Isn't this now the standard Corporate Social Responsibility argument? As to whether it's all eyewash or a profit maximizing exercise or noble intentions for the greater common good?
There's an interesting Economist article [1] on how corporations are essentially psychopaths as also a documentary [2] which said article reviews. [1] http://www.economist.com/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=2647328 (It's behind a subscription wall now. I have the full text, if someone would like to read it.) [2] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379225/ On 2/1/07, Calvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ah, but they only make a profit because we, the consumers, let them, so in that sense, we are the conscience... An example that I can relate to is the classic MGB sports car - in 1974 they changed from having chrome bumpers to rubber bumpers with a higher ride height in the name of safety. This was done, not because Leyland had sprouted a conscience, but because US safety regulations required of it, and the regulations came about because the people were demanding safer cars, even if it completely destroyed the car both from a handling and performance perspective and arguably led to its, as well as MG's downfall. Granted it's not always that easy, but if the will is there, it'll get there. Neha Viswanathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > why not? Because the questions of good and bad are always subjective. As long as they don't violate anyone's rights - they are only exercising their right to make a profit. -- Neha Viswanathan +44(0) 77695 65886 London, UK http://withinandwithout.com | http://globalvoicesonline.org --------------------------------- Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
