3 ms·

So, my question is: Would we be better off with Enron still existing There are thousands -- millions? -- of innocent people who would definitely have been bet

So, my question is: Would we be better off with Enron still existing There are thousands -- millions? -- of innocent people who would definitely have been better off had Enron survived. You could be right about the long term, but you're playing pretty fast and loose with other people's money.

SwellJoe 10y ago
"you're playing pretty fast and loose with other people's money" I'd say Enron was playing fast and loose with other people's money; likewise VW was, too. Why blame me for the malfeasance of the executives at these companies, just because I think they shouldn't be allowed to do it again? The rolling blackouts Enron caused likely led to deaths (hospitals need power to keep machines and people running, refrigerators need power to prevent food-borne illnesses, etc.). It should be a really big deal when a company makes an intentional decision to harm people.
- dionidium 10y ago
  It should be a really big deal when a company makes an intentional decision to harm people. It should be a really big deal when a person makes an intentional decision to harm people and that person should be punished.
  - SwellJoe 10y ago
    I'm absolutely in agreement with you on that. So where are the criminal prosecutions? My argument is that very large corporations wield so much power, and have disbursed responsibility so widely, that no one faces any significant consequences for making these decisions. I think maybe what I haven't really made clear is that I think we (we, as in, governments, nations, communities) don't seem to be equipped with legal tools needed to prosecute people within corporations, because responsibility for actions becomes this wisp of an idea that sort of floats around inside a company but never really sticks to anyone. And, when it does stick to someone, it sticks to low-level workers; trickle-down economics for blame. My suggestion was barely thought out; an expression of frustration that companies like BP, and Shell, and VW will keep ticking after committing horrible crimes. And, more importantly perhaps, the C-levels at those companies still have jobs in those companies, in most cases. Blame trickled down, profits trickled up. The incentives remain for companies to skirt the law and put communities at risk. Maybe there's some other way to hold executives accountable. I don't think this settlement has done that.
    - dionidium 10y ago
      I regard it as a good thing that BP, and Shell, and VW (and so on) keep ticking along! People made bad decisions and should be punished. Companies cannot make decisions. Only people can. There's no point in burning down the village because the mayor's corrupt. The town still has value!

SwellJoe 10y ago

"you're playing pretty fast and loose with other people's money" I'd say Enron was playing fast and loose with other people's money; likewise VW was, too. Why blame me for the malfeasance of the executives at these companies, just because I think they shouldn't be allowed to do it again? The rolling blackouts Enron caused likely led to deaths (hospitals need power to keep machines and people running, refrigerators need power to prevent food-borne illnesses, etc.). It should be a really big deal when a company makes an intentional decision to harm people.

dionidium 10y ago
It should be a really big deal when a company makes an intentional decision to harm people. It should be a really big deal when a person makes an intentional decision to harm people and that person should be punished.
- SwellJoe 10y ago
  I'm absolutely in agreement with you on that. So where are the criminal prosecutions? My argument is that very large corporations wield so much power, and have disbursed responsibility so widely, that no one faces any significant consequences for making these decisions. I think maybe what I haven't really made clear is that I think we (we, as in, governments, nations, communities) don't seem to be equipped with legal tools needed to prosecute people within corporations, because responsibility for actions becomes this wisp of an idea that sort of floats around inside a company but never really sticks to anyone. And, when it does stick to someone, it sticks to low-level workers; trickle-down economics for blame. My suggestion was barely thought out; an expression of frustration that companies like BP, and Shell, and VW will keep ticking after committing horrible crimes. And, more importantly perhaps, the C-levels at those companies still have jobs in those companies, in most cases. Blame trickled down, profits trickled up. The incentives remain for companies to skirt the law and put communities at risk. Maybe there's some other way to hold executives accountable. I don't think this settlement has done that.
  - dionidium 10y ago
    I regard it as a good thing that BP, and Shell, and VW (and so on) keep ticking along! People made bad decisions and should be punished. Companies cannot make decisions. Only people can. There's no point in burning down the village because the mayor's corrupt. The town still has value!