4 ms·
> You still have the problem of punishing diffuse guilt. Corporations are hierarchical. > however, because corporations have many stakeholders who may not de
by keybored 2y ago
> You still have the problem of punishing diffuse guilt.
Corporations are hierarchical.
> however, because corporations have many stakeholders who may not deserve punishment, e.g. employees.
Hiding behind the employees. The ones with the least stake in the company. That’s a classic.
They might have their two weeks notice. What else? “There might be no other jobs around?”
Class collaboration is a lie.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> They might have their two weeks notice. What else? “There might be no other jobs around?” "Let them eat cake" isn't a winning pitch when it's your job on the line.
- keybored 2y agoYou are trying to turn “the corporations are committing crimes” into “the peasants are starving”. I know that this is board of diverse backgrounds, but you have to be very out of touch for that hilarious reversal to be convincing.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> You are trying to turn “the corporations are committing crimes” into “the peasants are starving” No, I'm pointing out the real limitations on the types of punishments that folks--typically on the left, with good intentions but breathlessly naively--like to propose. Ignoring the board doesn't make you a smarter player. I'm then pointing out the option that works within those limitations to exact tremendous justice. The option that when it comes up, anyone in its crosshairs will immediately start pointing to hare-brained schemes like a "corporate death penalty" to get out of. Massive. Fines. (For those who prefer jail time to fines, do you really thing Bytedance's CZ would trade his 6 months in jail for the tens of billions he's personally walked away with?)