Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'News' started by MrGask, Sep 16, 2012.
I'm guessing a sand nigger took it because it happened on the 11th.
Someone was low on ammo for their fat boy.
Another example of corporate efficiency in all it's glory.
Well it is Texas.
The Jews took it.
@oddguy @veganfarts @Akula @Seraph @hkh, get the fuck in here!
Maggo is keeping a regular anne franks diary of the heebs infecting EDF.
I'm pretty sure corporations (who're tied with the state and federal governments) dumping hazardous material in hick towns is standard operating procedure.
A corporation is formed by the government for purposes the government stipulates, structured as a totalitarian bureaucracy, and exists solely within the imagination of the law. Your statement implies that there exists versions outside of that paradigm.
Fair enough. I suppose I meant "companies" or "businesses."
Oh America, you so silly.
Sorry, I just really hate corporations as a business that is artificially fueled by government protection via limited liability and a host of other goodies that distorts genuine market competition. I really really fucking hate them.
A modern corporation hasn't to be formed by the goverment, nor has to have its purposes stipulated by a goverment, at all.
Any big company is structured as a totalitarian bureaucracy, so what?
And any legal entity exists within the "imagination" (lolwut) of the law, by definition. Although a corporation can be multinational, so that concept of "law", as a single entity, is not applicable
Btw, limited liability is a cornerstone of free market and capitalism, every country has a form of that, for example anything with ltd. in the name
Well, It doesn't sound TOO dangerous. The CEO's probably accidentally replaced his "Marital Aid" with it.
Yes it does. The government regulates what kinds of corporations can exist and what kinds can't. A person applies to form a corporation and where and what they can apply for is entirely dependent on what the government will and wont allow, take Delaware's lax corporate law formed in 1899 as an example of this. The same is not true for the general concept of a market which will exist under or above ground regardless of Government mandate.
If you're unable to independently expand upon what that fully implies then I can't help you.
I'm sorry this is difficult for you to grasp Loudon v. Coleman, 59 Ga. 653, 655 (1877):
‘[a] corporation, considered in itself... is, in fact, a myth, a fiction, and has no existence but in the imagination of the law.’ <-- key precedent in corporate law.
Unlike a regular businesses (that have existed and can exist without a legal fiat) a corporation is unique in this respect.
And it's hypocritical, the government is shielding the individuals from the full responsibilities of their actions. If your saying that free market capitalism requires government to intervene at major intervals in order for it to be tenable then it's either not free market capitalism or free market capitalism is untenable. I'm not saying that limited liability is or isn't key in a thriving economy, there are strong historical cases in which it can be presented as vital to growth. However it pisses me off that free-market Libertarians like Ron Paul sit back and talk about limited government intervention and people taking full responsibility for their actions but being ironically silent on this glaring howler.
Maggot, I know your a grade A troll; your better than this. Give me something nasty like I know you can.
About what, exactly?
I'm not trolling at all.
I think the main problem, which is pretty common around here, is that you are talking about USA exclusively.
I'll just leave this here
Please explain to me how Canon Inc. or Activision Blizzard Inc., just to name two corporations, were "formed by the government for purposes the government stipulates"
Quoting TOW on my AE?
They were formed by the government because only the government has the authority and power to create a corporation. Your link even presents the first corporation Stora Kopparberg created by King Magnus III, ie created by the state, as a bureaucracy .
Those two, if I am not mistaken, are both given a mandate by the government to pursue profit, one of the most popular nowadays. Earlier on corporations were given mandates that ranged from colonizing the east indies to building transcontinental railroads, hence the government decides what type of corporations can exist and for what purpose. 501-c4s aren't used for profit, directly. That a person submits a request to the government for it to create a corporation doesn't change the fact that the government created it and mandated what it can and cannot do.
That corporations utilize limited liability which protects investors personal belongings should their investments go sour.
Oh. I thought you meant mutually agreed upon contracts between individuals and/or companies. I'm pretty sure those exist. They're basically a naturally extension of dividends.
Oh, c'mon...don't give me that "WKlol" bullshit, it's really outdated and cheap
You and I know that if instead of the direct WP link I had posted the citation links, you wouldn't have complained a bit
Pics or it didn't happen. And btw, a mandate to pursue profit is a joke.
Goverment: The Goverment here, I just call to command you to try to get rich
Entrepreneur: Oh, ok
In my book, it does. If I go to the registry or whatever and I say I want to register a company, it's me who is trying to create it.
The goverment giving me permission to do that, or legally regulating my powers, doesn't equate at all with the goverment being the creator
Also, you are still disscussing corporations by the role they played in the XIX-early XX centuries, or by (some) USA standars.
While in fact, in most of the world company and corporation are synonyms
The United Kingdom was the first country to draft modern corporation statutes, where through a simple registration procedure any investors could incorporate, limit liability to their commercial creditors in the event of business insolvency, and where management was delegated to a centralised board of directors.
