3 ms·
But each actor is merely doing the actions to their maximum satisfaction within the ruleset. "scuzzy" is not factored into the equation at all.
by petermcneeley 9y ago
But each actor is merely doing the actions to their maximum satisfaction within the ruleset. "scuzzy" is not factored into the equation at all.
- noir_lord 9y agoIndeed and I'm not disagreeing but my point is that it should be. Companies don't exist in isolation, they benefit hugely by been able to operate in stable societies with defined legal systems, educated populations who are capable of buying their products, it seems fair that in return they should pay their taxes and operate in a way that society broadly considers acceptable. The problem (imo) is that we have a two tier rule system where if you get big enough fast enough you are essentially untouchable in any real sense. * Bank Bailout * HSBC laundering money for Cartels/Terroists * VW (and others) cheating emissions, lying to customers etc. The list goes on and on and they all (in real terms) get away with it because they are too big to punish. If a SME behaved that way they'd go out of business.
- Lionsion 9y ago> But each actor is merely doing the actions to their maximum satisfaction within the ruleset. "scuzzy" is not factored into the equation at all. An ethical human being or organization is supposed to factor it in themselves, whether it's listed in the "ruleset" or not. This is not a board game, real people's lives are affected.