirley Jun 2015 #46

Thank you. Cannot be said too often. So many people do not think about this undeniable JDPriestly Jun 2015 #79

Exactly n/t fasttense Jun 2015 #88

Unfortunately, the intent of our founding Fathers to limit corporate power... Human101948 Jun 2015 #151

Thank you for the additional information and link, Human. Dont call me Shirley Jun 2015 #153

You are surely welcome, Shirley! Human101948 Jun 2015 #154

That would be from the ongoing war on public education and misinformation from the media. Dont call me Shirley Jun 2015 #155

Well stated Art_from_Ark Jun 2015 #48

"Corporations have no right to anything, nothing. " SusanCalvin Jun 2015 #53

Corporations are not people but they are owned and run by people. randome Jun 2015 #58

I think that is what Mitt Romney was trying to get to as well when he said corporations are people. fasttense Jun 2015 #90

I have an LLC alc Jun 2015 #135

NO, your LLC should have absolutely NO Rights to anything. fasttense Jun 2015 #149

That is precisely why the TPP and its trade arbitration courts are such a bad idea. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #103

You wouldn't have to worry about "trade arbitration courts" if it were not for FDR and Truman. pampango Jun 2015 #116

Actually, Wilson favored more trade too. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #122

Color me a Wilson, FDR, Truman and Scandanavian Democrat then. pampango Jun 2015 #137

You have it exactly backwards. lumberjack_jeff Jun 2015 #62

Not easy at all BlindTiresias Jun 2015 #78

Do you prefer for there not to be a WTO arbitrater between corporations and countries? Recursion Jun 2015 #6

Because ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2015 #8

You owe me a keyboard, 1SBM Recursion Jun 2015 #9

LOL ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2015 #10

Lol! I'm flattered. bettyellen Jun 2015 #130

Disaster capitalism at work here. salib Jun 2015 #12

We are doing something that works for the 99% Recursion Jun 2015 #14

Again, simply because you have identified an issue salib Jun 2015 #17

People said the same thing about NAFTA. But things got better after it. Recursion Jun 2015 #19

define "better" and provide a source please Fast Walker 52 Jun 2015 #23

Higher median wages, lower unemployment, lower discouraged worker rate, higher household income Recursion Jun 2015 #26

source? Fast Walker 52 Jun 2015 #34

post hoc ergo proctor hoc, no? Vattel Jun 2015 #54

I think you are confusing the tech "dot com boom" bubble that was being inflated at that time... cascadiance Jun 2015 #84

Don't be silly. The dot com bubble destroyed tens of millions of jobs. More than a trade agreement Recursion Jun 2015 #123

They built jobs to start with when you quote statistics on what happened with NAFTA... cascadiance Jun 2015 #125

No, it destroyed jobs to start with. It was *entirely* about replacing people with software Recursion Jun 2015 #127

You obviously don't understand the software industry either! cascadiance Jun 2015 #131

I'm a UNIX sysadmin and programmer. The only thing software does is replace people Recursion Jun 2015 #132

People's salary since around NAFTA, have flattened out or gone down... cascadiance Jun 2015 #136

Your own chart shows they were up more after 1994 than before Recursion Jun 2015 #139

You are ignoring productivity gains over that time... cascadiance Jun 2015 #141

I'm looking at the real wage level Recursion Jun 2015 #144

Climate change got better after NAFTA? raouldukelives Jun 2015 #29

No, that got worse. Recursion Jun 2015 #31

Global greenhouse gas emmissions closely track global economic growth bhikkhu Jun 2015 #55

actually this makes sense as we only get world GDP by burning cheap fossil fuels. airplaneman Jun 2015 #65

Delusional. salib Jun 2015 #64

NAFTA did not create more prosperity, the tech balloon did. Lasted until 2000 when it popped. n/t PowerToThePeople Jun 2015 #85

The tech balloon was entirely about replacing people with software Recursion Jun 2015 #129

Record stores didn't go out of business until more recently with the advent of Itunes, etc. cascadiance Jun 2015 #138

If things had gotten better after NAFTA, we would not be arguing against the TPP. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #106

