TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
I don't really know why I'm wasting my time expanding an argument that was started in a different thread into its own thread, other than trying to separate my arguments, from the exact philisophy that I believe.
Especially when it comes to the governance of corporations, and the regulation of individuals and corporations, and the entities in between. There are many who believe that Republicans (the base) are for corporations, and support corporations, but this is only true in the sense that we do not want to be dependent on the largest, most-corrupt corporation on earth, the United States Federal Government, which is a Corporation which has 50 major share holders (the states) and over 300,000,000 minor share holders.
The effects of this dominance and monopolization of an area the size of the United States can be seen by how corrupt the Federal Government is. In every state it operates in it consistently attempts to deprive individuals of their liberties, whether it be Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Expression, or the more elusive Freedoms enshrined in the Declaration of Indepence, the Human Rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
But the fact is that the right does not believe that corporations should have the enshrined right to do as they will. This would be absurd, as in many cases it has been demonstrated that they will abuse superior market positions a la' Microsoft, AMD, Finance and Detroit, in order to dictate to the larger corporation what must be done.
In the case of the United States a corporation can be seen using its interlocking directorships to preserve other corporations that were mismanaged, and should have been destroyed. Keynesians and Statists who believe that government (a legally fictional entity) exists separate from corporations would argue that this is moral and proper, but that same corporation explicitly forbids dumping of products in the territory it controls. A corporation caught giving products away, or charging below market prices would find itself getting sued by this corporation.
But this is all aside from the main point that I am getting to. That it is not possible to take freedom from individuals and corporations and effectively challenge corporations that way. All that increases in regulation accomplish is to further enshrine the market position of already dominant corporations and further raise the barriers to enter markets. In short, because of high amounts of regulation (most of it poorly documented, and poorly written) it is more and more difficult for an individual to go into business for themselves and escape from corporations.
The continued reduction of individual liberty does not make it possible for the individual to challenge the corporation. The graduated taxation system so beloved of the Socialists and Statists does not enhance freedom, but restricts it. The graduated taxation system makes it harder for individuals to raise capital to form companies to compete against corporations, and thus further enshrines the positions of corporations.
Additional legislation requiring business licenses for even that most mundane of business the sole proprietorship makes it more difficult and more challenging for an individual to operate a business.
Zoning laws interfere with the ability of an individual to start a business, and further lead to market dominance by a few major players that know all the ins and outs of the laws, because they are able to hire the expertise necessary to navigate the legal mine field.
Laws and Regulations do not protect individuals, it is of very little comfort to some one that is killed by poorly cooked food that the location that served them was fined. Ultimately it will be the negative word of mouth advertising that results in that business being brought down. Especially if that business has been entrenched in the market for so long as to have a dominant position.
In order to allow individuals to really challenge corporations, and to encourage the creation of a middle class backed by sole proprietorship the income tax would need to be abolished, zoning laws would have to be abolished, and the entire legal and tax code would have to be drastically simplified so as to make it easily understandable to individuals.
To challenge corporations one must reduce the power the largest ones (the Governments) exercise over the individual, in short the only way to disenfranchise the corporations and create a more liberal society is to empower the individual by lowering taxes and reducing regulation.
Man can not be free if he is enslaved, but he can be fooled into thinking he is free when he is enslaved.
Especially when it comes to the governance of corporations, and the regulation of individuals and corporations, and the entities in between. There are many who believe that Republicans (the base) are for corporations, and support corporations, but this is only true in the sense that we do not want to be dependent on the largest, most-corrupt corporation on earth, the United States Federal Government, which is a Corporation which has 50 major share holders (the states) and over 300,000,000 minor share holders.
The effects of this dominance and monopolization of an area the size of the United States can be seen by how corrupt the Federal Government is. In every state it operates in it consistently attempts to deprive individuals of their liberties, whether it be Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Expression, or the more elusive Freedoms enshrined in the Declaration of Indepence, the Human Rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
But the fact is that the right does not believe that corporations should have the enshrined right to do as they will. This would be absurd, as in many cases it has been demonstrated that they will abuse superior market positions a la' Microsoft, AMD, Finance and Detroit, in order to dictate to the larger corporation what must be done.
In the case of the United States a corporation can be seen using its interlocking directorships to preserve other corporations that were mismanaged, and should have been destroyed. Keynesians and Statists who believe that government (a legally fictional entity) exists separate from corporations would argue that this is moral and proper, but that same corporation explicitly forbids dumping of products in the territory it controls. A corporation caught giving products away, or charging below market prices would find itself getting sued by this corporation.
But this is all aside from the main point that I am getting to. That it is not possible to take freedom from individuals and corporations and effectively challenge corporations that way. All that increases in regulation accomplish is to further enshrine the market position of already dominant corporations and further raise the barriers to enter markets. In short, because of high amounts of regulation (most of it poorly documented, and poorly written) it is more and more difficult for an individual to go into business for themselves and escape from corporations.
The continued reduction of individual liberty does not make it possible for the individual to challenge the corporation. The graduated taxation system so beloved of the Socialists and Statists does not enhance freedom, but restricts it. The graduated taxation system makes it harder for individuals to raise capital to form companies to compete against corporations, and thus further enshrines the positions of corporations.
Additional legislation requiring business licenses for even that most mundane of business the sole proprietorship makes it more difficult and more challenging for an individual to operate a business.
Zoning laws interfere with the ability of an individual to start a business, and further lead to market dominance by a few major players that know all the ins and outs of the laws, because they are able to hire the expertise necessary to navigate the legal mine field.
Laws and Regulations do not protect individuals, it is of very little comfort to some one that is killed by poorly cooked food that the location that served them was fined. Ultimately it will be the negative word of mouth advertising that results in that business being brought down. Especially if that business has been entrenched in the market for so long as to have a dominant position.
In order to allow individuals to really challenge corporations, and to encourage the creation of a middle class backed by sole proprietorship the income tax would need to be abolished, zoning laws would have to be abolished, and the entire legal and tax code would have to be drastically simplified so as to make it easily understandable to individuals.
To challenge corporations one must reduce the power the largest ones (the Governments) exercise over the individual, in short the only way to disenfranchise the corporations and create a more liberal society is to empower the individual by lowering taxes and reducing regulation.
Man can not be free if he is enslaved, but he can be fooled into thinking he is free when he is enslaved.