Quote:
Originally Posted by Cimarron29414
So, just to be clear, you believe the state should control the behavior of corporations and those corporations should have no say-so in "who" the "state" is?
Hmmm, what's that word? Ah, there it is: tyranny.
|
Now you're jumping to conclusions. If this were the case, then we've all been living under tyrannical power for well over 100 years.
Corporations do have a say. They have lobbyists. There are protocols they can follow if they have grievances. There are courts, there are constitutions.
But to think that the state should not be able to control the behaviour of corporations at all is to think along the same lines as proponents of laissez-faire economics—you know, that failed and miserable experiment of the 19th century....and a direct cause of the introduction of labour and consumer laws of which we are familiar today.
Corporations have a say, but they cannot do away with legislation that has the general support of the public. If the past has ever been a teacher, we have learned that corporations need to be kept on a leash.
They have a say, but they should not have very much say in who has power within the state. They would have too much influence, and they are not people. Governments are supposed to be empowered by people, not corporations.