Dear Jack:
I admire you- a lot After all, you are not only a fellow chemical engineer, but you managed to drive General Electric to unparalleled heights. But, that does not mean that I can accept everything you say without complaint.
You published your article in today’s (16 July 2012) Wall Street Journal asserting that corporations are people. And, you derided Elizabeth Warren’s who said (accurately noted by your quote): “Mitt Romney tells us, in his own words, he believes corporations are people. No, Mitt, corporations are NOT people. People have hearts. They have kids. They get jobs. They get sick. They love and they cry and they dance. They live and they die. Learn the difference.”
Which preceded your rebuttal “proving” that corporations are people: “Buildings don’t hire people. Buildings don’t design cars that run on electricity or discover DNA-based drug therapies that target cancer cells in ways our parents could never imagine. Buildings don’t show up at a customer’s factory and say, “We won’t leave until we solve your inventory problem.” Buildings don’t encourage their employees to mentor inner-city kids in math and science. Buildings don’t fund homeless shelters in Boston or health clinics in Rwanda. People do.”
I’m sorry so say that simply just won’t fly. Corporations do NONE of those things. People do. Let’s go back to basic chemical engineering principles. We know that should we choose the wrong basis, we can’t properly solve the problem. Your stated basis lacks the necessary foundation. People are defined as human beings; you cannot elect to change the definition to suit your purposes. The individuals associated with your stated entities do those things, but there is no potential creativity in any corporate entity without people.
And, if corporations are people, then why are not some of them in jail…Let’s just pick a few recent choices for such treatment. Barclays who manipulated the LIBOR. And, HSBC for aiding and abetting terrorists and drug cartels. (HSBC would be in jail for “life” [if it really were a person, which it’s not] as a three-peater, too!)
Moreover, I don’t think you would ever agree that governments are people. They are “of the people, by the people, and for the people” by the US’ home-grown tradition. But, given your stated logic that defines corporations as people above would mean that you also assert governments must be people. After all, governments hire people. They hire researchers and fund the same research that develops those inventions you mentioned. They solve problems for people who are laid off by your revered corporations- or excessed to send their jobs overseas.
I also do not think you would agree that a parastatal (government/state owned corporation), like those that obtain in China, are people. I based this corollary from your other professed opinions.
Yes, “people in corporations do indeed love and cry and dance”. I absolutely agree with your words there. It’s absolutely clear that people are not corporations by your own declaration. Unless, of course, you could believe that people have the right to own other people or that mergers of people into other people is possible.
So, between the fact that corporations can’t be jailed, can’t own other people or merge people into other people, state-owned companies can’t be people, and neither can governments be people, I am sure you want to reconsider your assertion that corporations are people. Because waving away these holes in your argument are about as possible as retroactively retiring from a company for which one is the sole stockholder, Chairman, and CEO three years after the fact.
Yours truly,
I don’t know who said it, but it went something like this: “I won’t believe a corp is a person until Texas executes one.” A joke, and probably one in poor taste, but one with truth in it.
Chemical engineer or not my friend, some people will say anything that serves them and their goals, when money is involved.
Personally, I want to lobby to make cats people, I could use the tax deduction 😉
Great rebuttal, Roy. I hope it doesn’t fall on deaf ears and hard hearts.
Lisa Brandel recently posted..The Painted Lady by Lisa Brandel
I like that one a lot, Lisa. HSBC could actually serve as the perfect example…
And, you know, Lisa, folks have gone to jail for just such deductions….
Ah, Roy, this is fantastic! I have been saying for years that corporations need to be stripped of their statute-created “personhood”. It’s insulting to real human beings. It is attitudes like Jack Welch’s that made insane Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United possible.
Angie Hottentots-Laurel recently posted..That’s Amore!—6 Not-So-Typical Songs About Love
Thanks for your approbation and agreement, Angie…
And, you should see what Bernie Sanders (I- VT, Senator) has been proposing- which is basically what you said. Stripping the concept of equivalent status as a citizen for all corporations.
