268 ms·

That's how it is most of the time but I don't see how you can say it's "supposed to" be that way. It's pathological. Essentially it's a form of group sociopat

That's how it is most of the time but I don't see how you can say it's "supposed to" be that way. It's pathological. Essentially it's a form of group sociopathy.

thedevelopnik 5y ago
[flagged]
watwut 5y ago
Supposed as per economical theory/ideology, legal expectations and also per "what kind of CEO will get the job". It is not like most of the time randomly. It is like that, because economic system is designed to work that way.
- DarylZero 5y ago
  That's a myth about legal expectations. "every state has enacted a corporate statute giving managers explicit authority to donate corporate funds for charitable purposes" https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=3271&context=vlr https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi...
  - watwut 5y ago
    Being allowed to donate to charity does not make those managers responsible for anything else then profit. (I am not necessary saying companies should run social support. I don't think so. But they are nor responsible for anything but the profit.)
- webmaven 5y ago
  > It is like that, because economic system is designed to work that way. "Designed" is probably putting it too strongly. But however you characterize the process that got it that way, people did it, and people can change it with enough effort. In fact it is constantly changing, and each of us can decide the direction we are going to push it, and how hard. "And friends, they may thinks it's a movement." — Arlo Guthrie, Alice's Restaurant Massacree
  - watwut 5y ago
    There were economists articles literally claiming this is good and pushing for reforms to that effect. Neoliberslism is literally theory that claims the companies should seek profit and only profit and then everything else will be good. They got their reforms, so yes it was designed.
    - webmaven 5y ago
      You can certainly make the case that the proposed reforms were designed, but to claim that for the economy as a whole would require that all such proposals were adopted with no changes, and that no changes to the economy that weren't in those proposals happened. The neoliberal faction certainly has had an outsized influence (funny how proposals that the 0.1% want done end up getting a lot of positive attention more often than not), but even so, the economy as a whole is the result of a lot of political compromise and dealmaking, not to mention undirected evolution.
skinkestek 5y ago
Most farms are also commercial and most of them still feed their cows and paint their barns even though in the very short abd short term it doesn't matter. Edit: Same goes for basic politeness or being customer friendly. Can be very good for the stock price long term even if it doesn't matter in this quarters result.

That's how it is most of the time but I don't see how you can say it's "supposed to" be that way. It's pathological. Essentially it's a form of group sociopathy.

thedevelopnik 5y ago

[flagged]

watwut 5y ago

Supposed as per economical theory/ideology, legal expectations and also per "what kind of CEO will get the job". It is not like most of the time randomly. It is like that, because economic system is designed to work that way.

DarylZero 5y ago
That's a myth about legal expectations. "every state has enacted a corporate statute giving managers explicit authority to donate corporate funds for charitable purposes" https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=3271&context=vlr https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi...
- watwut 5y ago
  Being allowed to donate to charity does not make those managers responsible for anything else then profit. (I am not necessary saying companies should run social support. I don't think so. But they are nor responsible for anything but the profit.)
webmaven 5y ago
> It is like that, because economic system is designed to work that way. "Designed" is probably putting it too strongly. But however you characterize the process that got it that way, people did it, and people can change it with enough effort. In fact it is constantly changing, and each of us can decide the direction we are going to push it, and how hard. "And friends, they may thinks it's a movement." — Arlo Guthrie, Alice's Restaurant Massacree
- watwut 5y ago
  There were economists articles literally claiming this is good and pushing for reforms to that effect. Neoliberslism is literally theory that claims the companies should seek profit and only profit and then everything else will be good. They got their reforms, so yes it was designed.
  - webmaven 5y ago
    You can certainly make the case that the proposed reforms were designed, but to claim that for the economy as a whole would require that all such proposals were adopted with no changes, and that no changes to the economy that weren't in those proposals happened. The neoliberal faction certainly has had an outsized influence (funny how proposals that the 0.1% want done end up getting a lot of positive attention more often than not), but even so, the economy as a whole is the result of a lot of political compromise and dealmaking, not to mention undirected evolution.

skinkestek 5y ago

Most farms are also commercial and most of them still feed their cows and paint their barns even though in the very short abd short term it doesn't matter. Edit: Same goes for basic politeness or being customer friendly. Can be very good for the stock price long term even if it doesn't matter in this quarters result.