Things got better only for the .01%. Not for me and the rest of us 99.99% Dont call me Shirley Jun 2015 #156

If corporations and Republicans are supporting TPP, it's bad, period n/t eridani Jun 2015 #80

Who benefits from the TPP? JDPriestly Jun 2015 #105

Trade negotiations with the general public's interests fully represented at the negotiating table Tom Rinaldo Jun 2015 #13

Way to think outside the corporate entitlement box Tom. fasttense Jun 2015 #30

exactly! It's the secrecy that gets me. Fast Walker 52 Jun 2015 #35

+1 Marr Jun 2015 #37

Very well said, Tom. jomin41 Jun 2015 #38

China and India! raindaddy Jun 2015 #15

Sure, and they've done that. They've also taken millions of jobs Recursion Jun 2015 #16

I'd say the American middle class lost way more jobs than were gained... raindaddy Jun 2015 #20

Huh? China and India have taken more jobs than countries with free trade agreements Recursion Jun 2015 #22

And Vietnam let's not forget them... raindaddy Jun 2015 #32

Is it your contention that the US actually *has* enforced standards elsewhere? Jim Lane Jun 2015 #33

Excellent Jim Lane! raindaddy Jun 2015 #44

Well, there's Metalclad versus Mexico Art_from_Ark Jun 2015 #51

Even the judge selected by Mexico agreed with the decision. In any event, Metaclad lost its plant. Hoyt Jun 2015 #57

Oh, FFS Art_from_Ark Jun 2015 #59

You lame attempts at citing example is more shameful. You never go further than some headline Hoyt Jun 2015 #60

Mexico can't possibly have any better use for its tax dollars than using them-- eridani Jun 2015 #81

Mexico asked to be part of TPP. Why? Because they want the jobs Hoyt Jun 2015 #89

Whatchu mean "Mexico," Kemosabe? Most of the people who live there, or eridani Jun 2015 #92

I mean the elected Mexican government trying to move their people from 50 cent a day jobs. Hoyt Jun 2015 #93

Sure. Just like after NAFTA fucked them over in the 90s, they'll react by moving here eridani Jun 2015 #94

Look at situation today, not 10 years ago. Do you actually think these type Hoyt Jun 2015 #96

The analysis took place 10 years after NAFTA eridani Jun 2015 #97

Yet the officials signing/supporting these agreements keep getting reelected. Hoyt Jun 2015 #98

Whores get lots of money for campaigning n/t eridani Jun 2015 #99

We get it, you have no respect for Mexicans. Do you feel that way about all poor foreign Hoyt Jun 2015 #100

Yay! Let's hear it for poor people in rich countries providing financial aid to eridani Jun 2015 #101

No respect for the Mexican government. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #113

Corruption. And the proof that the corruption is the reason is the killing fields of Mexico. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #111

Folks are going to find a rationale(s) to turn our backs on Mexico. That's the way it's always Hoyt Jun 2015 #114

I live on a tiny bit of land we "stole" from Mexico. It is quite Mexican. Trust me on that. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #124

Maybe they think they'll be able to sue us for the ag subsidies we give to big ag here... cascadiance Jun 2015 #142

Mexico asked to be part of the TPP? Who in Mexico asked to be part of the TPP?? JDPriestly Jun 2015 #108

So all government officials, even in Bernie Sanders' favorite Scandinavian countries, are Oligarchs Hoyt Jun 2015 #109

You mean the case that Metalclad lost in a WTO appeals court? Recursion Jun 2015 #70

What the blazes are you talking about? Art_from_Ark Jun 2015 #72

The Mexican government was required to buy back the property Metalclad had bought Recursion Jun 2015 #73

Mexico disagreed with the decision Art_from_Ark Jun 2015 #74

I have no doubt Mexico would have prefered not to buy the property back Recursion Jun 2015 #75

Mexico would have been pleased if all they had to do was refund the purchase price Art_from_Ark Jun 2015 #76

Thanks, I missed that they assessed the improvements Recursion Jun 2015 #77

Do you have anything to back up your claim? Art_from_Ark Jun 2015 #83

So let's make it clear to companies like Metalclad that they have no right to come in, buy JDPriestly Jun 2015 #115

