4 ms·

Why do you attribute the bad things to people/entities who have nothing to do with them? The corporations making profit paid taxes on that profit - taxes that y

Why do you attribute the bad things to people/entities who have nothing to do with them? The corporations making profit paid taxes on that profit - taxes that your government could've used to do something about the bad stuff. Corporations are not here to solve world hunger or climate change, that's what governments are for - and governments won't exist nor function without profitable corporations and otherwise healthy economy.

mdp2021 4y ago
Not really - externalities remain a personal responsibility (including the "sheerly juridical person").
- emteycz 4y ago
  What externalities? Whose personal responsibility? What is a programmer from Microsoft personally responsible for?
  - mdp2021 4y ago
    You mention «the bad stuff»; an instance is the typical of the externalities: pollution. The polluter, "juridical person", is responsible for it. «Paying taxes» in general to allow "having somebody else fix it" is not a responsibility relief - it is not the payment of a specific service. The mentioned «programmer», "person matching individual", is responsible for his actions as well - though it is not clear how such mention of the «programmer» fits the context. If with the original post you wanted to stress that "things are not as clear-cut as it seems (and it's best to refine one's views instead of prematurely embracing position and emotion)": I would surely agree - that's what I also noted in my earlier post.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> Corporations are not here to solve world hunger or climate change, that's what governments are for Corporations are creations of government, if they don't serve a public purpose they should not be permitted to exist.
- emteycz 4y ago
  They serve a public purpose - it's something people (citizens = voters) can use to shield themselves from economic bullshit ruining their lives by limiting their financial exposure. I don't really see the value in having millions of entities working on a goal such as changing the course of climate change in their own (and thus inefficient) way. I think it's much better to let these entities focus on what they do best, and then take money from them, and use it to further these goals in a much more optimal way.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > it's something people (citizens = voters) can use to shield themselves from economic bullshit ruining their lives by limiting their financial exposure. That “financial bullshit” is specifically “liability for unlawful harms to other people caused by actions undertaken for the benefit of those granted the special protection”. If the laws providing liability are bullshit, they ought to be eliminated.
    - emteycz 4y ago
      That's not the bullshit I was speaking of. :-)

mdp2021 4y ago

Not really - externalities remain a personal responsibility (including the "sheerly juridical person").

emteycz 4y ago
What externalities? Whose personal responsibility? What is a programmer from Microsoft personally responsible for?
- mdp2021 4y ago
  You mention «the bad stuff»; an instance is the typical of the externalities: pollution. The polluter, "juridical person", is responsible for it. «Paying taxes» in general to allow "having somebody else fix it" is not a responsibility relief - it is not the payment of a specific service. The mentioned «programmer», "person matching individual", is responsible for his actions as well - though it is not clear how such mention of the «programmer» fits the context. If with the original post you wanted to stress that "things are not as clear-cut as it seems (and it's best to refine one's views instead of prematurely embracing position and emotion)": I would surely agree - that's what I also noted in my earlier post.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> Corporations are not here to solve world hunger or climate change, that's what governments are for Corporations are creations of government, if they don't serve a public purpose they should not be permitted to exist.

emteycz 4y ago
They serve a public purpose - it's something people (citizens = voters) can use to shield themselves from economic bullshit ruining their lives by limiting their financial exposure. I don't really see the value in having millions of entities working on a goal such as changing the course of climate change in their own (and thus inefficient) way. I think it's much better to let these entities focus on what they do best, and then take money from them, and use it to further these goals in a much more optimal way.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > it's something people (citizens = voters) can use to shield themselves from economic bullshit ruining their lives by limiting their financial exposure. That “financial bullshit” is specifically “liability for unlawful harms to other people caused by actions undertaken for the benefit of those granted the special protection”. If the laws providing liability are bullshit, they ought to be eliminated.
  - emteycz 4y ago
    That's not the bullshit I was speaking of. :-)