If Corporations Were Really Persons

[Lydia Leftcoast]

They would not be able to spin off subsidiaries until they had existed for 13 years.

They would not be able to sign contracts until they had existed for 18 years.

They would not be able to serve alcohol at their holiday parties until they had existed for 21 years.

They would not be able to merge with another company until they had existed for 18 years (16 years if they were a subsidiary and their parent corporation allowed it), and they could merge with only one other company at a time. If they wanted a second merger, they would have to dissolve the first merger. If they went out of business (died), their merger partner and their subsidiaries would divide up all their assets.

They would list their business expenses on Schedule C and pay taxes on their profits at personal rates. This would include both federal taxes and any taxes listed by the state where they were headquartered.

They could be charged with felonies and misdemeanors and put on trial.

They would be put in prison (forced to limit operations) or even put to death (forced to dissolve) in some states if found guilty.

If bought by foreign investors or companies, they would cease to be U.S. corporations and would have to apply for a green card in order to continue doing business in the U.S.

After they had existed for 18 years, they would have to register for the draft, and in time of war, they could be forced to produce products for the Department of Defense at cost.

Since human lifespans vary, we'd have to be generous, but corporations would be required to dissolve after they had existed as long as the longest recorded human lifespan. Their assets would go to their subsidiaries, or if they had no subsidiaries, their assets would be auctioned off.

That's all I can think of offhand. Does anyone else have any additional things that would happen if corporations were really treated like human persons?

[valerief]

1. Vice presidents could shoot them in the face. nt

[Roland99]

6. BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!

A definite DUzy!!

[elehhhhna]

24. LMAO -- a DUzy!!!111 +100

[Vincardog]

2. They would be required to pay taxes on income.

[sam sarrha]

4. great....

:fistbump: :headbang:

[virgogal]

3. Aaaah,don't let them live that long. Make them "die" when the

life expectancy of their country is reached.

Nice post,by the way.

[Wapsie B]

5. A corporation should not be a means to avoid taxation or liability.

Pierce the corporate envelope of protection and let them live or die like the rest of us.

[Canuckistanian]

7. Buying other corporations would be considered indentured servitude

That's the point Thom Hartmann always makes.

Great points. K&R.

[Dora]

8. Failure to manage and "parent" their subsidiaries responsibly....

... would result in investigations, monitoring, re-training of the parent and subsidiary corporations, and potential custodial intervention.

[cascadiance]

42. And once they started planning a subsidiary, they wouldn't be able to stop that work...

in states that don't allow abortions... And if it is a state that doesn't allow abortions even in cases when the life of the parent is threatened, then if they've already started planning to break off a subsidiary, and doing so would wipe out the company, then they'd just have to close shop!

[cascadiance]

43. ES&S would then be prosecuted for voter fraud for looking at everyone else's votes!

[ms liberty]

9. KR&B. Great argument! n/t

[unblock]

10. they would have to go to school before working for real

[unblock]

11. they would, for the most part, pay taxes on REVENUE and not on NET PROFIT

[stlsaxman]

12. Is this your? It's brilliant! Can i spread it around?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

20. Yes, I would LOVE to have it go viral

especially among people who studied business or law any time from the Reagan administration onward.

[stevedeshazer]

13. My address would be a post office box on Grand Cayman Island.

Good post, recommended.

[burrowowl]

14. Especially!

"They could be charged with felonies and misdemeanors and put on trial."

Hopefully Kennedy will get his ass in gear!
Sotomayer gave a good argument! I was surprised!

[stlsaxman]

15. They would be represented as a constituent by ONLY the Congressional Representative...

of their District and two Senators.

Just like the rest of us.

[The Magistrate]

16. An Excellent Piece, Ma'am: Thank You for Sharing It

To regard corporations as persons under the Constitution is monstrous as it is foolish.

The problem with corporate person-hood taken as equal to a citizen in public and political life is, as someone once said, 'they have neither souls to be damned nor bodies to be kicked". The corporation is a legal device for pooling capital and limiting the personal liability of people who devote capital to the corporation for its debts and actions. That is all, and that is hardly a sound footing for participation in political life. Taken as a 'person', a corporation is pretty much a sociopath, since it is chartered to have no responsibility save its own self-aggrandizement, whatever that may cost others. What actually happens when a corporation is treated as a citizen in political life is that it simply amplifies the political views of those persons in a position to control its expenditures, and make them in effect a nobility, worth in political terms thousands, even millions, of citizens, by virtue of the capital they control. This certainly is a breeding ground for oligarchic rule, and antithetical to democracy.

[susanna]

26. I've always used an argument relating to conscience.

Your quote illustrates it as well ("no soul to be damned...").