Roy
Oh, I am very familiar with what Bernie says. I am a huge fan of his and sign and share all the petitions he puts out there. He’s a great man.
Angie Hottentots-Laurel recently posted..That’s Amore!—6 Not-So-Typical Songs About Love
Glad to know that, Angie!
So good. I loved this post!
Thanks, Shawn. It’s greatly attenuated from the first version, too!
I really liked Lisa’s idea of having cats declared as people, as long as dogs are, too. As for corporations, they need to be undeclared people. My daddy worked for General Electric back in the 50s thru 80s. That company should never be given people-hood, it was so anti semitic. Of course maybe it’s not any more, but it still isn’t a people. Good post, Roy.
Ann Mullen recently posted..In-Home Caregivers and The Internet
I am for neither be considered dependents. They are items that do not promote the ideals of the US. Oh, they support their owners, but we need the tax code to reflect the needs and ideals of the country (i.e., the betterment of all citizenry. And, dogs and cats and corporations are not people).
Roy
Hello Roy, loved this post, haven’t found your blog before but now I have through UBC. What a brilliant article on a really interesting topic. As part of my MSc in War & Psychiatry many years ago, I looked at group psychology and its impact on the actions of corporations, groups – and the power over the individual. Very interesting distinction between individuals and ‘the whole’. Thanks for the thought-provocation.
Also, because you inspired me through your blog today I’ve tagged you in my response to a blogging game. Don’t feel any pressure to respond to it, but just to say thanks for the thoughts and inspiration: http://peoplewatchblog.com/2012/07/23/games-bloggers-play-ive-been-tagged/
Hannah Roderick recently posted..Games bloggers play – I’ve been tagged
Nice to meet you, Hannah! And, I’m so glad you liked this post. As you can tell, I cover a fairly wide range- but this is one of those things that really needs clarification- whether it meets the criteria of my blog categories or not.
Thanks for checking this out.
I share the same sentiments that you have. We can say that people comprises corporations, but corporations never act for the best interest of the small guy.
Linda recently posted..greensmoke honest review
Even if corporations ACTED in the best interest of the small guy, it still would not make that corporation a person, Linda.
Thanks for your visit- and your comment.
I think you made your point that corporations are not people when you asked why some of them are not in jail. I agree that there are some who deserve to be in jail (or even executed) but that doesn’t happen.
Janette Fuller recently posted..Book Review: Thrown Into Transition
I’m obviously with you, Janette. Thanks for adding to the conversation.
A wonderful clarification Roy. Corporations are for tax purposes right? And a company can grow into a corporation. So I looked up the word and found this: CORPORATION: A company or group of people authorized to act as a single entity (legally a person) and recognized as such in law.
So maybe some think ‘legally a person’ is what justifies their verbalization of what you discuss here?
Lynn Brown recently posted..Stop Making Excuses & Start Making Choices
Actually, Lynn, if I could believe the corporation were legally a person, it could be incarcerated. Single entity- yup. Fictional character- yup. Person or legally a person- No way in heaven.
One challenge as we both know Roy is that what people say is a reflection of what is happening for them in real life or more importantly reflect what the newspapers are saying.
Jack, like many reflected the de-humanizing and re-humanizing of business but corporations while separate legal entities are feeling, thinking beings. Just thinking of the movie Bicentennial Man, corporations could never prove their humanity.
I absolutely agree, Roberta. But some comments are simply meant to be self-serving.
And, I, unfortunately, feel that some persons are completely incapable of proving their humanity, either. So, I would not want to include that among the legal definitions of what a person may or may be or require…
BTW- I liked that movie a lot!
Okay so now we get into interesting territory – how do you define humanity?
Roberta Budvietas, recently posted..Stop when you no longer can….
Humanity is the ability to interact with and care for other human persons. It implies that one has social intelligence, can demonstrate kindness, and experience love.
Good enough, Roberta?