While I think most of us can agree that corporations are rife with corruption and are the very definition of self serving… this kind of legislation is what drives a stake into the heart of bipartisanship and only serves to fuel and invigorate her base come voting time.
In reality, everyone (including Warren) except the uniformed voters knows this has zero chance of surviving in almost any form and just fires up the right to widen the already enormous chasm that exists in our government and continue polarizing the nation.
#1 - This - while still fantasy - isn’t ludicrous #2 - So ridiculous it is hard to take seriously #3 - Sounds great to the blue collar masses but impossible in terms of everything else. Logistical, enforement, execution. #4 - It and of itself, most of us would agree. Would have been great 10 years ago
In my understanding, the functions that corporations perform and allow serve, generally, to advance productivity and profit overall. Such that without these laws, people would be less likely to take risks like opening businesses. And that’s the main reason for their existence.
Of course they are. Unions, unlike corporations, are inherently placed in a structure where their power is matched against an opposing force, the employer. There can be no union without an employer, and the employer still has great power even when unions exist. When unions get too powerful, they deserve to be reined in as well.
As iiandyiii noted, I’m not talking about what corporate structure IS, but WHY laws to create a corporate structure were written. Yes, Corporations exist to advance shareholder interests, officers have a fiduciary duty to the owners, owners are shielded from liability, etc, etc, etc. My point is, why do we have Corporations?
We created this legal construct called “Corporation”, with all of these traits, because the entire economy / society benefits from the existence of the legal construct. We, as a society, get to determine what those traits are, what the limitations are to this legal construct, not based on natural law, but based on what serves the need of our society.
Most of the votes I cast are for people, not referenda. And most people do not support having to pay a third party as a condition of employment. So the legislators they elect tend to listen.
Being an employee is a commodity. There are plenty more out there. In times when unemployment is low, and labor demand increases, you normally see wages increase. Also being an employee has significantly less risk than an equity holder in a company.
In the event of a bankruptcy, the employees are considered unsecured creditors of the company. They will get paid all their due wages before the shareholders see a dime.
OTOH, the employee can be dismissed at any time, while the shareholder can’t be dispossessed. (Though they can be ripped off in all sorts of other ways.)
