>One thing I always wonder about the corporate personhood, is, wouldn't it be
>better to expand it in a totally literal-minded way. (I know, you would have
>to abolish limited liability - I don't know how to do that, of course.) Say,
>if they are going to be considered people and have the rights people have,
>they should have the responsibilities people have. Thus, say, OK
>corporations are people, so, when they commit crimes, the board, CEO and all
>of upper management have to do jail time. They cause someone's death, they
>get life sentences.
But the directors and the staff are not the corporation, so that is inappropriate. A corporation is not its personel, but its balance sheet.
What would be appropriate therefor is for the corporations balance sheet to do jail time, with hard labour, in the sense that the wealth of the corporation would lose its liberty for the appropriate term. The corporation could be taken over by a state-appointed administrator and its profits diverted to the state.
The advantage of a short term of imprisonment for a corporation is that it really could be reformed, that is its criminally minded management could be replaced. Or it could be simply worked to death, asset-stripped, before being returned to its shareholders at the end of the prison term.
> Three strikes in California, we throw away the key. Etc.
Life imprisonment for a corporation might be a very long time indeed. It amounts to confiscation of assets. A sentence of 500 years seems a bit ridiculous for a mortal natural person, but for a corporation there could be truth in sentencing.
The death penalty, involuntary liquidation, for corporate persons might also be appropriate. In some situations.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas