On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 09:19:46AM +0100, Simon Waters wrote: > > On Thursday 08 Sep 2005 3:09 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > And when the corporate executives have a legal and moral obligation to > > generate income for the stockholders (barring a stockholder's resolution > > or other similar instrument dictating otherwise), what is one to do when > > "vast profits" and "vast evil" lie in the same direction? > > Moralities aren't black and white, generating profits falls behind other > legal > and moral obligations that apply to everyone.
Except, they don't in the United States corporations have a legal obligation to put profits above all else. They are legally forbidden to put morality above profit. These laws are severyly in need of some adjustments. > > Even Google, with it's "Don't Be Evil" policy > > Any influence Google's "Don't be Evil" policy had vanished the day it was > floated AFAICT. > > Where profits are put before morals that is called greed. Sure the No, that is following the law. > stockmarkets allow people to put greedy people in charge of their money, but > be aware what goes around, comes around. > > HG Wells referred to people investing in the stockmarket as a purely > financial > endevour for short term profits as "the irresponsibly wealthy" as far back as > 1902. Plus ça change. Michael
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
