5 ms·
This is yet another bait and switch where a public corporation is presented as a private party. To put it in the melodramatic language of the 18th century: A c
by konjin 6y ago
This is yet another bait and switch where a public corporation is presented as a private party.
To put it in the melodramatic language of the 18th century: A corporation has no soul to save and no body to punish. It has no natural interests and no natural rights. It is a legal fiction whose only use is to protect its owners from ruin and whose only justification is the public good. To pretend otherwise is an affront to both common sense and god.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> This is yet another bait and switch where a public corporation is presented as a private party. No, the above is the fallacy of equivocation. “Private” in “private party” unambiguously refers to the “non-government” sense of “private”, where the “party” may be a corporate entity or natural person. It does not refer to the “private(ly held)” vs. “public(ly traded)” distinction regarding how corporate stocks are traded.