Proposal: Corporations Are Not Beneficial to Society
- Thread starter TruthSeeker
- Start date
- Status
I don't know about the world...everyone's is different. For me communism is better for other democracy and other sort of government.
its not about me...Why?...it is about me being beneficial to everyone else in a better way for everyone. Communism is not about ego as capitalism is, communism is about being part of a large organism a society. The individuality is lost and replaced by the feeling of a larger matrix of society.
People didn't join, because the question is too subjective. It is like Healthcare for example. Depending on your social status, you might view it as good or as bad.
If you are a non-union employee of a large corporation you have a completely different view than the CEO of said corporation. Please note that there is a different between company and corporation. Corporation is a legal person actually, which is silly itself....
Now I could play my Logical Republican alterego and argue that corporations are benefical to society, but I would be arguing from the CEOs point of view. And I already addressed this p[roblem in the previous paragraph.
Here is a short argument though: If we acknowledge that "The might is just " rule is one of nature's natural law, the existence of corporations is perfectly in sync with that, because it helps the powerful to be and stay might...
How is that for starters???
Challenger78
Valued Senior Member
However, might is only percieved. it is only the people who buy the corporations products that allow it to practice such might. I read about a boycott of nestle that managed to changed things regarding company policy, all their powers were for naught if one does not buy their products, because then there would be no profit.
I digress however, the original point was that corporations are not beneficial to society, and i;m not well read enough to really (in depth) debate on that. Although i did watch the documentary the corporation...
I digress however, the original point was that corporations are not beneficial to society, and i;m not well read enough to really (in depth) debate on that. Although i did watch the documentary the corporation...
How about this. I and someone else debate against Why? and Syzygys . How's that?
Or maybe joepistole and Why?, actually....
The government is the corporation in communism and look where they ended up! 
(Consider this my acceptance)
Corporations are totally necessary given the nature of our financial systems, and our sue happy society. They motivate people to invest money in situations where they would normally be too afraid of the risks. The sole purpose of a corporation is to limit the liability of the investors.
If you're a multimillionaire, and you invest a substantial portion of your net worth in a sole proprietorship (by starting one up and being the owner), and that sole proprietorship gets sued for more than the value of its assets, the law could come after your personal assets. That means one day you're a millionaire, and the next day one of your customers spills coffee on their lap, and you're totally bankrupt.
Another possibility is if the business takes out some loans, and then there's a market crash. If it's a sole proprietorship, then you have to pay those loans out of your own pocket. If it's a corporation, then the corporation declares bankruptcy and probably goes out of business, and you lose the value of all the stocks you own in that company, but the bill collectors can't come after your personal assets.
My point is: without corporations, most rich people would never invest their money in any business venture, and our economy would come to a screeching halt (if it hasn't already). Motivating people to invest money is the most crucial part of a capitalist economy.
Corporations are totally necessary given the nature of our financial systems, and our sue happy society. They motivate people to invest money in situations where they would normally be too afraid of the risks. The sole purpose of a corporation is to limit the liability of the investors.
If you're a multimillionaire, and you invest a substantial portion of your net worth in a sole proprietorship (by starting one up and being the owner), and that sole proprietorship gets sued for more than the value of its assets, the law could come after your personal assets. That means one day you're a millionaire, and the next day one of your customers spills coffee on their lap, and you're totally bankrupt.
Another possibility is if the business takes out some loans, and then there's a market crash. If it's a sole proprietorship, then you have to pay those loans out of your own pocket. If it's a corporation, then the corporation declares bankruptcy and probably goes out of business, and you lose the value of all the stocks you own in that company, but the bill collectors can't come after your personal assets.
My point is: without corporations, most rich people would never invest their money in any business venture, and our economy would come to a screeching halt (if it hasn't already). Motivating people to invest money is the most crucial part of a capitalist economy.
- Status