4 ms·

This is a personal donation Cook made in Apple's benefit in the role of CEO. He would not do this if he was not Apple CEO. You can see the same in elections in

by nabla9 2y ago

This is a personal donation Cook made in Apple's benefit in the role of CEO. He would not do this if he was not Apple CEO. You can see the same in elections in the US and other countries. People in lobby groups and their lawyers give large public donations to candidates in behalf of their clients. Donation buys access. This established way to do business.

latexr 2y ago
Yes, I agree with all of that. My points still stand: 1. You can’t claim a donation of personal money is a responsibility to shareholders. Shareholders don’t control your personal life. 2. More importantly, fiduciary responsibility to shareholders is a bullshit reason whose only purpose is to justify unethical behaviour. If you go against your values because of money, they’re not your values. 3. Tim Cook likes to claim he fights the good fight. He’s an influential and powerful person whose actions can influence the lives of millions of people, so what he says should be compared to what he does.
- nabla9 2y ago
  1. Is any person any less morally responsible for their decision when they work for the company or when they work as individuals. My answer is no. There is only legal and company branding decision, not moral ones. 2. Should companies and actions of their executives be treated as amoral (not having moral factor in their decision) or moral as a starting point. I think amoral. 3. Does anyone think that value statements from companies convey actual intentions? If not, why to always treat as PR and not talking points.
  - latexr 2y ago
    While I think you’re engaging in good faith, I don’t think we’re talking about the same thing and haven’t been from the start. I don’t think continuing this point is a good use of the remainder of any of our Sunday’s, so I’ll just wish you a good one wherever you are.
archagon 2y ago
If so, this is very much against Apple’s business conduct policy.

by nabla9 2y ago

latexr 2y ago

Yes, I agree with all of that. My points still stand: 1. You can’t claim a donation of personal money is a responsibility to shareholders. Shareholders don’t control your personal life. 2. More importantly, fiduciary responsibility to shareholders is a bullshit reason whose only purpose is to justify unethical behaviour. If you go against your values because of money, they’re not your values. 3. Tim Cook likes to claim he fights the good fight. He’s an influential and powerful person whose actions can influence the lives of millions of people, so what he says should be compared to what he does.

nabla9 2y ago
1. Is any person any less morally responsible for their decision when they work for the company or when they work as individuals. My answer is no. There is only legal and company branding decision, not moral ones. 2. Should companies and actions of their executives be treated as amoral (not having moral factor in their decision) or moral as a starting point. I think amoral. 3. Does anyone think that value statements from companies convey actual intentions? If not, why to always treat as PR and not talking points.
- latexr 2y ago
  While I think you’re engaging in good faith, I don’t think we’re talking about the same thing and haven’t been from the start. I don’t think continuing this point is a good use of the remainder of any of our Sunday’s, so I’ll just wish you a good one wherever you are.

archagon 2y ago

If so, this is very much against Apple’s business conduct policy.