I find this kind of frustrating. It seems like the solution to everything in the US is to run it through an LLC or Corp. I've been shocked to learn about al the benefits that are afforded to...
But there is a difference: Big property companies can keep doing business after they default and are even considered savvy for jettisoning distressed buildings. But homeowners who stopped paying their mortgages suffered a huge hit to their credit ratings and had to find somewhere else to live.
I find this kind of frustrating. It seems like the solution to everything in the US is to run it through an LLC or Corp. I've been shocked to learn about al the benefits that are afforded to companies since founding one. It's interesting that corporations have "personhood" but aren't subject to the same laws and consequences that rest of us persons are.
I absolutely agree with the sentiment in your last sentence. It bewilders me that we afford corporations the right to freedom of speech as it pertains their participation in our politics, but...
I absolutely agree with the sentiment in your last sentence. It bewilders me that we afford corporations the right to freedom of speech as it pertains their participation in our politics, but because a corporation is composed of multiple people we can diffuse away responsibility when it comes to anything else.
As someone who has a master's in American history focusing on early 20th century progressivism, I would rather not. The human rights abuses in the name of "progress" were appalling!
As someone who has a master's in American history focusing on early 20th century progressivism, I would rather not. The human rights abuses in the name of "progress" were appalling!
For example, when attempting to prevent venereal diseases, New York State passed a law saying that police could inspect women's genitals if they were suspected of being prostitutes. I'm sure that...
For example, when attempting to prevent venereal diseases, New York State passed a law saying that police could inspect women's genitals if they were suspected of being prostitutes. I'm sure that was totally not abused. This was wholeheartedly supported by the progressive movement in New York City.
I want to link a source, but don't want to doxx myself. You can go read the New York City department of health yearly reports for some great abuse of power in the name of progress. They can be found here: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/mb?a=listis;c=959075551;sz=25
The last two paragraphs are a great point to conclude the article on: People are hit hard by a change in the economy and they suffer the consequences. This is considered a personal failing -...
The last two paragraphs are a great point to conclude the article on:
Today’s handing back the keys is reminiscent of the term “jingle mail,” which became notorious after the financial crisis of 2008 when homeowners abandoned their homes — and supposedly sent their keys back to their banks — because their homes were worth far less than what they owed on the mortgage.
But there is a difference: Big property companies can keep doing business after they default and are even considered savvy for jettisoning distressed buildings. But homeowners who stopped paying their mortgages suffered a huge hit to their credit ratings and had to find somewhere else to live.
People are hit hard by a change in the economy and they suffer the consequences. This is considered a personal failing - perhaps bad financial planning (and maybe that is true) - and they have to suffer the consequences. Corporations go through the same thing, and no doubt they incur significant costs from this as well, but this isn't nearly as disastrous. Who ends up suffering in those cases? Again the working class, the lower rungs of the corporate ladder.
I'm not sure what really can be done about this, or what we should do about the office buildings. There is a time and place for on-site office work, but we could reduce the amount of time spent there and thus the amount of space.
And we shouldn't waste the labor and resources that went into these buildings. I know that there are issues when it comes to zoning for repurposing them as residential sites, but maybe that's something we should revisit. I don't want to think of it as just hiding away homeless populations so they are out of sight, but maybe converting these into shelters where there are communal spaces for mental health assistance and cognitive engagement could be one use.
I find this kind of frustrating. It seems like the solution to everything in the US is to run it through an LLC or Corp. I've been shocked to learn about al the benefits that are afforded to companies since founding one. It's interesting that corporations have "personhood" but aren't subject to the same laws and consequences that rest of us persons are.
I absolutely agree with the sentiment in your last sentence. It bewilders me that we afford corporations the right to freedom of speech as it pertains their participation in our politics, but because a corporation is composed of multiple people we can diffuse away responsibility when it comes to anything else.
Personhood was originally a citizen focussed innovation-it allowed corporations to be sued. RIP early 20th century progressivism.
As someone who has a master's in American history focusing on early 20th century progressivism, I would rather not. The human rights abuses in the name of "progress" were appalling!
I'm curious, what abuses were there in the US?
For example, when attempting to prevent venereal diseases, New York State passed a law saying that police could inspect women's genitals if they were suspected of being prostitutes. I'm sure that was totally not abused. This was wholeheartedly supported by the progressive movement in New York City.
I want to link a source, but don't want to doxx myself. You can go read the New York City department of health yearly reports for some great abuse of power in the name of progress. They can be found here: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/mb?a=listis;c=959075551;sz=25
The last two paragraphs are a great point to conclude the article on:
People are hit hard by a change in the economy and they suffer the consequences. This is considered a personal failing - perhaps bad financial planning (and maybe that is true) - and they have to suffer the consequences. Corporations go through the same thing, and no doubt they incur significant costs from this as well, but this isn't nearly as disastrous. Who ends up suffering in those cases? Again the working class, the lower rungs of the corporate ladder.
I'm not sure what really can be done about this, or what we should do about the office buildings. There is a time and place for on-site office work, but we could reduce the amount of time spent there and thus the amount of space.
And we shouldn't waste the labor and resources that went into these buildings. I know that there are issues when it comes to zoning for repurposing them as residential sites, but maybe that's something we should revisit. I don't want to think of it as just hiding away homeless populations so they are out of sight, but maybe converting these into shelters where there are communal spaces for mental health assistance and cognitive engagement could be one use.