3 ms·

It doesn't have to be the shareholders responsibility to tell directors that, the directors can even just assume that - as they should. Big companies don't all

by vetler 12y ago

It doesn't have to be the shareholders responsibility to tell directors that, the directors can even just assume that - as they should. Big companies don't all set out to ruin the world just to make money, and I'm not saying that is your opinion, but I get the feeling that this is sometimes implied when discussing how to maximize profits. Companies even donate money to charity, without any concern for short term profits.

pizza234 12y ago
> Companies even donate money to charity, without any concern for short term profits. "Donating money" is not an indicator of "morality" at all, because it has tax and PR advantages. It's not about doing or not doing it, but they fact that business are complex, and this specific choice doesn't tell anything in general. Even a, let's say, a fictional company "Momsanto", which corrupts politicians and violently silences researchers and farmers, surely would have a (again, fictional) foundation for "making difference in someone else's life" [any resemblance to real companies is purely coincidental].
- ptaipale 12y ago
  > "Donating money" is not an indicator of "morality" at all, because it has tax and PR advantages. Do you imply that tax and PR advantages completely make it impossible that some companies still might want to give money away to good causes for moral reasons? In other words, you think that moral choices are solely based on money?
TeMPOraL 12y ago
Big companies don't all set out to ruin the world just to make money, but companies don't set business practices, Moloch does[0]. Those that don't sufficiently optimize for profit get replaced by ones that do, so in the end you have a drive towards ruining the world. [0] - http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/

3 ms·

It doesn't have to be the shareholders responsibility to tell directors that, the directors can even just assume that - as they should. Big companies don't all

by vetler 12y ago

pizza234 12y ago
> Companies even donate money to charity, without any concern for short term profits. "Donating money" is not an indicator of "morality" at all, because it has tax and PR advantages. It's not about doing or not doing it, but they fact that business are complex, and this specific choice doesn't tell anything in general. Even a, let's say, a fictional company "Momsanto", which corrupts politicians and violently silences researchers and farmers, surely would have a (again, fictional) foundation for "making difference in someone else's life" [any resemblance to real companies is purely coincidental].
- ptaipale 12y ago
  > "Donating money" is not an indicator of "morality" at all, because it has tax and PR advantages. Do you imply that tax and PR advantages completely make it impossible that some companies still might want to give money away to good causes for moral reasons? In other words, you think that moral choices are solely based on money?
TeMPOraL 12y ago
Big companies don't all set out to ruin the world just to make money, but companies don't set business practices, Moloch does[0]. Those that don't sufficiently optimize for profit get replaced by ones that do, so in the end you have a drive towards ruining the world. [0] - http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/