Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 17, 2014, 12:36:19 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Discussion
| |-+  Constitution and Law (Moderator: True Federalist)
| | |-+  Gay Marriage paving the way for Corporate Marriage?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Gay Marriage paving the way for Corporate Marriage?  (Read 2460 times)
Jacobtm
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3054


View Profile
« on: November 29, 2011, 01:04:30 pm »
Ignore

Marriage in New York is no longer between a man and a woman but between any 2 persons.

Corporations of course are legal persons.

AT&T recently tried to take over T-Mobile, but was prevented by anti-trust authorities.

In that case, why not simply marry?

Of course, then divorces could be filed, with one corporation being granted half the assets of the other.
Logged

Why do so many people here cheer on war crimes?
Israel and the United States "killing dozens of civilians with explosives", as you phrase it, has, throughout history, almost always been a good thing.
Bacon King
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15839
United States Minor Outlying Islands


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2011, 04:46:35 pm »
Ignore

To get a marriage license you need to provide documents like birth certificates and photo ID's, which a corporation couldn't have. Also, I don't think any state allows a person to send a representative to get married on their behalf, which would be needed for a corporation to be married.

Corporate personhood is definitely stupid, I agree, but thankfully this amusing idea isn't something that could actually happen.
Logged

BK without all the crazy drugs just wouldn't be BK.

Verily
Cuivienen
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16807


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 30, 2011, 12:06:46 pm »
Ignore

Even if corporations could get married, corporate marriage wouldn't achieve the same ends as a merger (and would be effectively meaningless). Married individuals are treated specially by the individual income tax, but the corporate income tax does not treat married corporations specially (for example, exempting from taxation transfers between married individuals but not between married corporations, or providing a separate set of tax brackets for the combined incomes of married individuals but not for married corporations). Additionally, other federal marriage benefits, like employee benefits for spouses and social security payouts, are not relevant to corporations, which cannot be employees and cannot receive social security.

I can't see any benefit that AT&T and T-Mobile would get from marriage.
Logged
Jacobtm
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3054


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: November 30, 2011, 01:54:23 pm »
Ignore


I can't see any benefit that AT&T and T-Mobile would get from marriage.

It's all in the divorce and taking half the assets.

If you can't merge, just get married, get divorced, and get the juiciest 50%.
Logged

Why do so many people here cheer on war crimes?
Israel and the United States "killing dozens of civilians with explosives", as you phrase it, has, throughout history, almost always been a good thing.
Zach Vega
zachvega
Full Member
***
Posts: 127
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.83, S: -6.61

P

View Profile
« Reply #4 on: December 29, 2011, 10:32:11 pm »
Ignore

I honestly wouldn't doubt it.
Logged
Governor TJ
TJ in Cleve
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4888
United States


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: December 30, 2011, 02:55:10 pm »
Ignore

I'll support it only if they have kids.... Tongue
Logged

The Mikado
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14416


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: December 30, 2011, 10:21:24 pm »
Ignore

This thread is idiotic.
Logged

Einzige is a poltroon who cowardly turns down duel challenges he should be honor-bound to accept. The Code Duello authorizes you to mock and belittle such a pathetic honorless scoundrel.
politicus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4061
Denmark


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: March 26, 2012, 09:31:55 pm »
Ignore

This thread is idiotic.
Yup. But funny
Logged


Every time I see Denmark I just want to punch it in the face...
milhouse24
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2343
View Profile
« Reply #8 on: June 30, 2012, 10:49:15 pm »
Ignore

I think there will be more "Platonic marriages" of convenience for people who are solely interested in getting free access to someone else's health insurance (through marriage) and other financial help. 

I see a lot of older single women "marrying" their female friends just for the Health insurance, especially if they are single mothers who don't have anyone to help them. 

It might seem fraudulent to have platonic friends/roommates marrying, but many straight couples get married for dubious reasons not having to do with intercourse. 

In the future, There will likely be "married" people who have never sexually consummated their marriages. 
Logged
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: July 01, 2012, 04:18:55 am »
Ignore

Sentiment echoed!

