4 ms·

That's an intersting point. Perhaps things would be more level if a conflict between an individual would be settled by selecting one RANDOM employee from that c

That's an intersting point. Perhaps things would be more level if a conflict between an individual would be settled by selecting one RANDOM employee from that company (not the super ninja expert in the narrow field at hand), and have them battle it out in a lower court / arbitration.

PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago
No, just do like you do with children who sign contracts, invalidate any obligations the child has to the adult, but the adult is still bound to any obligations they have, and punish the adult for trying to take advantage of the child. Ideally, the ability for individuals to sign contracts with corporations should be forbidden. Maybe a single 1 person corporation that doesn't involve a lawyer either direct or as a contractor.
- marcosdumay 8y ago
  I don't think the world could function without contracts. I get into a restaurant, I order some food. That's a contract where I get into the obligation of paying, and they get into the obligation of serving the food. It's much more likely that the justice system needs a complete rework.
  - PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago
    You would still have contracts, they would be limited to being between people of similar power, and a lot stronger protections for someone being taken advantage of.
Nasrudith 8y ago
That would work only slightly better than the top level salary cap being the lowest salary - dodged via a nesting doll of layered corporations as contractors or using actual ones. In that case they would have a top level entity with C-levels and elite lawyers which just so happens to own the rights and assume legal responsibility for the lower corporation. In which case just save everyone the hassle and pass a law requiring proportionality to the degree of defined max lawyers per lawsuit of size defined in some workable metric so it doesn't take decades just to go through every mortgage in a AAA bank with solo lawyers on each side. It would limit the use of lawyer armies but it may lose a constitutional challenge on grounds of right to petition the government for redress.

PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago

No, just do like you do with children who sign contracts, invalidate any obligations the child has to the adult, but the adult is still bound to any obligations they have, and punish the adult for trying to take advantage of the child. Ideally, the ability for individuals to sign contracts with corporations should be forbidden. Maybe a single 1 person corporation that doesn't involve a lawyer either direct or as a contractor.

marcosdumay 8y ago
I don't think the world could function without contracts. I get into a restaurant, I order some food. That's a contract where I get into the obligation of paying, and they get into the obligation of serving the food. It's much more likely that the justice system needs a complete rework.
- PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago
  You would still have contracts, they would be limited to being between people of similar power, and a lot stronger protections for someone being taken advantage of.

Nasrudith 8y ago

That would work only slightly better than the top level salary cap being the lowest salary - dodged via a nesting doll of layered corporations as contractors or using actual ones. In that case they would have a top level entity with C-levels and elite lawyers which just so happens to own the rights and assume legal responsibility for the lower corporation. In which case just save everyone the hassle and pass a law requiring proportionality to the degree of defined max lawyers per lawsuit of size defined in some workable metric so it doesn't take decades just to go through every mortgage in a AAA bank with solo lawyers on each side. It would limit the use of lawyer armies but it may lose a constitutional challenge on grounds of right to petition the government for redress.