Occupy Wall Street better defend its identity

[shuize]

Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_personality

Your link points out one of the most important aspects of legal personhood: limiting investor liability. If this did not exist in some form, every investment, no matter how small, could put every investor on the hook to lose everything he owned.

I'd be very interested to hear from anyone in the "end corporate personhood" camp explain how this and all the economic knock on effects which would follow are actually a good thing.

 

[WildCat]

Why is it different from the dozens of other pipelines crisscrossing the aquifer? Have pipelines in the US proved to be a danger to aquifers?

And I still don't see what the pipeline has to do with legal personhood.

 

[Ziggurat]

Given that slaves were people (and described as such in the constitution), I'm not sure why anyone thinks that corporate personhood grants too much power to corporations.

 

[bookitty]

What is the risk? What is "little return"? It would create tens of thousands of jobs and create a stable oil supply from a friendly country that doesn't funnel the profits to terrorist groups.

Most of the oil is already promised to foreign markets and there would only be 2500 - 5000 temporary jobs.

Report from Cornell:
http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

This information is all readily available.

 

[bookitty]

And I still don't see what the pipeline has to do with legal personhood.

It doesn't. You specifically asked for an example of this:

Do a minority of people have the right to influence legislation that benefits themselves and harms the majority or in many cases goes entirely against the will of the majority, simply because they represent the majority of wealth in the US?

I gave you one.

and now because I am ever-so bored by this sort of intellectual dishonesty, I am putting you on ignore.

 

[WildCat]

Most of the oil is already promised to foreign markets and there would only be 2500 - 5000 temporary jobs.

Report from Cornell:
http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

This information is all readily available.

I think the company knows better how many workers will be required to build their pipeline than academics from Cornell.

And what does this have to do with legal personhood?

 

[Alt+F4]

There are some small examples of this - School teachers who are fired or reprimanded because they were in a porno, even though porn is legal.

I'm a teacher and I don't give a damn if over 18 porn is legal, any teacher who has been a porn movie should be fired. As educators of YOUR kids we need to live up to a higher standard.

 

[RandFan]

I'm a teacher and I don't give a damn if over 18 porn is legal, any teacher who has been a porn movie should be fired. As educators of YOUR kids we need to live up to a higher standard.

Why? How is being in porn a lower standard? Is porn unethical? Is porn immoral? FWIW: I would accept an argument of moral turpitude (public standards that PERCEIVE that porn is unsavory). Sadly we cannot force reason on people. We can only advocate for it. Is that what you mean? However, if you argument is that porn is inherently immoral or unethical then I'm afraid you have a job ahead of you.

 

[AlBell]

What is the risk? What is "little return"? Iwould create tens of thousands of jobs and create a stable oil supply from a friendly country that doesn't funnel the profits to terrorist groups.

http://www.transcanada.com/keystone.html

TransCanada believes Keystone XL will ultimately be approved, as it is too important to the U.S. economy and its national interest. As well, Keystone XL remains the best option for producers to supply crude oil to U.S. Gulf Coast Refineries.
The U.S. consumes 15 million barrels of oil each day and imports 10 to 11 million barrels per day. Industry forecasts predict oil consumption will continue at these levels for the next two to three decades, so a secure supply of crude oil is critical to U.S. energy security.
Keystone XL is shovel-ready. TransCanada is poised to put 13,000 Americans to work to construct the pipeline - pipefitters, welders, mechanics, electricians, heavy equipment operators, among other jobs - in addition to 7,000 manufacturing jobs that would be created across the U.S. Additionally, local businesses along the pipeline route will benefit from the 118,000 spin-off jobs Keystone XL will create through increased business for local goods and service providers.
TransCanada looks forward to concluding the U.S. regulatory review process and beginning the important work of building Keystone XL. The safe and reliable operation of our pipelines and infrastructure has been TransCanada's priority for 60 years. This same commitment will drive us forward in the years ahead.

The U.S. $13 billion Keystone pipeline system will play an important role in linking a secure and growing supply of Canadian crude oil with the largest refining markets in the United States, significantly improving North American security supply.


In June 2010 TransCanada commenced commercial operation of the first phase of the Keystone Pipeline System. Keystone's first phase was highlighted by the conversion of natural gas pipeline to crude oil pipeline and construction of an innovative bullet line that brings the crude oil non-stop from Canada to market hubs in the U.S. Midwest.

Keystone Cushing (Phase II), an extension of the Keystone Pipeline from Steele City, Nebraska to Cushing, Oklahoma went into service in February 2011. The 36-inch pipeline connects to storage and distribution facilities at Cushing, a major crude oil marketing/refining and pipeline hub.

The proposed Keystone Gulf Coast Expansion Project is an approximate 2,673-kilometre (1,661-mile), 36-inch crude oil pipeline that would begin at Hardisty, Alberta and extend southeast through Saskatchewan, Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska. It would incorporate a portion of the Keystone Pipeline (Phase II) through Nebraska and Kansas to serve markets at Cushing, Oklahoma before continuing through Oklahoma to a delivery point near existing terminals in Nederland, Texas to serve the Port Arthur, Texas marketplace.

see also

http://www.keystonexlnebraska.com/the-facts/jobs-and-economic-impact

An independent economic study finds that construction of the Keystone Gulf Coast Expansion Pipeline project should provide significant, positive contributions to U.S. energy security and the U.S. economy valued at over $20 billion. The Perryman Group study states that the proposed pipeline project should improve U.S. energy security with the ongoing benefit to the U.S. economy of a more stable source of consistent energy supply over an extended period of time.