I want a TA-Trade Agreement for the workers of America, not a Free Market Agreement for the Corp DhhD Jun 2015 #36

Post removed Post removed Jun 2015 #102

One excellent idea would be strong labelling laws... raindaddy Jun 2015 #24

The WTO just rained on that parade. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #117

I was being facetious in my response JD... raindaddy Jun 2015 #134

And you should see all the plastic wrapping in our recycle bins -- wrapping that is necessary JDPriestly Jun 2015 #107

China and India do not have free trade agreements with the US. You keep skipping that Recursion Jun 2015 #110

And we should impose tariffs on their goods in order to protect our industry. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #126

That's lunatic. It's not "because of corruption" it's "because our GDP would shrink 30%" Recursion Jun 2015 #128

No economist takes protectionism seriously YoungDemCA Jun 2015 #147

And economists are wrong. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #148

I would like to see a parallel process for public interest groups and cali Jun 2015 #25

I'd really like that too (nt) Recursion Jun 2015 #27

Yes, fasttense Jun 2015 #28

Yes. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #118

Our model is opening the gap between the uber wealthy and the lower 99% at a startling rate. rhett o rick Jun 2015 #68

No. The past 20 years have been the biggest reduction of global inequality in world history Recursion Jun 2015 #69

I'm sure RoR can defend their statement, but .. this shit again? Comeon... MrMickeysMom Jun 2015 #71

Thank you, you said it much better than I. "walking outside your door to find where in the fuck rhett o rick Jun 2015 #91

I worked for a homeless agency for years. A lot of my bitterness is due to what I saw there. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #120

And the ruination and loss of the American middle class. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #119

No, we've just been treading water Recursion Jun 2015 #121

You are way off. The wealth has gone to the 1%. We have massive joblessness and those with rhett o rick Jun 2015 #133

How does that contradict what I said? Recursion Jun 2015 #140

Treading water means you are not getting any better or worse. The wealth inequality has grown rhett o rick Jun 2015 #143

US inequality has grown. Global inequality has shrunk Recursion Jun 2015 #145

I don't know how that's supposed to make us feel better in the USofA. rhett o rick Jun 2015 #146

And if our own legislators were not so corrupt, we would not permit China and India JDPriestly Jun 2015 #104

Yeah, it's the spread of corporate fascism throughout the world. ananda Jun 2015 #7

K&R Scuba Jun 2015 #11

you are too late to be concern about that Cali, Cryptoad Jun 2015 #18

The Loss Of Citizen Sovereignty Over The Political Process To The Corporations Is cantbeserious Jun 2015 #40

Agree. ananda Jun 2015 #63

Major K&R..... daleanime Jun 2015 #41

An excellent summation. K & R snagglepuss Jun 2015 #42

NO MORE f*%king give aways to the corporations, period. Hotler Jun 2015 #43

Corporations are merely empires for their uber wealthy major shareholder owners. Dont call me Shirley Jun 2015 #45

What job losses? We're told there'll be no job losses.... except that apparently we need Guy Whitey Corngood Jun 2015 #47

Nitpicking! valerief Jun 2015 #49

that might be the undoing of this trade pact bigtree Jun 2015 #50

I am against Costly Trade Deals? Free Trade? No such thing. grahamhgreen Jun 2015 #56

When ridiculous court judgments happen - there's a trade agreement behind it. lumberjack_jeff Jun 2015 #61

^ Wilms Jun 2015 #66

Sending jobs overseas, importing questionable food products, jacking up pharmaceutical prices, GoneFishin Jun 2015 #67

I have to wonder how the TPP is going to affect the price of prescription medication davidpdx Jun 2015 #82

It's also like that here in Japan Art_from_Ark Jun 2015 #86

I know, the price of your Viagra might go up davidpdx Jun 2015 #87

Post removed Post removed Jun 2015 #95

That is my concern also. I am especially concerned about their power regarding smaller less powerful jwirr Jun 2015 #112

And yet the job losses will be catastrophic to those affected. Orsino Jun 2015 #150

In essence they want to Nite Owl Jun 2015 #152