An influential model within Europe, the Commonwealth and as an international standard setter, UK law has always given people broad freedom to design the internal company rules, so long as the mandatory minimum rights of investors under its legislation are complied with.
Company law, or corporate law...
How is it a joke? What kind of mandate a corporation receives matters as in the difference between non-profit and for-profit corporations matters. If a non-profit corporation tries to start making profit they will get a visit from the party van. A corporation can't go get rich unless the government issues them a mandate to do so.
Your little dialogue sums up how retarded the reality of this is pretty well.
I was waiting to see if you'd catch on to that one. The entirety of this business structure stems from and is sustained by an act of the government. The fact that you request the government to form a corporation and hand you control doesn't change the fact that the government created it and the goals it is to pursue.
Yeah the internal workings ie the body and group are allowed to manage themselves however they like doesn't change the fact that they are still working within a structure that the government created and that they are working towards goals the government set up. Hence why I refer to them as mercenary bureaucracies. It has no independent life outside of this government mandate unlike independent shops, stalls, and black markets.
Ok, let's make it simple for you:
Differences Between a Corporation and a Limited Liability Company (LLC)
A limited liability company is a type of business entity that combines the personal liability protection of a corporation with the tax benefits and simplicity of a partnership. The following section details the main advantages and disadvantages of corporations versus LLCs.
Advantages of a corporation versus a limited liability company (LLC)
Corporation profits are not subject to Social Security and Medicare taxes
Like a sole proprietorship or a partnership, the salaries and profits of an LLC are subject to self-employment taxes, currently equal to a combined 13.3%, unless the LLC opts to be taxed as a corporation. With a corporation, only salaries (not profits) are subject to such taxes.
Corporations garner greater acceptance
Since limited liability companies are still relatively new, not everyone is familiar with them. Although they continue to grow in popularity, still, in some cases, banks or vendors may be reluctant to extend credit to limited liability companies. Some states restrict the type of business an LLC may conduct.
Corporations can offer a greater variety of fringe benefits with fewer taxes
Corporations offer a greater variety of fringe benefit plans than any other business entity. Various retirement, stock option and employee stock purchase plans are available only for corporations. Plus, sole proprietors, partners and employees owning more than 2% of an S corporation must pay taxes on fringe benefits (such as group-term life insurance, medical reimbursement plans, medical insurance premiums and parking). Shareholder-employees of a C corporation do not have to pay taxes on these benefits.
Corporations lower taxes through income shifting
Although C corporations are subject to double taxation, a C corporation can use income shifting to take advantage of lower income tax brackets.
To illustrate, let's take an example of a company that earns $100,000. With a sole proprietorship, a business owner who is married and filing jointly would be in the 25% income tax bracket. With a corporation, assume that the business owner takes $50,000 in salary and leaves $50,000 in the corporation as corporate profit. The federal corporate tax rate is 15% on the first $50,000. Furthermore, the business owner is now in the 15% tax bracket for his or her personal income tax. This can reduce your overall tax liability by over $8,000.
Advantages of a limited liability company (LLC) versus a corporation
LLCs have fewer corporate formalities
Corporations must hold regular meetings of the board of directors and shareholders and keep written corporate minutes. Members and managers of an LLC need not hold regular meetings, which reduces complications and paperwork.
LLCs have no ownership restrictions
S corporations cannot have more than 100 shareholders. Each shareholder must be an individual who is a U.S. resident or citizen. Also, it is difficult to place shares of an S corporation into a living trust. These restrictions do not apply to LLCs (or C corporations).
LLCs have the ability to deduct operating losses
Members who are active participants in an LLC's business can deduct operating losses against their regular income to the extent permitted by law. While S corporation shareholders can also deduct operating losses, C corporation shareholders cannot.
LLCs have tax flexibility
By default, LLCs are treated as a "pass-through" entity for tax purposes, much like a sole proprietorship or partnership. However, an LLC can also elect to be treated like a corporation for tax purposes, whether as a C corporation or an S corporation.
There's nothing there that suggest that corporations are "formed by the government" or that they need "that they are working towards goals the government set up", as you have literally said.
Nowadays, there's no real difference between a corporation and a company
Or are you saying that all companies (and corporations) are created by the goverment and working towards goals the government set up?
Are you telling me that if I think about opening a bakery to sell pretzels is the goverment who "created" it?
If I devise a business plan to do that, go to the registry, etc and make all the paperwork, until an office clerk gives me the approval to establish the company...are you seriously telling me that it's the goverment who set the "working goals" of my company?
Because if you are saying that, one of two: or you are really retarded, or you are splittin hairs trying to save face.
Btw, still waiting for some proof that e.g. Activison-Blizzard Inc was "formed by the goverment" and working towards governmental goals
Goddamnit Texas, if i needed another reason to hate living here.
Nobody important lives in Texas anyway. In fact it'd be the perfect dumping ground for Humanity's hazardous waste.
You're either an Afghan goat fucker or an Aussie roo fucker.
either way, you live in a fucking dumping ground.
glass houses baby
You think I'm fat. That's how much you know about me.