The line about agreeing to abide by the laws of the state and the laws of the United States is in the documents that create the corporation in the first place. At least it was required in California when I last set up a company some25 years ago.
That is what the lawyer explained it to me.
If you look it is probably at or near the end close to the signatures ...
If it is not there it was changed to avoid responsibility. Why that is not see to take on corporate criminals I don't know. That is what scared me the most, not that I wanted to break any laws and the only real effect is it desolves the company making all the stock holders responsible for all the debt directly. I think if that happened to a couple of major law flaunting companies people would pay more attention.
But states do not have the balls to enforce the agreement
Allan
On Dec 17, 2011 2:49 AM, "Don Johnson" <dajohn@gmail.com> wrote:
That's interesting. I'd love to read more about what you are talking
about. I'm casually interested in the Corzine/WF Global investigations
currently going on but I doubt the justice dept. can touch him. He's
just too smart and has too many powerful friends. Unlike the crass and
apparently unsophisticated Gov. Blagojevich who will be spending the
next 15 years in a federal prison for his stupidity. Unless a person
is the CEO or CFO and can be proven to be lying or cooking books I
don't see how you can go after the personal wealth of an individual
just because they own stock. They would have to be decision makers to
be liable I would think. It will be interesting to see how things play
out.
By no means do I advocate no regulation at all. Some is required to
prevent monopolies and help stabilize production to avoid severe boom/
bust cycles. It's the social engineering aspect of regulation that
irritates me. Economic engineering is necessary and desirable for
stability. The social part is insulting.
dj
On Dec 16, 1:21 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Don business is bound by the same moral code as the rest if humanity, in
> the s when you form a corporation you agree to abide by the laws of the
> state and the laws of the United States .. basis requirement now the real
> question is how many of the major corporations really still exist because
> if you violate the law you lose the corporate veil exposing all the share
> holders to full exposure including all of their wealth. All of it every
> last penny. Not just what they have invested
> Allan
> On Dec 16, 2011 7:56 AM, "Don Johnson" <daj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > This is true Allan. However, business is business. You can only lose
> > what you invest so one should never invest more then they can afford
> > to lose. Another way to put this is don't hate the player; hate the
> > game. Don't sit at the table and ante up if you can't handle the loss.
> > Stay outta the kitchen if you can't stand the heat. And so on. If a
> > businessman is breaking the law then let's put him in jail and fine
> > him. If he's done wrong by someone then let's sue his ass. Let a jury
> > of his peers judge him. What frustrates me is how often I see
> > government picking the winners and losers. Or powerful entities like
> > the FED Reserve picking winners and losers. I'm still baffled why
> > Lehman Bros. got the shaft back in 2008 when Washington and the Fed.
> > couldn't pass out bail out money fast enough to just about every other
> > bank begging. Must of been politics. The better course would have been
> > to let them all go bankrupt. The vast majority of investors and owners
> > would have been wealthy and they can withstand the loss. Instead, the
> > tax payers are on the hook for billions in sub-prime mortgages.
> > Shameful. Even more shameful is the new Regulations prop up these
> > oligarchical banks even more while forcing me to pay fees I've never
> > paid in my entire life. Bwankers indeed.
>
> > dj
>
> > On Dec 15, 10:09 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Don you also have to take into account how that money is acquired. When
> > > others are harmed in the process of the gathering of that wealth then
> > you
> > > have a question of morality and the violation of the ethics involved.
> > > Allan
> > > On Dec 15, 2011 11:42 AM, "Don Johnson" <daj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > No need to get all snippy Vam. My comment was honest and wasn't meant
> > to
> > > > be insulting. Human nature isn't going to change to fit anyone's ideal
> > of
> > > > how we should all get along. It's just not going to happen. Ever. There
> > > > will always be winners and there will always be losers. The vast
> > majority
> > > > of us plod along somewhere in the middle. I believe in giving others
> > > > opportunity and encouragement. I do not believe in hand outs and the
> > > > perpetual Nanny State. Enabling, indeed, actually fostering a lifetime
> > of
> > > > dependance on other's blood, sweat and tears is degrading in the
> > extreme.
> > > > Both to the giver and the receiver.
>
> > > > I think you understand how bad the world economy is. I think you're
> > aware
> > > > of the massive political chicanery known colloquially as "crony
> > > > capitalism." When we are at the point where you must be in Government
> > to
> > > > succeed then that's where the sharks will gravitate. And us tax payers
> > will
> > > > give them our money and they will decide which monopolies to give it
> > to so
> > > > they can receive their kick backs. I mean campaign donations. Laws
> > will be
> > > > passed to protect the favored companies(such as GE) while rivals(energy
> > > > companies) are punished with regulation and perpetual dragging of feet
> > to
> > > > get permission to run a pipeline or drill. Thus is the way of the
> > world and
> > > > wishing isn't going to change it. I'd rather instill in our youth a
> > burning
> > > > ambition to succeed. To become the next Steve Jobs or Carlos Slim or
> > John
> > > > D. Rockefeller. Telling them the government owes them a living probably
> > > > isn't the best way to accomplish this.
>
> > > > Not sure what you mean bringing up Africans and Indian aborigines.
> > That is
> > > > a problem for Africa and India, no? I would welcome them here, of
> > course.