A corporation seeks only its own gain at the expense of others with no thought to any human consequences. They really exhibit total lack of empathy, or what we may consider a conscience. In the actual singular-person-based world, someone with those characteristics is labeled at the very least a borderline personality, and in the extreme as a sociopath (which you mention as well). We as a society usually end up restricting the behavior of, or jailing, those types of people eventually.

Corporations simply should not be trusted to act morally or ethically within a society. It is beyond them by their very construct. Arguably, there are corporations who act responsibly and were set up to do good things. I've read about them here and there, though I have no immediate examples come to mind (which is telling in itself - it's that rare). That said, the "conscientious" types of corporations are the exception, not the rule.

I love your post, btw. I am not as articulate as you are about it, though!

On edit to the OP: REC!

[The Magistrate]

31. Indeed, Ma'am, there Is Great Overlap In Our Views Of the Thing

Oddly, the origin of the term and practice was more political than economic, and not at all retrograde. The root meaning is to make into a single body, and it was the means by which free towns in the Medieval period exercised and asserted rights within the feudal system, with the populace of the town being made into a body by a charter of incorporation, which body could then hold lands, pay and collect rents, and taxes, owe and receive duties to and from other persons, and manage its affairs. Trade guilds and other groupings of like persons incorporated in similar style and for similar purpose. Its application to economic matters and business came during the earliest expansion of European trade to the Indies and the New World, generally in a quasi-governmental form, in which a state chartered an enterprise that was at once costly, very risky, and potentially of great profit. It is from these various 'Indies Companies' that the thing took root as a business form. In fairness, it is useful in the developmental and expansive stages of economic development, but like many expedients it can outlive its usefulness as conditions change. In a developed economy, the things simply become berserk in their rapacity, and gain in power as they gain in size, till they seem to be beyond check by any available political means.

[susanna]

32. Fascinating. I did not know the history, but it makes a great deal of sense.

Thank you for sharing this information; I will definitely try to learn more. I appreciate your taking the time to reply. (Every day I learn something is a good day!)

[On the Road]

45. What Bothers Me Most

is that Supreme Court decisions are all about balancing conflicting rights. If large corporations are granted individual rights, which side do the scales of justice come down on when they're balanced against a single individual?

Corporate personhood changes the nature of the system from a political democracy, where 51% of voters control an election, to something closer to a corporate democracy, where 51% of stock ownership controls the decisions.

[The Magistrate]

46. So Far, Sir, The Balance Seems To Settle Against the Breathing Human....

[pyoom]

67. Great post. nt

[defendandprotect]

17. They would be able to breathe . . . and have human needs . . .

[defendandprotect]

18. k i c k

[scarletwoman]

19. Wow! Absolutely brilliant! Wish I could rec this 1000 times!

You totally rock! :applause:

sw

[LWolf]

21. There would be no bailout when they went bankrupt. nt

[Lydia Leftcoast]

23. Definitely not!

:-)

[JerseygirlCT]

22. If I could recommend this twice, I would

Excellent work, Lydia!

[Dragonfli]

25. K&R - They would have to follow individual contribution limits the same as any other "person" :

Contribution Limits 2009-10


An Individual may give $2,400 To each candidate or candidate committee per election

$30,400 To national party committee per calendar year
$10,000 (combined limit) To state, district & local party committee per calendar year
$5,000 To any other political committee per calendar year

Special Limits
$115,500 overall biennial limit:

•$45,600 to all candidates
•$69,900 to all PACs and parties

http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/contrib.shtml

[susanna]

27. K & R, and bookmarked. Excellent summation! n/t

[foxfeet]

28. They could, and should, get syphilis.

[politicat]

29. Corporations that spin off subsidiaries at 13 or before merger would be

subject to community condemnation, called a crisis and a moral failure. The parent corporations would be condemned as bad parents, and the new subsidiary would be more likely to be taken into foster care (made a community owned asset for 18 years).

All corporate entities could have their rights to speech, religion, arrest and search and seizure abbreviated by community authorities for the first 18 years of operation.

Corporate entities cannot make financial contributions to any political entity for the first 18 years of existence. (Equating financial contributions with voting.)

[TheKentuckian]

30. The words treason and industrial espionage spring to mind.

Plenty of theft and murder as well. This is one of the more far flung insane concepts in our culture. Few douchebags in history have had thinking this distorted and ridiculous. Patently illogical bullshit.

[Voice for Peace]

33. brilliant!

[intheflow]

34. K'd and R'd and posted on facebook.

Great post, Lydia!! You're my hero for the second time today! :headbang:

[readmoreoften]

35. Magnificent. No, I think you covered it all.

:)

[Hannah Bell]

36. they'd die, instead of existing for hundreds of years like vampires.

