Dnia piątek, 24 stycznia 2014 19:02:39 James A. Donald pisze: > J.A. Terranson <[email protected]> > > > Assuming all of your arguments to be correct (which I don't), I would want > > to remove "freedom of speech" for corporations because it artificially > > amplifies the voice of the corporate entity: the individuals who own the > > issued shares of the corporation already have these freedoms > > They ought to have these freedom, but in practice they don't. Hillary > Clinton does not have to obey the campaign finance laws, leftists do not > have to obey the campaign finance laws, but Kirk Shelmerdine does have > to obey the campaign finance laws. > > And because corporations do not, in practice, have these freedoms, their > employees and shareholders are denied these freedoms.
Maybe instead of giving the voice to a legal fiction we should work towards restoring the voice of real persons, eh?.. -- Pozdr rysiek
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
