Why do so many people think the Appell Petroleum Corp is behind this? Would it make more sense if it was Apple?

I continue next day after it occurring to me that Mike is using a lawyering trick and substituting in a package deal of false premises: his wrong position is simple while a good answer is necessarily complex. But through the magic of linking, I’ll just refer to here later so my effort isn’t wasted though this thread is surely over.

It’s indeed difficult to answer “what’s the harm?” A college education should have provided Mike with historical context of WHY corporations must be regulated, that entities without souls and conscience MUST be closely watched, yet having been born into the 1% Ivy League class of corporate-owners, his view is totally biased in favor of corporations. So, like a child, Mike blithely asks a quite complex question. — And won’t listen to the answer! It’s clear he thinks there is no harm, especially not with his dear Google.

So, Mike, equally simple question tough to answer: where’s the harm in regulating Google? If not doing anything wrong, what’s to fear? — You SHOULD be able to easily answer what Google does with the data, and where Google’s income is from, before you so blithely suggest there’s no harm. Where’s your positive data up front, Mike? But of course you won’t attempt it, because ANY investigation of Google is counter to your purpose, can only increase worries.

But WE The People don’t need to show harm up front, Mike! Corporations DO NOT HAVE RIGHTS! I don’t care what our servants on the Supreme Court say, they’re wrong, been bought, and are lawyers too, famously unable to see morality, always searching for hair-splitting excuses to impose tyranny.

The People have let corporations and “Public Servants” become our masters, and we are regretting it more every day as corporatized surveillance clamps down. — But doesn’t have to continue if we reject your wimpy “what’s the harm?” and make them get back in their box. — A major problem in the world today is that so many just blindly accept that legal fictions called corporations can do anything they wish if okayed by a few lawyers whom the corporations own. Those inherently evil NON-persons are now dictating terms TO The People.

But even LAWYERS are permitted to operate only under certain conditions because inherently dangers to society! True, it’s a monopoly that lawyers wish (to better skim money and exert power), but the actual basis for licensing lawyers is compelling given the harm that they can do.

Corporations are permitted to exist for ECONOMIC purposes that society finds useful. The secret of corporatism is right out in the open with “LLC”: LIMITED LIABILITY. That means a corporation can lie, cheat, steal, torture, murder, and make a profit selling the bodies of its victims as pet food, and the ONLY sanction that can normally be imposed is loss of the money invested! It’s so much easier to make profits without morality and conscience, or being held to account for actions as a “natural” person is. That’s WHY corporations exist today: not to pool money but to escape personal responsibility FOR CRIMES.

As the banker bailout of 2008 under Bush showed, corporations are now to the point where they force The People to pay back when wild “investments” fail, or if their bets pay off, then banks keep all the profits. It’s win-win because they control the gov’t and just take what they want out of taxes. — So, Mike, where’s the harm in letting banks get into real estate? Well, in practical terms, $700 billion plus trillions more, variously. — Until the recent repeal of a law, banks in real estate was illegal (such speculation was part cause of the Great Depression), and now we’ve had to repeat history because ignorant little Ivy League “economists” have been indoctrinated to recognize nothing but corporate profits, and cheer on skimming and grifting instead of good solid production. The Rich and their corporate fronts ALWAYS turn to financial speculation when allowed to. It’s certain, because potential “profits” are far beyond what one can gain by making products and trading value for value, and they don’t care if they wreck society. — And they ALWAYS try to re-coup losses from the public treasury because “too big to fail”.

History is replete with reasons why corporations and lawyers and gov’ts MUST ALL BE LIMITED. Power is power, and a general danger to The People, even if nominally “economic” and “private”. — Everyone knows this. Just look at opinion noted right here this week: the article with 19,000 to ZERO against some sort of spying. People don’t wish to be spied on, Mike. Google is the biggest spy agency ever even if you believe it to be entirely commercial. But Google can sell that data to the gov’t, down to individual data, when it’s technically illegal for the gov’t to gather such data itself: they’ve just privatized spying. Is there any doubt that gov’t WILL buy and use such data? Not to “fight terrorism”, either, but simply to spy on and control The People.

Mike, you’re just a tricky fool to believe there’s “no harm” or that it has to be proven up front. Anyone at all educated knows how the world works, and WHY “capitalism” has to be tightly regulated or it becomes economic tyranny. — And gov’t is always interested in increase of tyranny, is just doing an end-run around the Constitution with its proxy spy agency, Google.