3 ms·
#1 and #2 are basically the default. Not good news for moral character.
by pchristensen 18y ago
#1 and #2 are basically the default. Not good news for moral character.
- eru 18y agoNo. Just his argument breaks down. Not all kinds of #1 and #2 dispose creating trust (and educating your customers) as a viable strategy.
- jhancock 18y ago"educating your customers" may be possible within certain domains. But is it possible in a free market structure which must include all people? Does the definition of "transparency" also imply that all mechanisms which emerge in a free market must be "understandable" by all participants? That is, even if you fully disclose financials, but the transactions and risks are so complex the average "customer" can't or does not have time to make sense of it, is it "transparent".
- orib 18y agoVery true. You probably need some legislation to get around that. For example, taxing emissions is a step towards it, but only if that money actually is spent covering the cleanup costs of the environmental damage done by the company. Other externalities should also be charged for, of course. Besides unhiding the hidden costs, I'm not sure that more government intervention would be a good thing, but I know for a fact that I'm not qualified enough to suggest solutions.