4 ms·

Could you go into some detail on why it couldn't be followed by them? I know of some different arguments about why it could or couldn't, but I don't know what y

• Nasrudith 8y ago
  The answer is that publically traded companies face heavy pressure to keep sustained quarterly growth indefinitely and various "activist" investors will insist upon ousting any who stand in the way even if it is better for longterm health not to say lay off experienced engineering staff in a stable industry to inflate quarterly profits (Boeing) when it comes to bite them with electrical fires in their next big plane.
• dmead 8y ago
  Sure, but you'll have to pick your poison. Most of the time people need to eat and feed their families so they do whatever gets the quickest buck. The ethical calculus is really that simple. As humans, we have a hard time extending our concern to people we don't know and will never meet. Many (most?) companies and many boards/ceos are like this. They don't care if they're squandering modern tech for dumb or unethical reasons. They have a responsibility to the families and employees to make money and keep people fed. I guess in the end I'm just rendering judgement on capitalism. Sorry it's not more insightful than that, but i don't see how free market participants (sellers) can drive ethics at all. Someone like Rand Paul might counter that the free market will make ethical choices if fully informed, but I don't see how consumers at this stage can really be expected to be fully informed (or even act reasonably).