-=> Earl Croasmun wrote to Dave Drum <=-

 ~>  ~> How about understanding that a "corporate person"
is a legal fiction
 ~>  ~> limiting liability of the actual persons involved in that corporation.

 ~>  EC> Completely false, since the limitation of legal liability of
 ~>  EC> shareholders far, far predates the Supreme Court cases on personhood,
 ~>  EC> and has NOTHING TO DO with those cases.

 ~> It is NOT completely false. A "corporate person" IS a legal fiction.

 EC> What you said was that it "is a legal fiction limiting liability of the
 EC> actual persons involved in that corporation."  The sentence is
 EC> completely false, for reasons that I explained and you ignored.

You explained your view of it without recognising that a corporate person is a
legal fiction and a corporation DOES limit the liability of the actual persons
involved in the corporation. Which is true. What part don't/didn't you
understand?
 
 ~>  EC> But also completely irrelevant, since the Citizens United case had
 ~>  EC> nothing to do with liability of corporations.  It was about free
 ~>  EC> speech.

For a group hiding behind a legal fiction ... which opens up the political
process to be sold openly to the highest bidder. 
 
 ~> You have a lot of trouble following logic and/or understanding cause and
 ~> effect, don't you, earl? The case was about granting free speech to a legal
 ~> fiction.

 EC> Which has nothing to do with your false claim that recognizing
 EC> corporations as artificial persons is what limits liability of
 EC> shareholders.  Usually your first sentence above would just be
 EC> meaningless bluster trying to look like an argument.  But, given your
 EC> inability to understand what you are talking about or to defend what
 EC> you have claimed, it drips of irony.

I did not say that recognising corporations as artificial persons was what
limited the liability of shareholders. The issues are not related except that
shareholders' liability is limited (except in rare cases) to the assets of the
corporation and that an "artificial person" person is a legal fiction.

Where is the irony in that? I repeat: You have a lot of trouble following logic
and/or understanding cause and effect, don't you, earl?

It must drive you up the wall to not be able to force others into your mold and
make them into lock-steppers and ditto-heads.

ENJOY!!!

From Uncle Dirty Dave's Kitchen
Home of YAHOOOOAHHHH Hot Sauce & Hardin Cider 

 

... The greater the ignorance the greater the dogmatism - Sir William Osler
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.49