Quote:
Originally Posted by Berean
You kept saying that because the board appointees weren't government employees, then the government therefore couldn't possibly control the company.
That argument doesn't follow any logic, so it can't be "disproven". That's a straw man.
Anyway, the point is, the government did appoint the board, and as a result, I think the administration controls the company. Anyone can be a political puppet, they don't have to come from government.
If you feel otherwise, fine, but I think the (few) actual facts we have, would lead an objective person to conclude that the administration is exercising some degree of control over the company.
I think a logical debate would be about the degree of control, not whether it exists.
|
QFT. All companies involved in business in the U.S. are indirectly controlled, in a sense, by governmental interference. The extent is rather its complete control or control through restrictions detailed by legislation and regulations.