[bridgit]

37. If corporations were really persons/people they'd have to suffer their own

Alzheimer's, liver spots, appendix failures, hip replacements misshapen wrath & stupidity like the rest of us which is only part of why they hate America with a vengeance

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x65337

[democrat2thecore]

38. Love This, Lydia. - nt

[BR_Parkway]

39. Mergers in states with "one man/one woman" admendments would be outlawed

[DailyGrind51]

40. You would have to file for divorce to change phone or internet companies?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

41. No, that would be like hiring an independent contractor

But you'd send the phone or Internet or cable company a 1099 at the end of every year.

[DailyGrind51]

72. You didn't know my ex ;-}

[Vidar]

44. Brilliant argument, Lydia. Recommended.

[Uncle Joe]

47. That's an excellent point of view and list.

Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Lydia Leftcoast.:thumbsup:

[leftstreet]

48. K&R Outstanding!

:applause:

[DKRC]

49. Insurance/Pharmacuetical corps would stand trial for murder

for the deaths of natural persons.

[windoe]

50. They wouldn't be allowed to make death threats

or incite violence or act *that crazy* in public, or they would be hauled away.

If they were real citizens, many of them would be arrested for theft, robbery, murder, for polluting their neighborhoods, and for drug trafficking.

[treestar]

51. They are not persons, they are legal entities

They are simply a way for people to jointly own businesses.

You are barking up the wrong tree. I don't know who you hate here, but you should figure it out and why.

[The Magistrate]

52. Under Law, Ma'am

Corporations are considered persons, with the suite of rights enjoyed by citizens: the Supreme Court seems on the verge just now of ruling this extends even to First Amendment rights of political speech.

[Occulus]

53. They are treated as persons for legal purposes.

It's called corporate personhood, and it's a false legal doctrine that's been in place for over a century. See Santa Clara cty. v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. for more information. Pay special attention to who the clerk of the court was at the time, and dig a little into his employment history. You'll also want to take a look at similar cases prior to that one.

[treestar]

54. that's so they can make contracts and write checks

Most of them are for small businesses. You take a few huge ones that do terrible things and throw out the baby with the bath water. It's their hugeness that is the problem, not the mere fact of incorporation.

To not have them would kill small and NEW businesses and entrench the offending ones ever more.

This is one of the crazier things on DU.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

55. Look, treestar, I'm self-employed myself

I don't "hate business," but I hate the way it runs the country.

The fact is that corporations ARE legal persons in the way that counts in our system--being able to make political contributions.

Personally, I would bar any but individual human beings from making political contributions. No corporations, no professional organizations, no unions, no charities, no religious groups, no PACs, just individual humans each subject to a strict limit.

[treestar]

56. That's not unreasonable

And I hope it turns out that way.

Getting that through the Senate would be a bear, though.

[Alameda]

58. Exactly, good point. Thank you.

[rudy23]

57. According to many Christians, they'd have to face the Lord on judgement day.

There has to be a way to get that through to the right.

[AntiFascist]

59. It's also perfectly legal to kill or "dissolve" a corporation....

and make money in the process.

[OwnedByFerrets]

60. You should send this to Thom Hartmans message board

just in case he misses it. It is ONE of his pet projects. I'm sure he will read it though since it hit Greatest Page. He spends quite a bit of time here....or has his people do it for him.

[RoccoR5955]

61. K & R... What happened to WE THE PEOPLE?

These days it seems like it's been "We the corporations."

[amb123]

62. They could be sued for Lying, for Libel & Slander.

They would have to clean up the Waste they generate.

[CK_John]

63. They could run for Congress. Check out my post on this.

IMO, Within 4 election cycles, corporations will be allowed to be elected to Congress if


<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8649456&mesg_id=8649456>

[lostnfound]

64. They'd be randomly subjected to various diseases capable of bankrupting or killing them.

If they caught one, they'd have to hand over all assets to third parties in order to get the "cure" accomplished. They would then be allowed to start from scratch..

[Mz Pip]

65. $2,500 campaign contribution limit.

B of A = 1 person.

[Joe Fields]

66. Lydia, I love you. You're my hero for the week.

you don't know how hard it is to impress me, but you have hit this one out of the ballpark. It might even go into orbit

Thanks for that wonderful analogy

k&r!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

74. Aw shucks!

:blush and shuffle feet:

[scentopine]

68. Well done. - nt

[ArcticFox]

69. Right on

Pfizer would have been fined much more than one year's income.

They would have to retire: stop operations after age 65.

[winyanstaz]

70. K & R....this should be everywhere...

Very well put..good ideas.
America needs to address the mess of corporations now.

[Duer 157099]

71. This sounds like the sort of post Thom Hartmann would read on air

Hopefully he'll see it and read it!

:thumbsup:

[PSzymeczek]

73. They would get

mammograms, PAP smears, and Prostate exams.