But that's fundamentally because of the stupidity and laziness of the shareholders. It's kinda cute that you believe that, and are prepared to go to any length

But that's fundamentally because of the stupidity and laziness of the shareholders. It's kinda cute that you believe that, and are prepared to go to any length to blame immoral behavior on anyone you can find other than the people engaging in the behavior. Also, beyond the initial purchase of the stock -- which may be well before any signs of trouble -- shareholders can easily be made to have zero power; even the power to replace directors through shareholder elections can be taken away: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/13/business/sham-shareholder-democracy.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/13/business/sham-shareholder-... "My shares count more than yours", requiring an ousted director's approval of his own ousting, plurality voting which allows directors to remain even when they can't muster a majority... the list of tricks goes on and on. I am not normally the type to say this, but: in the case of corporate governance, the system is now actually rigged against shareholders. Much larger changes than just "don't buy stock in a company that will later go bad" are needed.