Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cynthetiq
The OP didn't express it as a condition to be a democratic country that one comes from or goes to for that matter.
Again, I stand behind that we already live in the questioned scenario. We move from state to state, county to county based on taxes, school systems, freedoms and liberties, all by the incorporated respective governments, local, county, state, etc.
Don't like the laws of the right to bear arms in the state of California, one moves to Texas. Don't like the school systems in your city/county? You move to an area that has better schools for your children. Even welfare recipients will move to where there are better programs that support them better, as do artists, elderly, rich people, etc.
|
You are right. I was just trying to narrow the field in terms of what the OP meant by "government" to "Western Democracy". Getting hung up on the USSR doesn't do anything but serve as a cautionary tale and/or muddy the waters of the discussion.
The on thing that it does do (and your assertion above as well) is underscore that fact that there are different flavours of government (even within the term western democracies).
A corporation's share holders are not neccessarily the "employees". The shareholders can be owners who have no interest in the workings of the Corp beyond its profitability. For example, the shareholders of a country run by a corporation need not live in that country or even be of that nationality. Their only interest is in deriving profits from that country.
While it may have a passing similarity to a national government, a corporation is a very different entity with very different goals.