3 ms·
I’m pretty sure that if you need some stock to grow in order to support your children, then your influence on a public company is virtually irrelevant.
by bbzealot 4y ago
I’m pretty sure that if you need some stock to grow in order to support your children, then your influence on a public company is virtually irrelevant.
- s1artibartfast 4y agoYou have a good point on my individual control of a public company is quite small. Luckily, basically every single other stockholder has the same reason for owning the stock as me- making money. There is basically no risk that a different group of stockholders with more voting power want to run it as a public works jobs program
- bbzealot 4y agoYet the fact that shareholders want to get richer doesn’t mean that laying off people when a company is drowning in money is ethically right.
- s1artibartfast 4y agoIf you want to look at it simply in terms of ethics, I'm not sure layoffs are always unethical, even if the company is profitable. I do think it is unethical to jerk people around (e.g. new hires), but I think generous severance goes a long way towards addressing this.