Re: Dumping (was Re: USA RULES OK!!!!)

Jeff Fabijanic (
Tue, 24 Mar 1998 10:33:17 -0500

Michael Lorrey <> wrote:

[lots of flamage about NH vs. MA]

I'll chalk your excessive rudeness up to an unseemly love of your
state and won't bother responding further in this forum.

Jeff said:
> So you're saying that we need to get rid of the idea of corporations
> first? OK. I'd be up for that. How should we go about it?

Michael replied:
>Easy, simply stop treating corporations as 'persons' under the law,

This is pretty much what an "incorporated" individual is, so you
seem to be saying "repeal the incorporation statutes". OK. Have
to do it for each state of course - this'll take awhile (good thing
we'll be here for at least a couple hundred more years...)

>and end much corporate liability protection

It'll all go away if your first point is carried out. The only protection
corps offer is the fact that as an "individual" they shield their execs
from liability - you can't find against one person for another
"person's" crime. And now many states have started to include the
idea of the "thinly-veiled" corporation - one which does not shield it's
shareholders from liability at all.

>(while at the same time reforming the tort
>process to prevent humongous punitive awards like $175 million to two former
>Texaco employees, or $6 million to a granny who spilled coffee on her lap.)

Why bother with this? I never understood why people get all upset
over settlements like this. Who gives a fig if some older woman
(her lawyers actually) make a big play? $6M is probably a single
day's coffee profits for an org the size of MickeyD's. If the jury thought
it was warranted, then let the lawyers fight it out. Award caps seem like
mandatory sentences and term limits - attempts to micromanage the
entire process of government from the legislative chamber.

>If the individuals in a corporation were severally liable for the actions they
>take in the conduct of their business, then they might start acting a lot more
>nicely. At the same time, I'd also stop taxing both the corporation AND its
>stockholders and employees. Have one tax (having it at the corporate level
>would of course be the easiest and cheapest to administer).

Huh? If you get rid of the "corporation", there won't be an entity at that
level to tax.


| Jeffrey Fabijanic, Designer "The Future exists,
| Primordial Software First in Imagination,
| "Software of the First Order" Then in Will,
| Boston, MA * (617) 983-1369 And finally in Reality."