> > > > We need all the immigrants we can get to help pay my social security in
> > > > about 30 years. It's the only way I'll ever see a dime. Come on down
> > but
> > > > bring a healthy work ethic. Freeloaders get the boot. Well, in my
> > little
> > > > fantasy world they do anyway. What, Capitalists can't dream? There are
> > no
> > > > race cards in my deck buddy.
>
> > > > I have no objection to a people "growing as they will" either. I'm
> > sure we
> > > > have something they want. In fact, Vam, I wonder if that really isn't
> > at
> > > > the root of much of the trouble? Could it be......Envy? Everybody
> > looooves
> > > > to bash on the Big Bad USA but looking around I still see we seem to be
> > > > doing......better then most. Even if the whole thing IS a house of
> > cards.
> > > > Where will your high-minded ideals come in when those cards come down?
> > > > It'll be every man for himself and dog eat dog. Family and friends
> > first.
>
> > > > Oh my I think I may have gone off the reservation here. Morals. No,
> > > > tithing doesn't necessarily equate to having a high moral standard.
> > > > However, in the case of JD Sr. and Jr. their largesse knew no bounds.
> > > > Excessively frugal in their personal lives and excessively generous in
> > > > their public lives. Honestly, with a simple look at history and current
> > > > events I don't see how ANYONE could dislike or resent rich people as a
> > > > class. They give more than anybody else. By a fairly large margin.
>
> > > > dj
>
> > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> " morals = tithe faithfully "
>
> > > >> That's how pathetic the belief springs from :
> > > >> " Without an avenue to create wealth people will be less productive
> > > >> which means there will be less largess for the needy and helpless."
>
> > > >> The people " here " are less naive than you, Don. Much, much less, I
> > > >> must point out.
>
> > > >> It's not the absence of avenues of wealth creation they seek. They
> > > >> seek people who can create wealth and disown its power of becoming a
> > > >> weapon to enslave others, deny others, own others, influence public
> > > >> policy, affect electoral outcomes, buy off common resources for
> > > >> commercial and personal gains, acquire rights to do as one pleases
> > > >> with the right to ownership of property, skew world world markets,
> > > >> twists financial structures...
>
> > > >> In short, stop creating lesser " dog-like " mercenary humans amongst
> > > >> us, degrade environments, and actually reduce opportunities for
> > > >> populations everywhere to grow, as they will, not as they are
> > > >> commanded by the money bags for the latter's feudal interests.
>
> > > >> They can keep all their wealth and splurge it in the luxury market.
> > > >> But not in owning people, markets, finance structures and instruments,
> > > >> land, natural resources, investing in electoral outcomes and public
> > > >> policy, etc.
>
> > > >> I hope you now understand the people " here " ... they believe the
> > > >> Rockfeller is no more or less than Indian aborigine you've denied or
> > > >> the African native who is yet to learn to be as smart as the white
> > > >> folk, or the homeless tramp closer home. If he can't be homeless,
> > > >> because of his wealth, he at least can extend his understanding and
> > > >> initiative for their benefit, being only as human and no more. If he
> > > >> can't be as unsmart as the African, he can at least enable them and
> > > >> not derive advantage. If he can't undo the fate if the Indian
> > > >> American, he can at least stand with them and admit his wrong.
>
> > > >> On Dec 14, 4:45 pm, Don Johnson <daj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> > I'm couldn't disagree more. The most successful people in the world
> > > >> > are often driven by a high sense of morals. J.D. Rockefeller in
> > > >> > particular was scrupulously honest and even before
> > > >> > he obtained success and could afford it. Without an avenue to create
> > > >> > wealth people will be less productive which means there will be less
> > > >> > largess for the needy and helpless. I wonder at the naivete I see
> > > >> > here. Will everyone truly be more happy when we are all distitute? I
> > > >> > think not.
>
> > > >> > dj
>
> > > >> > On Dec 6, 1:47 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> > > Francis of Assisi once said that it is better to understand than
> > be
> > > >> > > understood. there is a time to understand what the wise men of the
> > > >> past had
> > > >> > > to say and why they said it.
> > > >> > > The world has a lot of problems today and a great deal of double
> > > >> talk and
> > > >> > > little action or direction. Most and a lot of what is said is
> > > >> irrelevant
> > > >> > > and immaterial.
>
> > > >> > > The changes the world needs to escape from a market economy and
> > back
> > > >> more
> > > >> > > to a traditional economy where local value come into much greater
> > > >> play,
> > > >> > > this is where the jobs are created,, On the other hand in the
> > > >> market
> > > >> > > economy everything is driven by the profit. The profit concept and
> > > >> the loss
> > > >> > > or creation of jobs is entirely irrevelent,, all that is of
> > > >> importance is
> > > >> > > making a profit no matter the effect on the population. As I
> > examine
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > problem looking for what has changed what seems to pop out is the
> > > >> loss of
> > > >> > > morality. Oddly what I do not see is the extreme protestant view
> > > >> > > that morality was everything, Not that I think it was great or
> > really
> > > >> > > approve of it,,, it what I now see is it shifting to preachers out
> > > >> > > screaming "Have you accepted jesus christ as your personal savior"
> > > >> leaving
> > > >> > > a total vacancy in the importance of morality.
>
> > > >> > > As I watch the news the focus is on the markets.. and the market
>
> ...
>
> read more »
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário