Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Corporation???

comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2010 3:02:23 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Should corporations get more of a break then small business?

Should the federal government regulate huge corporations?

Should corporations be watched by the government?

The "free market" does not seem to have great answers to corporations. Corporations get big enough to kill small businesses, and the bigger the corporations get the more disconnected they become with employees. Employees will put up with a lot to keep a job, even when things are not even close to the ideal situations for them. They will even put up with abuse. Verbal abuse is a regulation of the "Government", and if the invisible hand was completely implemented verbal abuse would still rain in places. People get fired for no reason, and have no law to defend them in an unregulated state.

So, what should we do?

If you believe in a complete free market, then explain the tough questions.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2010 5:29:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/26/2010 3:02:23 PM, comoncents wrote:
Should corporations get more of a break then small business?
No.
Should the federal government regulate huge corporations?
No.
Should corporations be watched by the government?
No.
The "free market" does not seem to have great answers to corporations. Corporations get big enough to kill small businesses,
http://en.wikipedia.org... Oh, and this is a good thing. Using the word "kill" and referring to "corporations" and "small businesses" as collective enemies are evidence of bias.
and the bigger the corporations get the more disconnected they become with employees. Employees will put up with a lot to keep a job, even when things are not even close to the ideal situations for them. They will even put up with abuse. Verbal abuse is a regulation of the "Government", and if the invisible hand was completely implemented verbal abuse would still rain in places. People get fired for no reason, and have no law to defend them in an unregulated state.
I love how you put government in quotes.
- To minimize the diminishing of returns, corporations institute different levels of management to limit any "disconnection." Corporations that do not do this are less efficient and have to pay higher wages to keep workers.
- Verbal abuse is free speech.
- The ability to fire whomever one wants is an extension of free association.
So, what should we do?
Who is "we"?
If you believe in a complete free market, then explain the tough questions.
Explain the questions? They exist because you wrote them, and you wrote them because you read something or heard something in college.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2010 5:41:38 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/26/2010 5:33:37 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
You do realize that the only reason corporations exist as they do is because, by granting a corporate charter, the government is granting a LOT of special privileges and protections that confer unfair advantages in the marketplace, right?

This is news to me. I was under the impression that corporations weren't by-definition chartered by the state and didn't by-definition have special privileges. I thought it was just a different business model in that it is owned by a group of investors. Disregard the above.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2010 5:56:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/26/2010 5:41:38 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 10/26/2010 5:33:37 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
You do realize that the only reason corporations exist as they do is because, by granting a corporate charter, the government is granting a LOT of special privileges and protections that confer unfair advantages in the marketplace, right?

This is news to me. I was under the impression that corporations weren't by-definition chartered by the state and didn't by-definition have special privileges. I thought it was just a different business model in that it is owned by a group of investors. Disregard the above.

Well, assuming you dissolve government-corporation relationships as you did in your answers, corporations would have to be redefined.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2010 6:06:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/26/2010 5:33:37 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
You do realize that the only reason corporations exist as they do is because, by granting a corporate charter, the government is granting a LOT of special privileges and protections that confer unfair advantages in the marketplace, right?

First of all, I think it's becoming obvious that the OP is a troll.

Secondly, aren't the only privileges for a corporation related to limited liability to creditors? Also, what exactly are the prerequisites for registering as a corporation? I figured that technically anyone could file as a corporation with the state.
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2010 7:41:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
So first, limited liability sounds lame on the surface. Its even lamer when you realize that corporations can own other corporations, and use limited liability to compartmentalize financial risk. http://en.wikipedia.org...

In theory, LL means you could create a special corporation, invest one dollar in it, murder someone, and then only pay one dollar. In practice there are very very complicated laws blocking that sort of thing.

I looked into corporate law once for a debate resolution. It is mind blowingly stupid and complex. You'd think the simplest law for society would be just "don't be a douchebag", but no. No. We need a whole team of people with 8 years of school and 20 years experience to even begin to navigate the hobbesian jungle that is corporate law.

But yes, people ITT are right. A corporation is just a chartered for a specific purpose, has shareholders w voting power, etc. But again, in reality, most business ventures aren't strictly "corporations". They take advantage of all sorts of laws that while not explicitly for "corporations", are the sorts of things only corporations could take advantage of. They are usually industry specific.

For example, patents, capital discounting and amoritization, government contracts... OSHA bla bla bla bla.

If the left weren't so concerned with saying fashionable lefty things, they'd be trying to reduce the burden on corporations so that smaller corporations could compete better (economies of scale favor paperwork and DRO).
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2010 10:04:21 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Should corporations get more of a break then small business?

In the same way that a rich person should not get more of a break than a middle class person, corporations should not get more of a break than small businesses.

Should the federal government regulate huge corporations?

Of course. They are far too influential to the national economy.

Should corporations be watched by the government?

Of course. See infra.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2010 5:47:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/26/2010 7:41:27 PM, Sieben wrote:
So first, limited liability sounds lame on the surface. Its even lamer when you realize that corporations can own other corporations, and use limited liability to compartmentalize financial risk. http://en.wikipedia.org...

I believe Special Purpose Vehicles played a role in the mortgage crisis, correct? I think a lot of mortgage securities were moved into these SPV's to either hedge risk or balance checkbooks among other firms.

In theory, LL means you could create a special corporation, invest one dollar in it, murder someone, and then only pay one dollar. In practice there are very very complicated laws blocking that sort of thing.

Actually, I think it just offsets risk by leaving the creditors out to dry. I don't think murder is allowed under corporate law...

I looked into corporate law once for a debate resolution. It is mind blowingly stupid and complex. You'd think the simplest law for society would be just "don't be a douchebag", but no. No. We need a whole team of people with 8 years of school and 20 years experience to even begin to navigate the hobbesian jungle that is corporate law.

But yes, people ITT are right. A corporation is just a chartered for a specific purpose, has shareholders w voting power, etc. But again, in reality, most business ventures aren't strictly "corporations". They take advantage of all sorts of laws that while not explicitly for "corporations", are the sorts of things only corporations could take advantage of. They are usually industry specific.

For example, patents, capital discounting and amoritization, government contracts... OSHA bla bla bla bla.

If the left weren't so concerned with saying fashionable lefty things, they'd be trying to reduce the burden on corporations so that smaller corporations could compete better (economies of scale favor paperwork and DRO).

Yeah, the complex laws and paperwork are problematic to smaller businesses/corporations. But, I think the left is generally in favor of progressive corporate taxation, which tilts the field in favor of smaller firms. Also, can't anyone technically register as a corporation, though? This is a legitimate question.
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2010 8:23:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/27/2010 5:47:40 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:

I believe Special Purpose Vehicles played a role in the mortgage crisis, correct? I think a lot of mortgage securities were moved into these SPV's to either hedge risk or balance checkbooks among other firms.

I think they got nerfed after Enron. Enron is the big case where they loaned money to themselves using SPVs. That's where I learned about them.

Actually, I think it just offsets risk by leaving the creditors out to dry. I don't think murder is allowed under corporate law...

Right LL alone would be superchaos. So there's a giant patchwork of law to keep things together.

Yeah, the complex laws and paperwork are problematic to smaller businesses/corporations. But, I think the left is generally in favor of progressive corporate taxation, which tilts the field in favor of smaller firms.
That's the party line.

Also, can't anyone technically register as a corporation, though? This is a legitimate question.
Yup. A charter costs like $500, and you have to have a stated purpose, owner, etc.
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...