Also, the premise ("Marriage in New York is now between any 2 persons") is simply incorrect. The law actually states "Parties to a marriage. 1. A marriage that is otherwise valid shall be valid regardless of whether the parties to the marriage are of  the same or different sex." Corporations are still as far as ever from Marriage Equality. So are cats, sheep, and elementary school students. This is an injustice and must be redressed.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27251
United States


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: July 01, 2012, 04:13:03 pm »
Ignore

Nice try. LOL. Let me help you with some of this. "Person" is a defined term, and sometimes it means a living breathing human being, and sometimes, its definition is a legal term of art referring to various economic or political actors, including entities. But hey, if you want to call a corporate merger a marriage, fine by me. After all, they will get to file a joint tax return, and have survivor benefits, and all that good stuff married folks enjoy.
Logged
shua
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11411
Russian Federation


View Profile WWW
« Reply #11 on: July 01, 2012, 05:13:16 pm »
Ignore

Sentiment echoed!

Also, the premise ("Marriage in New York is now between any 2 persons") is simply incorrect. The law actually states "Parties to a marriage. 1. A marriage that is otherwise valid shall be valid regardless of whether the parties to the marriage are of  the same or different sex." Corporations are still as far as ever from Marriage Equality. So are cats, sheep, and elementary school students. This is an injustice and must be redressed.

I for one support cat-sheep marriage.
Logged

oakvale
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9032
Ireland, Republic of


Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -4.00

View Profile
« Reply #12 on: July 01, 2012, 06:46:13 pm »
Ignore

The question is whether gay corporations (Pepsi, Apple, etc) will be able to marry, or if that will only be in certain states.
Logged

○∙◄☻tπ[╪AV┼cV└
jfern
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31604


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: July 01, 2012, 06:48:33 pm »
Ignore

AT&T's prenup with T-Mobile cost them $3 billion.
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14416


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: July 01, 2012, 06:51:35 pm »
Ignore

The question is whether gay corporations (Pepsi, Apple, etc) will be able to marry, or if that will only be in certain states.

How about lesbian corporations like Home Depot?
Logged

Einzige is a poltroon who cowardly turns down duel challenges he should be honor-bound to accept. The Code Duello authorizes you to mock and belittle such a pathetic honorless scoundrel.
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28207
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: July 01, 2012, 07:45:52 pm »

This topic, while never all that serious to begin with, has jumped the shark and is being locked to keep me from hitting the delete button even more than I already have.
Logged

I wonder why Van Heusen never bothered to make women's clothing?
Jacobtm
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3054


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: July 20, 2012, 09:46:57 am »
Ignore

This topic is serious, and deals with the important issue of corporate personhood. If corporations are people, they can marry. If not, they can't marry, and probably can't be protected by 1st ammendment rights either.

The "ridiculous" nature of the thread was just reflecting on the ridiculous nature of considering corporations people.

It's crazy that people think it's sensible to give corporations the protections of humans and then not consider the absurd logical consequences of this.
Logged

Why do so many people here cheer on war crimes?
Israel and the United States "killing dozens of civilians with explosives", as you phrase it, has, throughout history, almost always been a good thing.
The Mikado
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14416


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: July 20, 2012, 11:09:09 am »
Ignore

Does Jacob ever post anything that's not absurd demagoguery?  Corporate personhood is a centuries-old notion that has its roots back in the first joint stock companies in the 18th century, and he always seems to treat it like it's some new innovation of the modern right.  It's the natural consequence of limited liability: rather than being able to sue or hold legally liable every "owner" (i. e. stockholder) of a company for its actions, the company itself becomes a separate legal entity responsible for its own actions.  It's that simple, and it makes sense.  If corporations weren't "people," it'd be a huge danger to invest in anything because you'd be legally liable for that corporation's actions.
Logged

Einzige is a poltroon who cowardly turns down duel challenges he should be honor-bound to accept. The Code Duello authorizes you to mock and belittle such a pathetic honorless scoundrel.
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28207
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #18 on: July 20, 2012, 01:48:59 pm »

Still, it would helpful if there was some other term for the concepts involved than to call corporations "people".  I'm reminded of the mock sponsorship message that NPR's All Things Considered had one April Fools' Day for the Soylent Green company.  "Soylent Green is people."
Logged

I wonder why Van Heusen never bothered to make women's clothing?
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines