Rant about the rights of a business.

[Max]

You're getting lost in semantics, Pedersen.

Although it IS pedantic to purposely misread what someone is trying to say (you should always be charitable and make allowances for typos and honest mistakes), Pedersen was being accurate with regards to the definition of a right. Whereas the adjective "right" has multiple meanings (such as "correct", "appropriate", "good", etc.), a "right" (noun) is an implicitly moral or legalistic term denoting something that is due to someone as a person qua person that society has an obligation to protect (even if that means violating the rights of the aggressor or "rule-breaker"). Just as a business does not OWE you free/discounted merchandise, society does not OWE you profit.

It is a misunderstanding of what rights ACTUALLY are that lead SCs to make ridiculous claims like "I have a RIGHT to sit in this coffeeshop and use your wifi all day without buying anything!" Um...no, society is not obliged to send in the swat team to defend your "right" to loiter. Nor will the police be dispatched when Burger King fails to get your order correct; you do not have the "right" to have a burger your way.

It was obvious what the poster in the OP meant, but I just wanted to point out the fact that Pedersen was kinda right.

Also, that IGA cosmetics story was hilarious!!!

[JustADude]

[A] "right" (noun) is an implicitly moral or legalistic term denoting something that is due to someone as a person qua person that society has an obligation to protect (even if that means violating the rights of the aggressor or "rule-breaker").

The definition for "right" that I have always used is more that it's something that a person is allowed to pursue without undue interference. The enforcement of someone's rights is the removal of that undue interference, not making sure the right is exercised to it's fullest. That is something that should be left to the individual skill and motivation of the person.

By that definition, a business does have the RIGHT to make a profit. If they aren't fully exercising that right through nobody's fault but their own, then that's just too bad.

[ArtDent99]

Whatever the market will bear....

If I am unable/unwilling to do something, it is reasonable for someone else to charge me to do it (sometimes it bites, ie. dental or medical), but it is capitalism.

Same goes for me. If I can help you, why should I not get paid for it? (Payment can be in cash, karma, or whatever I choose)

[Rahmota]

Um actually a companny does NOT have a RIGHT to do anything. They have no rights whatsoever as they are not people. Only people have rights as that is something that is inerherently a part of being a living breathing sentient person, that is also granted and recognized by the constitution of the united states of america.

What a company does have is legally recognized PRIVILEDGES. They have the priviledge to operate. They have the priviledge to set prices for their goods and services and they have the priviledge of making a profit. Those priviledges can and should be tightly controlled and revoked when the business exceeds their power, authority or the laws.

Pederson was not arguing semantics as this is an important issue to recognize. Otherwise companies could and would be able to get away with all kinds of abuses like price fixing, monopolies and such worse than they already do.

Anythign further about that and I'll meet you on Fratching.

[allniter]

Another right is the right to refuse service to anyone who may be costing that business money.

Problem solved with that right.

[allniter]

He told his boss that he had discovered that there was virtually no profit margin on any of this merchandise. So he went thru all of it, changing prices to match what other store sold it for.

When the lady came back, she was horrified to see what he had done. "You can't charge more than it cost us, it's not Christian!"

So she quit, and my coworker got a promotion, a raise and a nice bonus as well as a lesson in business 101.

HAHA I love it. I'd have fired her for her attitude but oh well, at least the problem is under control now.

Both of these are New Testament. Those of you in biblical areas may want to get these printed into a plaque and put up on the wall (Your boss can't object to a bible quote, right? Right?)

Of course he can. It's not their property and so it's not their decision as to what they can put there. The boss objects but the lady claims freedom of speech. Does that mean she can yell at a good customer just because she has a bad day and doesn't feel like being nice to them. No, she has a job.

Look at it this way. If the boss wanted to put a quote up on her desk from the satanist bible, could he say freedom of speech making her forced to work behind the quote? By your logic, even if she objected and was revolted by it, she couldn't do anything about it.

Um actually a companny does NOT have a RIGHT to do anything. They have no rights whatsoever as they are not people. Only people have rights as that is something that is inerherently a part of being a living breathing sentient person, that is also granted and recognized by the constitution of the united states of america.

Actually, in a landmark Supreme court case in the 1800's, corporations WERE given the rights of a person, making them harder to go up against in court.

http://www.ecologycenter.org/tfs/lesson.php?id=13480

*MOD EDIT - Posts merged. Pleas use multi-quote, rather than make several posts in a row.

[Rahmota]

I know and that was a sad and evil day in american history. But even with that case it was not a granting of rights. It was a recognition and granting of special priviledges. Rights cannot be granted they can only be recognized.

[Gurndigarn]

Want it for free? Call Habitat for Humanity.

FWIW, HfH doesn't give away their stuff. You want a house? First you help build houses for a bunch of other people. Then, after that, you still pay for the materials used to build your own house.

Best assistance program out there. They also build houses very well— their building standards are a lot more stringent than essentially all for-profit companies adhere to.

[Max]

Anythign further about that and I'll meet you on Fratching.

Agreed.




I know this is totally off topic, but I just wanted to say that I am always so impressed by how civilized debates are on this board. I've seen some really argumentative and petty message boards in my time, but this one is comprised of extremely courteous and sympathetic people and is very well moderated. I know manners shouldn't shock me, but I guess I've become pretty jaded. Anyways, I just wanted to mention that!

[Auto]

The definition for "right" that I have always used is more that it's something that a person is allowed to pursue without undue interference. The enforcement of someone's rights is the removal of that undue interference, not making sure the right is exercised to it's fullest. That is something that should be left to the individual skill and motivation of the person.

By that definition, a business does have the RIGHT to make a profit. If they aren't fully exercising that right through nobody's fault but their own, then that's just too bad.

JustADude nailed it.

I couldn't agree more.

The rights we're talking here have nothing to do with legal, civil, or constitutional rights.

Just the right to go about your business without others interfering who have no compelling interest to justify their interfering.

Which is sometimes also called our right to privacy.

[Seshat]

Of course he can.

You're taking me far more literally than I intended, and without the cultural background I meant to imply.

I meant my words to be read while the reader bore in mind the story of the woman saying 'it's not Christian to charge more than it costs us'.

With that in mind, and also bearing in mind the extremely Christian culture of some parts of the USA, I provided some biblical quotes which indicate that yes, it is in fact Christian to pay a labourer a fair wage for his/her work.

And then, still bearing in mind the extremely Christian culture (which I did refer to in my post), I intended to suggest it was highly unlikely for a boss, in that cultural atmosphere, to object to a Bible quote being posted on the wall.

Taking the phrase 'The boss can't object to that, can he?' literally and out of that contextual mileau, it's a stupid thing to say. Of course he can. Anyone can object to anything. I could object to you offering me chocolate ice cream served with fudge brownies.

But I intended the phrase to be read with that whole cultural context in mind. As I understand that culture, a manager refusing to allow a relevant bible quote to be posted in their business is at risk of social censure, if not outright ostracism.

Should he be? Probably not. Is that fair, especially in light of the fact that other religions don't enjoy the same privilege? Probably not. Is it a fact of life? If I understand the culture correctly: yes, it is.

[JustaCashier]

I know this is totally off topic, but I just wanted to say that I am always so impressed by how civilized debates are on this board. I've seen some really argumentative and petty message boards in my time, but this one is comprised of extremely courteous and sympathetic people and is very well moderated.......

I agree.

I'd also be curious to somehow find out what percentage of the people that get downright nasty in message board debates are also SC's in real life.

Mike

[DarthRetard]

Which is sometimes also called our right to privacy.

Just thought I'd point out that not even in the UN Charter, unless I've msised something, nor our constitution, is there a defined right to privacy.

I guess it all falls under, I believe what is it, the fourteenth amendment? (correct me if I'm wrong, it's been a year or so since high school debate. )

Nonetheless, privacy is a privilege, not a right. It should be though, and for the most part, it's treated like one.

Just to throw this out there and have a little fun with this, let's take this into a different economic world. Say we're in a socialist-communist nation. How many rights/privileges does a business get then?

[Rahmota]

Sung to a show tune... (Because everybody likes show tunes dont they?)

HEY! Come on down to that little place,
Where ugly contentious stuff will show its face.
That wonderful land
Where you can discuss the stuff from here thats banned
LIke politics, and religion and rights and wrongs and stuff like that.

Come on down to FRAAAAATTTCHINnnnnggg!

http://www.fratching.com

Brought to you by the committiee to introduce showtunes into random conversations whenever possible...

Oh and By the way I can see at least 4 different fratching threads in this one thread right here.
1: Rights of a Business
2: What is a Right
3: Corporations have rights as people Yes or No!
4: Right? to Privacy.

[DarthRetard]

Oh, i wasn't trying to debate what defines a right and what right's we should have.

I merely was pointing out that the almighty UN never mentioned a right to privacy, cause it seems to be a little known factoid, that's all.