Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (171332)	5/6/2021 6:46:32 PM
From: sense	1 Recommendation Recommended By pak73 Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 219155

LOL!!! Yeah, right. Canada pretending to be different "and thus better"... again... only because "incrementally and by necessity"... seems a valid enough excuse to justify the pretense. As is so often true... Canadians just didn't have the balls to go their own way... Too funny that this discussion of the Canadian view... starts with a discussion of the threat of a disruption in the American system... Somehow, no one ever gets around to asking... "who gave the courts the power to determine the personhood of fictional entities" ? Of course... as persons... corporations are, by the grant, also made the slaves of the state... so don't expect too many in the ruling class to asking penetrating questions. But the difference boils down to... "if we don't state it overtly, maybe they won't notice"... as Brits and Canadians simply refusing to acknowledge the reality of the impact resulting from the practice in the law... which is the same in outcome. In the discussion... we've not got around to opinions... The need for limited liability... or for limits in liability... can be attained in a lot of different ways. Declaring that (or pretending to not declare while still acting as if) corporations are persons... is a stupid way to go about that.