You might want to read more about corporate personhood. It doesn’t mean that the corporation is considered by the law to be a person, or that whoever or whatever performs the duties of the CEO is by definition a person. It means that a corporation, despite not being a person, has certain rights usually associated with people. For example, a person can own property or be sued. A cat cannot own property or be sued. A corporation is like a person rather than a cat in that it can also own property or be sued. There’s debate about exactly which rights should be granted to corporations, but the idea that a corporation has at least some minimal set of rights is centuries old and an essential part of the very definition of what a corporation is.

You’re mixing up corporate personhood and the CEO’s own personhood. He isn’t the corporation. Ultimately, he’s just an employee. There’s no good reason for the board of directors to pay him if a machine can do a better job while costing less. I’m not sure why you might think that wouldn’t happen.

They’re small but they actually have a pretty good reputation.

Do you imagine that the Russian people could possibly change their situation by voting?

The Pope isn’t a good role model if you want to reduce the “continuously wider gap between the income levels of the working class and the money that the wealthiest receive”. I’m not saying he shouldn’t live in splendor - I think that the Catholics get to run their organization however they want. But so do Tesla investors…

I’m not sure why Chase is getting dragged into this. I haven’t read anything claiming that there were financial crimes going on.

Hmm, it’s probably several of those things at once. The last time it happened was after I ate a bunch of pancakes for lunch while having a stressful day and not sleeping very well.

Usually I feel a more normal “I’m full but I could eat more because that was tasty.” I have also felt “I haven’t eaten all day but the thought of eating disgusts me,” but that was definitely a side effect of a medication I was taking at the time.

Yes. He doesn’t say “One of them.” There’s nothing wrong with “One of us” when “us” in this context is clearly “residents of Utah”.

Consistent principles aren’t going to stop a Chinese invasion, and hypocrisy won’t provoke one.

Weren’t we all hoping the same thing, that the shooter wouldn’t turn out to be a member of whatever group we identify as? I know I was.

one of them

This phrase appears to be written by the author of this article to refer to residents of Utah. It’s not part of the quote of what the governor said.

I don’t trust Trump about this, but I trust Venezuela about as much as I trust Trump.

Plenty of other people’s interests don’t align with mine either - these days, it seems like most people’s interests don’t. What makes a corporation less reliable than my fellow Americans?

Corporations are predictable - they try to make money. If their profit motive aligns with my own interests, then what they do will be good for me. Amazon, for example, sells me all sorts of things for low prices and with great customer support. My interests and corporate interests won’t necessarily align and that’s why exit rights are so important, but at least I will still be dealing with an entity acting more-or-less rationally.

I’m going to go against the trend here and say that libertarian corporate city-states actually sound pretty cool. They’re generally not portrayed positively in fiction but I think they might work well in practice. I’m a lot less optimistic about cooperating with all my fellow Americans in order to govern the whole country democratically than I used to be. Choosing to move to an independent city-state with a government that I agree with (albeit one I don’t elect) might work better.

A voice of dissent… in the New York Times? Few people who read the NYT are Republicans, and few of those Republicans are the sort that support Trump. Bernie is preaching to the choir here, and I don’t see why you assume that people who don’t preach to the choir actually don’t care.

Your options are an ugly wall that works or the beautiful lack of a wall.

I see them as protecting their dignity by not screaming into the void. Sanders isn’t accomplishing anything.

I wonder how they managed to target these guys after previous attacks, both by Israel and the USA, appeared to be largely ineffective. Was it a serendipitous opportunity or does it reflect progress on establishing an intelligence network in Yemen?