Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

news.bloomberglaw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 269 posts

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#141

Post by ceejayoz »

pseudalopex wrote: post #140
ceejayoz wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The context is clearly "in Fenwick". https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48295844

The strongest plausible interpretation of josefritzishere and Refreeze5224 was the judge was wrong because voting in 2 places would violate 1 person 1 vote. Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize.[1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

But that's not true, either.

My town has a village at its core; village residents vote in two places.

Our school district doesn't perfectly match the town's borders, either, so some folks vote in two places there.

One person gets one vote in a particular election.

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#142

Post by booleanbetrayal »

I don't understand how this thread went from something like #10 on the main page down to #186 in a matter of an hour, despite being more active than most of the threads it is competing with. Can someone more familiar with HN rankings explain this one to me?

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#143

Post by pseudalopex »

booleanbetrayal wrote: post #142

I don't understand how this thread went from something like #10 on the main page down to #186 in a matter of an hour, despite being more active than most of the threads it is competing with. Can someone more familiar with HN rankings explain this one to me?

Submissions with too many comments for their votes receive a penalty. This is to stop flame wars.

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#144

Post by swampthing »

rayiner wrote: post #74
swampthing wrote: post #71

To save everyone some trouble, "some Delaware elections" refers to elections in a town that amended its charter to explicitly allow legal entities to vote.

More accurately: the town charter allows non-residents to vote if they own property on the island, even if the property is owned through a corporation.

Thanks!

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#145

Post by booleanbetrayal »

pseudalopex wrote: post #143
booleanbetrayal wrote: post #142

I don't understand how this thread went from something like #10 on the main page down to #186 in a matter of an hour, despite being more active than most of the threads it is competing with. Can someone more familiar with HN rankings explain this one to me?

Submissions with too many comments for their votes receive a penalty. This is to stop flame wars.

I suppose that could make sense. It's still rather unfortunate, as this is a concerning development that could probably use some more awareness around it.

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#146

Post by opengrass »

rc-research wrote: post #28

> Visions of faceless large corporations or even HAL controlling a small town are frightening and the stuff of science fiction. Company towns are well-recorded history, not science fiction. Lost Hills California (home of Wonderful Pistachios) exists in the real, present, non-fictional world.

Water main upgrade canceled because Sandeep from Nepal voted against it.

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#147

Post by shimman »

SoftTalker wrote: post #93
Hugsbox wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which makes sense... why should anyone get a say in the local matters of a place they don't even live in?

I own property there, I pay property taxes there (at the highest "non-owner-occupied" rate), in my case I'm actively operating a business not (just) a passive investor. Why should I have zero say in how those taxes are spent, or other local governance? I'm not a disinterested bystander.

I pay sales taxes in other cities I travel in, I too should get a say in how they run their government. Money, after all, is the top virtue in a democracy; if it wasn't why did the founders ensure that slavers had equal representation?

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#148

Post by EnergyAmy »

SoftTalker wrote: post #93
Hugsbox wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which makes sense... why should anyone get a say in the local matters of a place they don't even live in?

I own property there, I pay property taxes there (at the highest "non-owner-occupied" rate), in my case I'm actively operating a business not (just) a passive investor. Why should I have zero say in how those taxes are spent, or other local governance? I'm not a disinterested bystander.

If you want a say, live there.

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#149

Post by EnergyAmy »

rayiner wrote: post #25

I don’t understand why people have so much trouble understanding that a “corporation” is just a proxy for the humans that own and control the corporation. In this case, non-residents who own a house on the island can vote according to the charter. The charter just says that this doesn’t change because you move ownership of the house into a legal entity that some human then owns and controls. The actual grievance seem…

This is an impressively awful take, congratulations.

Corporations aren't people and don't have rights or votes.

If you want to have a say in the way a place is run, you can do so in your capacity as a person.

If you want to do so from a legal fiction "proxy", fuck off.

Re: Corporations can vote in some Delaware elections, judge says

#150

Post by EnergyAmy »

Gormo wrote: post #113
esikich wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does a corporation need healthcare? Can a corporation be jailed? Does a corporation have a finite life in which they can pursue happiness? Does a corporation have offspring it's trying to raise? Does a corporation have hopes and dreams? Does a corporation wish to visit a park or visit with their neighbors? Are you for real?

Replace "corporation" in each of your questions above with "organizational model employed by people as a mechanism for coordinating complex activities", and the answers should all become clear. Much of the discourse on this topic involves muddled, contradictory thinking that simultaneously argues "corporations aren't people" and "corporations are exercising autonomous agency as singular entities distinct from the peo…

The contradiction clears up when you realize that corporations are legal fiction without rights, merely privileges granted to them.

You can act in your capacity as a person and exercise your rights, taking on personal liability.

You can act via a fictive legal proxy, which has no rights and shield yourself from some liability.

Trying to blur those two is madness.

Post reply on HN