On Monday 29 December 2008 09:50, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote: > On Sunday 28 Dec 2008 10:51:58 am Nagarjuna G. wrote: > > used by that company for the benifit of humanity. Forget about > > the latest ones. This is to demonstrate that they do not have > > minimal social committment. The argument I made is to show that > > they are not complying to ethics. > > companies exist to make money - not to comply with ethics.
Companies exist to provide a service to society. In the process they make money. Both have to be within the ambit of the law. Given that they exist to provide a service to society, they engage in external auxilary activity that raises it's standing in society and internal auxilary activity that raises it's standing amongst it's internal elements (employees, vendors etc.,). One such activity is ethical behaviour. Ofcourse there are any number of crooked companies and people whose sole ethic is to make money. M$ is one such. The disaster is all too clearly visible. It affects large swathes of society. including very many who actively shun products and services of such companies. -- Rgds JTD -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