Creating Economic Growth
The study further concluded that once the pipeline is operational, the states along the pipeline route are expected to receive an additional $5.2 billion in property taxes during the estimated operating life of the pipeline. The $7 billion pipeline project is expected to directly create more than 15,000 high-wage manufacturing jobs and construction jobs in 2011-2012 across the U.S., stimulating significant additional economic activity.

Strengthening U.S. Energy Security
The study also highlights the significant ongoing benefit to the U.S. economy of a more stable, consistent and reliable supply of oil. When completed, the Keystone Pipeline System is expected to provide five per cent of current U.S. petroleum-consumption needs and represent nine per cent of U.S. petroleum imports. Once permitted and completed, the Keystone Gulf Coast Expansion project will supply roughly half the amount of oil that the U.S. currently imports from the Middle East or Venezuela.

 

[Neally]

Yes. Conceded. Not much different than many other groups. It's wrong. I find it unfortunate. It DOESN'T mean that the movement is unjustified or wrong.

Really? Are we going back to "this isolated incident is really part of the real OWS movement"?

 

[RandFan]

Really? Are we going back to "this isolated incident is really part of the real OWS movement"?

Never mind that argument ad anecdote is fallacy, it's also very insipid and intellectually lazy. I'm sure I could add some epithets but this is a skeptics forum. That ought to do.

 

[Alt+F4]

Why? How is being in porn a lower standard? Is porn unethical? Is porn immoral? FWIW: I would accept an argument of moral turpitude (public standards that PERCEIVE that porn is unsavory). Sadly we cannot force reason on people. We can only advocate for it. Is that what you mean? However, if you argument is that porn is inherently immoral or unethical then I'm afraid you have a job ahead of you.

I have my civilian life and I have my teacher life (colored chalk anyone?) and yes, in my teacher life not engaging in moral turpitude is the defining factor. There is no way I could be an effective teacher to 14-year-olds while at the same time trying to explain to them it was perfectly ok for me to be the star of Behind the Green Door, part whatever.

 

[Neally]

Never mind that argument ad anecdote is fallacy, it's also very insipid and intellectually lazy. I'm sure I could add some epithets but this is a skeptics forum. That ought to do.

The other side is that you are using a No true Scotsman fallacy.

 

[RandFan]

I have my civilian life and I have my teacher life (colored chalk anyone?) and yes, in my teacher life not engaging in moral turpitude is the defining factor. There is no way I could be an effective teacher to 14-year-olds while at the same time trying to explain to them it was perfectly ok for me to be the star of Behind the Green Door, part whatever.

I'm fine with "moral turpitude". I can't force reasonable standards on people. As for explaining to 14 year olds, do you explain to them why it's perfectly okay for you to have sex in private? Or is that something we pretend doesn't happen? If a kid asked me if it is okay for me to have sex I'd tell them to talk to their parents.

BTW: This reminds me of:

How will I explain to children about mixed marriages?
How will I explain to children about gays and lesbians?
How will I explain to children about atheism?
How will I explain to children about the incest, animal sacrifice, genocide, rape, etc in the Holy Bible? Oh, wait, that's considered okay. Scratch that one.

I think we need to stop patronizing children.

 

[RandFan]

The other side is that you are using a No true Scotsman fallacy.

No, but hey, I'm open, please to explain how?

(Philosaur I'm trying man. I really am)

 

[shuize]

I have my civilian life and I have my teacher life (colored chalk anyone?) and yes, in my teacher life not engaging in moral turpitude is the defining factor. There is no way I could be an effective teacher to 14-year-olds while at the same time trying to explain to them it was perfectly ok for me to be the star of Behind the Green Door, part whatever.

Or having to explain that no animals were harmed in the making of that clip that somehow went viral on the net.

/off topic

 

[Alt+F4]

I'm fine with "moral turpitude". I can't force reasonable standards on people. As for explaining to 14 year olds, do you explain to them why it's perfectly okay for you to have sex in private? Or is that something we pretend doesn't happen? If a kid asked me if it is okay for me to have sex I'd tell them to talk to their parents.

BTW: This reminds me of:

How will I explain to children about mixed marriages?
How will I explain to children about gays and lesbians?
How will I explain to children about atheism?
How will I explain to children about the incest, animal sacrifice, genocide, rape, etc in the Holy Bible? Oh, wait, that's considered okay. Scratch that one.

I think we need to stop patronizing children.

I wear a wedding ring to work so I'm pretty certain my students know I have sex in private. As for having sex for money with strangers if I was doing that I would keep that private and if it became public, I think the correct decision would be to resign. As for all your other comments, all those topics have come up and we do discuss them, my opinions/activities regarding them however don't matter.

 

[Alt+F4]

Or having to explain that no animals were harmed in the making of that clip that somehow went viral on the net.

/off topic

Hehehehe. Whenever I show a movie in which many people die, none of the kids care, but if a horse, a bunny or god forbid a puppy dies then the sadness/tears (girls) starts. I now begin a movie with the disclaimer, "you know that when a living creature dies in a movie, it doesn't die in real life."

/another off topic

 

[RandFan]

I wear a wedding ring to work so I'm pretty certain my students know I have sex in private. As for having sex for money with strangers if I was doing that I would keep that private and if it became public, I think the correct decision would be to resign. As for all your other comments, all those topics have come up and we do discuss them, my opinions/activities regarding them however don't matter.

You asked how you would explain to the children. We'll you provided your own answer. As for resigning I've no idea why but that would be your decision.

And yeah, let's pretend that kids don't see porn on the internet. They don't give a damn about your sex life. Your fear is just as irrational as the people who fear about telling kids about gays and lesbians. And yes, last July and August we had a long thread about people crying over the fact that California was going to teach gay history to school kids "THINK OF THE CHILDREN".

 

[RandFan]

"THINK OF THE CHILDREN".

Get over it.