Comment Re:WGA and the EU (Score 1) 527
You don't have the right to profit from the products of your mind. Without government protection, the first person you sold it to could sell it himself. Only the threat of government sanctioned violence keeps people from reproducing any intellectual property whatsoever.
There's a difference between a right to something, and protection from those who take it from you.
And yes, you dont have a right to *profit* from it, but you do have a right to keep it.
Corporation is an abstract concept created by government. Your free market idealism applies to sole proprietorships only. Once you have more than one owner, you need a power structure and laws to keep things sane. Without corporate charter, you do not have limited liability and any shareholder can be sued for the entire amount of damages or debt a company has. So telling government to stay the hell out of corporate business is nonsensical.
Without government, corporations as we know them wouldn't exist. We, the people, created them through the democtratic process and we can impose any kind of limitations we want.
A corporation is only a collection of interested individuals. It is not a government granted privelege or abstract concept. The governments only valid role is to protect the individuals of the corporation and those they deal with in such areas as limited liability, intellectual and capital protection, disputing trade agreements, etc, etc.
The artificial domains of Anti-Trust and/or Anti-competition is what this thread is focusing on.
We live in a cooperative society, and just as we have the right to say "we will imprison you for killing someone" we can also say what are legal and illegal ways of making money.
There is a fundamental difference between murdering someone and trading goods between two voluntary entities. These are not arbitrary democratically chosen laws, subject to the whim of the current government. They stand on their own reasoning. If people had the right to impose any law than this entire conversation would be moot wouldnt it?
You sound like a petulant child who wants all of the rights and privileges of living in a cooperative society with none of resonsiblities, and like petulant children everyhwere you project your own failings onto those who point them out to you.
The only responsiblities are met by delivering the product that was paid for, and paying the wages of those who agreed to make that product.
Point out my failings and who exactly Im projecting them on, or please refrain from attacks ad hominen.
Socialists aren't the ones profiting off the work of others, capitalists are, and they demand
the right to keep on profiting.
You do not have a right to make a profit. Anyone who claims so does not know the first thing
about capitalism.
A wage slave is a slave nonetheless, and capitalism is founded on the work of the wage slave.
Thanks for tip.
There's a difference between a right to something, and protection from those who take it from you.
And yes, you dont have a right to *profit* from it, but you do have a right to keep it.
Corporation is an abstract concept created by government. Your free market idealism applies to sole proprietorships only. Once you have more than one owner, you need a power structure and laws to keep things sane. Without corporate charter, you do not have limited liability and any shareholder can be sued for the entire amount of damages or debt a company has. So telling government to stay the hell out of corporate business is nonsensical.
Without government, corporations as we know them wouldn't exist. We, the people, created them through the democtratic process and we can impose any kind of limitations we want.
A corporation is only a collection of interested individuals. It is not a government granted privelege or abstract concept. The governments only valid role is to protect the individuals of the corporation and those they deal with in such areas as limited liability, intellectual and capital protection, disputing trade agreements, etc, etc.
The artificial domains of Anti-Trust and/or Anti-competition is what this thread is focusing on.
We live in a cooperative society, and just as we have the right to say "we will imprison you for killing someone" we can also say what are legal and illegal ways of making money.
There is a fundamental difference between murdering someone and trading goods between two voluntary entities. These are not arbitrary democratically chosen laws, subject to the whim of the current government. They stand on their own reasoning. If people had the right to impose any law than this entire conversation would be moot wouldnt it?
You sound like a petulant child who wants all of the rights and privileges of living in a cooperative society with none of resonsiblities, and like petulant children everyhwere you project your own failings onto those who point them out to you.
The only responsiblities are met by delivering the product that was paid for, and paying the wages of those who agreed to make that product.
Point out my failings and who exactly Im projecting them on, or please refrain from attacks ad hominen.
Socialists aren't the ones profiting off the work of others, capitalists are, and they demand
the right to keep on profiting.
You do not have a right to make a profit. Anyone who claims so does not know the first thing
about capitalism.
A wage slave is a slave nonetheless, and capitalism is founded on the work of the wage slave.
Thanks for tip.
