5 ms·

Exactly. This where I disagree with the left camp when they paint corporations as evil. No, big companies are not inherently evil. They played by the rules that

Exactly. This where I disagree with the left camp when they paint corporations as evil. No, big companies are not inherently evil. They played by the rules that, you, in congress laid out. It is foolish to expect a profit driven entity to do things out of the goodness of their heart when their competitors are utilizing the rules available to them. It like saying a football team is evil because they are physically tackling their opponents.

nabla9 6y ago
Both left and right populism personalizes things. Traditional leftist position is that evil is structural, class etc. People are people. Changing structures fixes problems. Traditional right position is that structures don't matter, less the better. People are mainly poor because they are lazy. Corporations are evil because they have bad people in them. Remove those people and you fix things.
multiplegeorges 6y ago
I think most people see acting entirely and solely in the pursuit of maximizing profits as evil and they use "corporations are evil" as a shorthand for that. That evil behaviour from corporations is largely due to the focus on maximizing shareholder value to the exclusion of all else. That's a fairly recent way of running a business that came about around 1970, primarily from Milton Friedman. I think most people expect a company to work towards healthy profits, while also taking into account all stakeholders, not just shareholders, their business interacts with. You're right in the sense that the rules are the way they are, so corporations act within those rules. However, those rules were largely put in place to make it easier to pursue the maximization of profits and were pushed by corporate lobbying. So, if an entity wants to act in an evil way, but is constrained by rules, then gets those rules changed so it can act evilly with impunity, surely that entity should be seen as evil?
- riantogo 6y ago
  I think we are both saying the same thing. The problem is creating a weak set of rules (you can pay employees less, you can fire at will, you can circumvent taxes, you can pollute etc.), and then expecting one company to do more when their competitors don't while both are competing in the same race. I think congress has failed the people and hide behind, "look at that evil corp". Heck, Zuckerberg is pleading congress to pass strict privacy laws and Amazon is pushing for higher min wages. The reason is that it will level the field and they don't have alone play by a different set of rules and see users go to competitors.
  - adamcstephens 6y ago
    Zuckerberg wants Congress to pass privacy laws only because that may preempt state level laws. If the states do it, there will be a mix of laws, some of which will inevitably hurt Facebook. This is a common tactic and is made easier by the easy money in DC.
    - riantogo 6y ago
      Sure. But it is also the right thing to do. Online privacy laws is best at federal level (not state and county levels).
      - brigandish 6y ago
        Why? I see no inherent reason why this is so.
adamcstephens 6y ago
The “left” made laws, then the “right” weakened them and stopped enforcing them. Corporations are not even playing by the laws on the books now, especially the antitrust laws. What’s missing is the will to hold companies accountable for breaking the laws that are destroying competition.
- riantogo 6y ago
  Right. What you are saying is that govt is being ineffective in making and enforcing laws. They should maybe focus on fixing that and less on "evil mega corp" narrative to gain cheap political points.
ElFitz 6y ago
There are also numerous examples of companies blatantly and knowingly ignoring the rules or lobbying to have them bent to their wants. Or both.
orthecreedence 6y ago
> It is foolish to expect a profit driven entity Yeah, this is the actual problem the left has: profit-driven entities. Nobody cares about groups of people working towards a common goal (ie, "corporations"). Of course profit-driven entities want to increase their profits at all costs. What's desired is systemic change and reorganization of production around different principles beyond just profit (or rather, eliminating it entirely). No leftists have a problem with companies themselves.
abraxas 6y ago
> No, big companies are not inherently evil. No they aren't. They are mostly amoral. Meaning they aren't inherently moral or immoral. They just act in accordance with their main directive which is to make the largest possible profit while keeping with the letter of the law (mostly). However, what the left emphasizes and the right often forgets is that they (corporations) aren't just reacting to pressures from the competitors, the public and the law makers. They also exert enormous pressure in all these spheres in the direction that benefits them. Not too rarely to the detriment of the public at large. That's when they can and do sometimes turn evil.

nabla9 6y ago

Both left and right populism personalizes things. Traditional leftist position is that evil is structural, class etc. People are people. Changing structures fixes problems. Traditional right position is that structures don't matter, less the better. People are mainly poor because they are lazy. Corporations are evil because they have bad people in them. Remove those people and you fix things.

multiplegeorges 6y ago

I think most people see acting entirely and solely in the pursuit of maximizing profits as evil and they use "corporations are evil" as a shorthand for that. That evil behaviour from corporations is largely due to the focus on maximizing shareholder value to the exclusion of all else. That's a fairly recent way of running a business that came about around 1970, primarily from Milton Friedman. I think most people expect a company to work towards healthy profits, while also taking into account all stakeholders, not just shareholders, their business interacts with. You're right in the sense that the rules are the way they are, so corporations act within those rules. However, those rules were largely put in place to make it easier to pursue the maximization of profits and were pushed by corporate lobbying. So, if an entity wants to act in an evil way, but is constrained by rules, then gets those rules changed so it can act evilly with impunity, surely that entity should be seen as evil?

riantogo 6y ago
I think we are both saying the same thing. The problem is creating a weak set of rules (you can pay employees less, you can fire at will, you can circumvent taxes, you can pollute etc.), and then expecting one company to do more when their competitors don't while both are competing in the same race. I think congress has failed the people and hide behind, "look at that evil corp". Heck, Zuckerberg is pleading congress to pass strict privacy laws and Amazon is pushing for higher min wages. The reason is that it will level the field and they don't have alone play by a different set of rules and see users go to competitors.
- adamcstephens 6y ago
  Zuckerberg wants Congress to pass privacy laws only because that may preempt state level laws. If the states do it, there will be a mix of laws, some of which will inevitably hurt Facebook. This is a common tactic and is made easier by the easy money in DC.
  - riantogo 6y ago
    Sure. But it is also the right thing to do. Online privacy laws is best at federal level (not state and county levels).
    - brigandish 6y ago
      Why? I see no inherent reason why this is so.

adamcstephens 6y ago

The “left” made laws, then the “right” weakened them and stopped enforcing them. Corporations are not even playing by the laws on the books now, especially the antitrust laws. What’s missing is the will to hold companies accountable for breaking the laws that are destroying competition.

riantogo 6y ago
Right. What you are saying is that govt is being ineffective in making and enforcing laws. They should maybe focus on fixing that and less on "evil mega corp" narrative to gain cheap political points.

ElFitz 6y ago

There are also numerous examples of companies blatantly and knowingly ignoring the rules or lobbying to have them bent to their wants. Or both.

orthecreedence 6y ago

> It is foolish to expect a profit driven entity Yeah, this is the actual problem the left has: profit-driven entities. Nobody cares about groups of people working towards a common goal (ie, "corporations"). Of course profit-driven entities want to increase their profits at all costs. What's desired is systemic change and reorganization of production around different principles beyond just profit (or rather, eliminating it entirely). No leftists have a problem with companies themselves.

abraxas 6y ago

> No, big companies are not inherently evil. No they aren't. They are mostly amoral. Meaning they aren't inherently moral or immoral. They just act in accordance with their main directive which is to make the largest possible profit while keeping with the letter of the law (mostly). However, what the left emphasizes and the right often forgets is that they (corporations) aren't just reacting to pressures from the competitors, the public and the law makers. They also exert enormous pressure in all these spheres in the direction that benefits them. Not too rarely to the detriment of the public at large. That's when they can and do sometimes turn evil.