-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At 9:38 PM + 3/26/04, Justin wrote:
R. A. Hettinga (2004-03-26 12:41Z) wrote:
At 7:20 AM + 3/26/04, Justin wrote:
Those nasty latin words are ceteris paribus.
Thank you.
On a network full of experts the price of error is bandwidth.
Harmon Seaver wrote:
If a member of a club, to which you belong, commits an act of
violence, are you liable for that act?
No, but if the club, as an entity, does such, you should be. If
the corporation pollutes, all and sundry owners and employees should
be equally liable. Or maybe
On 26 Mar 2004, Frog wrote:
Harmon Seaver wrote:
If a voluntary association injures me,
Associations - corporate or otherwise - are abstract, intangible
entities. They don't perform actions. People do.
Corporations act as legal persons - they can enter into contracts, own
assetts,
At 11:44 AM + 3/26/04, Anonymous via panta wrote:
three rounds in the base of Bob Hettinga's geodesic skull
Glock for the bed. AR for the Closet. Mossberg for the door?
:-).
Collective punishment, indeed...
Cheers,
RAH
--
-
R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The
At 7:20 AM + 3/26/04, Justin wrote:
Those nasty latin words are ceteris paribus.
Thank you.
On a network full of experts the price of error is bandwidth.
Cheers,
RAH
--
-
R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation
R. A. Hettinga (2004-03-26 12:41Z) wrote:
At 7:20 AM + 3/26/04, Justin wrote:
Those nasty latin words are ceteris paribus.
Thank you.
On a network full of experts the price of error is bandwidth.
There's no reason to get all sarcastic.
For all I knew you could have unintentionally
Harmon Seaver wrote:
If a member of a club, to which you belong, commits an act of
violence, are you liable for that act?
No, but if the club, as an entity, does such, you should be. If
the corporation pollutes, all and sundry owners and employees should
be equally liable. Or maybe
On 26 Mar 2004, Frog wrote:
Harmon Seaver wrote:
If a voluntary association injures me,
Associations - corporate or otherwise - are abstract, intangible
entities. They don't perform actions. People do.
Corporations act as legal persons - they can enter into contracts, own
assetts,
At 10:26 AM 3/25/04 -0500, Tyler Durden wrote:
I also think that some cypherpunks mistake the Corporate State for what
has
been described as Crypto-Anarchy.
Get this through your head: a corporation can't initiate force against
you.
You may not like their product, practices, or price, but no one
Ah Variola...do I detect a wee bit of Knee-jerk in your otherwise
consistently iconoclastic views? Let's take a looksee...
Get this through your head: a corporation can't initiate force against
you.
You may not like their product, practices, or price, but no one is
coercing you at gunpoint.
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 02:02:25PM -0500, Tyler Durden wrote:
Get this through your head: a corporation can't initiate force against
you.
You may not like their product, practices, or price, but no one is
coercing you at gunpoint.
Think I'm gonna have to disagree with ya' hear partner.
At 02:02 PM 3/25/04 -0500, Tyler Durden wrote:
Think I'm gonna have to disagree with ya' hear partner.
For one, in the old days Corporations regularly hired goons to mow down
striking coalminers and whatnot.
You have no right to trespass simply because you once worked there.
Neither does anyone
On Thu, 25 Mar 2004, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Nonsense -- corporations are not humans, they have zero rights.
Unfortunately, there are a whole slew of Supreme Court decisions that say
otherwise - mostly applying the 14th amendment (you know, freeing the
slaves) to grant free speech and other
At 05:27 PM 3/25/04 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 25 Mar 2004, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Nonsense -- corporations are not humans, they have zero rights.
Unfortunately, there are a whole slew of Supreme Court decisions that
say
otherwise - mostly applying the 14th amendment (you know,
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 05:27:14PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 25 Mar 2004, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Nonsense -- corporations are not humans, they have zero rights.
Unfortunately, there are a whole slew of Supreme Court decisions that say
otherwise - mostly applying the 14th
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 02:42:13PM -0800, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
2. Humans don't lose their rights when they form voluntary associations.
That's all the corporate decisions are saying.
Humans don't lose their rights, but they also shouldn't lose their
responsibility either. If a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2004-03-25 22:27Z) wrote:
On Thu, 25 Mar 2004, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Nonsense -- corporations are not humans, they have zero rights.
Unfortunately, there are a whole slew of Supreme Court decisions that say
otherwise - mostly applying the 14th amendment (you know,
Harmon Seaver (2004-03-25 23:06Z) wrote:
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 05:27:14PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 25 Mar 2004, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Nonsense -- corporations are not humans, they have zero rights.
Unfortunately, there are a whole slew of Supreme Court
Harmon Seaver wrote:
If a voluntary association injures me,
Associations - corporate or otherwise - are abstract, intangible entities. They don't
perform actions. People do.
each and every person involved in it should be liable.
If a member of a club, to which you belong, commits an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
First off, yes, corporations are creatures of the state. So, what
else is new?
They are an easy way to achieve limited liability. In the UK after
the South Sea Bubble popped (and in France, after the same thing
happened to the Mississippi Company did
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At 8:59 PM -0500 3/25/04, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
Boom. An anonymously-voted limited liability business entity.
Look, ma. No state.
Oh. One more thing.
It'll *never* happen until the risk-adjusted (those nasty latin words
ceterus paribus) cost of
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 11:46:29PM +, Justin wrote:
Why should it be impermissible for corporations to be persons under
the law when parents can be persons on behalf of their minor children?
Why should they be?
In both situations, one or more people are persons only to represent
At 12:39 AM 3/26/04 -, Frog wrote:
Harmon Seaver wrote:
each and every person involved in it should be liable.
If a member of a club, to which you belong, commits an act of violence,
are you liable for that act?
Excellent question. The gestap^H^H^H^H Feds think you are --membership
in a
This is what Major Variola (ret) [EMAIL PROTECTED] said
about corporate vs. state, TD's education on 25 Mar 2004 at 9:16
Get this through your head: a corporation can't initiate force against
you. You may not like their product, practices, or price, but no one
is coercing you at gunpoint
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 09:43:53PM -0800, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
At 12:39 AM 3/26/04 -, Frog wrote:
Harmon Seaver wrote:
each and every person involved in it should be liable.
If a member of a club, to which you belong, commits an act of violence,
are you liable for that act?
R. A. Hettinga (2004-03-26 02:20Z) wrote:
blah blah (those nasty latin words ceterus paribus) blah blah
Those nasty latin words are ceteris paribus.
--
That woman deserves her revenge... and... we deserve to die.
-- Budd, Kill Bill Vol. 1
At 10:26 AM 3/25/04 -0500, Tyler Durden wrote:
I also think that some cypherpunks mistake the Corporate State for what
has
been described as Crypto-Anarchy.
Get this through your head: a corporation can't initiate force against
you.
You may not like their product, practices, or price, but no one
Ah Variola...do I detect a wee bit of Knee-jerk in your otherwise
consistently iconoclastic views? Let's take a looksee...
Get this through your head: a corporation can't initiate force against
you.
You may not like their product, practices, or price, but no one is
coercing you at gunpoint.
28 matches
Mail list logo
