tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1143820766803772881.post8966747137281438709..comments2023-03-25T05:47:59.204-07:00Comments on Ruminations of a Junkie for Politics: Science and Global WarmingUncle Walthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08287229628325946260noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1143820766803772881.post-36012402657507454312011-10-06T15:24:45.951-07:002011-10-06T15:24:45.951-07:00Bill,
Emotionally I agree with you, but realistic...Bill,<br /><br />Emotionally I agree with you, but realistically we both know it isn't true.<br /><br />Corporations are shielded from most of the methods that society uses to keep people from behaving badly.<br /><br />And I disagree with your definition of a corporation.<br /><br />To me a corporation is a state regulated contract that allows people to invest in a venture that they hope will produce a profit. The investors can profit from their investment but are shielded from losses exceeding their investment. So they can win big if the corporation does well but can only lose their investment if everything goes bad. Business owners who are not protected by such a corporate structure are personally responsible for the losses suffered by their business.<br /><br />And (for profit) corporations only charter is to maximize shareholder value. Corporate Officers have a fiduciary and legal obligation to do just that.<br /><br />You get get people together in many different structures to make something someelse wants to buy, but the primacy of profit as a goal and the shielding of investors from losses are the reasons corporations exist.<br /><br />Do I think we SHOULD hold corporations criminally accountable for their actions, yes I do. But we seldom do. Wall Street crashed our economy in 2008 in the naked rush to make a bigger and bigger profit, without regard to the effects on others. So the big investment and commercial banks started selling these mortgage based securities to retirement funds touting their income potential and supposed stability. They even had the backing of the ratings agencies who wouldn't risk loosing one of those big banks as a customer by actually telling the public that the securities were actually junk.<br /><br />The banks knew they were junk. But that didn't stop them from selling them anyway.<br /><br />The naked pursuit of profit is the nature of a corporation, its their reason for existence.Uncle Walthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08287229628325946260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1143820766803772881.post-3676451039534726222011-10-06T09:27:15.606-07:002011-10-06T09:27:15.606-07:00I tend to disagree with your friend and often wond...I tend to disagree with your friend and often wondered about the Machievellian ideas of amorality. Corporations are nothing more than people and equipment assembled to create and sell product. People don't have the convenience of excusing immoral or unethical behavior under the guise of "it doesn't apply to us."<br /><br />Too often, employees behave horribly under the delusion of shareholder value and the amorality of corporations. Was Enron amoral? Hell no! Is Monsanto amoral? No. Were Madoff and Stanford amoral? Ask my friends who are out looking for work again in their 70s.<br /><br />Corporations, too must be compelled to act within the bounds of human decency. Anything else is inexcusable!Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03482138136638297435noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1143820766803772881.post-13615632856682695102011-10-06T07:07:45.545-07:002011-10-06T07:07:45.545-07:00Thanks Bill,
I think you know the answer to the q...Thanks Bill,<br /><br />I think you know the answer to the question.<br /><br />The people who have an investment in the burning of fossil fuels have lots of money to pay pet "scientists" and the tea party in order to protect their profits.<br /><br />A deeply conservative friend of mine once stated that Corporations are Amoral. And that is true. Corporations exist for the single goal of making a profit for their share holders and for no other reason. They have no concept of morality as humans would think of it because the drivers for human morality do not apply to Corporations.<br /><br />And much of Corporate America wants to deny climate change purely as a method of protecting their profits, nothing else.Uncle Walthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08287229628325946260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1143820766803772881.post-54079701421018170652011-10-06T06:11:55.737-07:002011-10-06T06:11:55.737-07:00Thanks Walt! I always felt that the climate/pollu...Thanks Walt! I always felt that the climate/pollutant issue was more of an ethical one. Humans, more than anything else, require air, water, and food to survive. Period. Plastic things, iPads, cars, and oil aren't necessary to survival - just air, water, and food. The ethical question for me was why we would jeopardize the integrity of the elements of our survival for things of convenience and profit.Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03482138136638297435noreply@blogger.com