Sentences with phrase «corporate personhood»

Police Think So Pittsburgh Bans Fracking, Eliminates Some Rights of Corporate Personhood With New Ordinance It's a Fracking Winter Wonderland!

Some 20 protesters along Pine Grove Road held signs «Tax the Rich», «End Corporate Personhood», «Democracy 4 Sale» and «Boot Buerkle» and chanted - «We are the 99 Percent» whenever guests drove through the police check point.

More on Fracking: Pittsburgh Bans Fracking, Eliminates Some Rights of Corporate Personhood With New Ordinance Are Pennsylvania's Fracking Opponents Really Environmental Extremists?

But there's also a point to be made here about corporate personhood.

In passing, regarding your allusion to ignorance or lack of knowledge as being a basis for dismissing arguments / opinions, i find this to be particularly problematic in the context of a debate on corporate personhood.

That's a perfect example of how silly it is for people to reject corporate personhood whole - hog.

Believe it or not, corporations are now considered people hence the «Corporate Personhood Amendments» that have been requested by some politicians to secure that our «economy» will thrive.

Our guest will be Adam Winkler, whose new book «We The Corporations» reviews business efforts in the courts to establish corporate personhood going back 200 years.

Using simple, inexpensive sensors the trees assume their own voice and capacity to exert corporate personhood within this new structure of ownership.

But if McKibben and his crew can get people all over the world to talk about the carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere, they can surely find a way to make corporate personhood interesting.

When free market neoliberals cite corporate personhood as an issue of freedom of speech, they reenforce a political system where influence is not based on one person, one vote - but rather how much money you have to bend the system to your will.

Separate corporate personhood is the main reason that many corporations are incorporated.

Despite this fact, many people claim to be opposed to the very notion of corporate personhood.

You seem to know more about corporate personhood than me, so why don't you think about all the instances where corporations are treated as persons, and pretend that they weren't.

It's all those links that draw you from an article on due process to one on corporate personhood to one on the Sovereign Military Order of Malta.

And its spokespeople can barely open their mouths on topics related to business and economics without saying things that are grossly mistaken, such as their idea that corporate personhood should be repealed.

As I've pointed out before, corporate personhood, properly understood, is absolutely essential to modern economies and hence to modern societies.

If you think you're opposed to the notion of corporate personhood, and additionally find inversion distasteful, you need to ask yourself: just who is being unpatriotic when corporate inversion happens?

It's like arguing against «corporate personhood» or claiming that Barack Obama is a «socialist»: all you're doing is demonstrating to the world that you don't know what the words you're using really mean.

Corporate personhood is one of the most misunderstood concepts in discussions of corporate behaviour and responsibility.

Now, a lot of people believe that the U.S. Supreme Court, in the Citizens United decision, invented the notion of Corporate Personhood.

This conception of corporate personhood has profound and beneficial economic consequences.

Corporate personhood is easily ridiculed on late - night television, but as Eric Posner pointed out in Slate, the law often «treats various nonhuman, nonsentient entities as «persons» for certain legal purposes.»

At 10:30 a.m., New York for Democracy holds a rally in support of making this the 17th state to call for a constitutional amendment against «corporate personhood» and «money as speech,» the Well, LOB, 198 State St., Albany.

Augusta, Maine — Members of the Maine Green Independent Party represented the majority of the six signers on the citizens initiative to order the Legislature to call on a Constitutional Convention, with the purpose to overturn the Supreme Court's «Citizens United» decision and end corporate personhood.

However, amongst many third party activists and candidates, corporate personhood is a headlining issue.

The corporate personhood aspect of the campaign finance debate turns on Buckley v. Valeo (1976) and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010): Buckley ruled that political spending is protected by the First Amendment right to free speech, while Citizens United ruled that corporate political spending is protected, holding that corporations have a First Amendment right to free speech.

Corporate personhood is an issue that is not much discussed at major party debates and does not present itself in the platforms of either the Republicans or Democrats.

While the Constitution enshrines the pursuit of happiness as a basic right, a long line of Supreme Court rulings has also established the notion of corporate personhood.

With the phrase «I, The Artwork», Khalili vested the contract — exhibited as a photograph — with corporate personhood, assigning to it the moral rights usually held by an author.

Instead, taking a page from the Occupy movement, in 2012 he will focus on «corporate personhood» and fossil - fuel subsidies.

In passing, «corporate personhood» is another of those unusal phrases that have wafted up from down south.

LSFPP — you wrote a message are complaining about «corporate personhood», whatever it is that that term means to you.

When i really think about it I tend to conclude that the people who know the most about corporations are the same people who are likely to support them and corporate personhood, perhaps because they have a vested interest in doing so.

I'm sure you're not suggesting that corporate personhood is the only way to regulate corporations, though maybe you're suggesting it's the best way?

If those aren't intances that bother you, provide examples of what you say is wrong about whatever it is you believe «corporate personhood».

In that world, a robot without a corporate personhood could be considered the way one would consider a human without a soul.

Personhood already exists for non-sentient beings in the form of corporate personhood, extending to entities such as limited companies, PLCs and trusts.