Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
20 Dec 2020, 6:28 pm
goldfish21 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
Why is any of this a surprise or revelation?
Corporations have one objective: Making profits. In fact, they’re legally obligated to make as much profit as they can - which makes the decisions of their boards of directors very predictable.
They’re in the business of making money, not enhancing their employees’ wealth & lives.
Corporations have one objective: Making profits. In fact, they’re legally obligated to make as much profit as they can - which makes the decisions of their boards of directors very predictable.
They’re in the business of making money, not enhancing their employees’ wealth & lives.
Though by providing good enough wages to guarantee dispensable income, as well as medical coverage that provides security from financial ruin, those companies would be providing a means for working people to buy even more products and keep the engines of capitalism chugging forward. In other words, it's an investment for the future by employers.
Why would company A give a s**t if their employees had money to buy stuff from company B, C, or D?
That doesn’t make them profits nor increase shareholder value.
So that employees can spend more money, thus making more companies richer, and in the end the stock holders richer.
Bradleigh
Veteran
Joined: 25 May 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,669
Location: Brisbane, Australia
20 Dec 2020, 6:48 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Why would company A give a s**t if their employees had money to buy stuff from company B, C, or D?
That doesn’t make them profits nor increase shareholder value.
That doesn’t make them profits nor increase shareholder value.
So that employees can spend more money, thus making more companies richer, and in the end the stock holders richer.[/quote]
That is the theory behind how the system works, not how in practice the capitalist mindset encourages selfishness. Where someone like a CEO could actually get in trouble from their shareholders if they did something that would help other companies and not make money for their shareholders who are putting trust into the CEO to make the most of their investment.
As an example, a business can replace local employees by cheaper offshore workers, and as long as it saved money to them it would be considered the right choice.
Although I am also one who thinks that accounting systems can help account for benefits other than money, which can mean improvement to the environment and happiness for local areas. That does not mean I know it is not inherently that way.
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
20 Dec 2020, 7:05 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
Why is any of this a surprise or revelation?
Corporations have one objective: Making profits. In fact, they’re legally obligated to make as much profit as they can - which makes the decisions of their boards of directors very predictable.
They’re in the business of making money, not enhancing their employees’ wealth & lives.
Corporations have one objective: Making profits. In fact, they’re legally obligated to make as much profit as they can - which makes the decisions of their boards of directors very predictable.
They’re in the business of making money, not enhancing their employees’ wealth & lives.
Though by providing good enough wages to guarantee dispensable income, as well as medical coverage that provides security from financial ruin, those companies would be providing a means for working people to buy even more products and keep the engines of capitalism chugging forward. In other words, it's an investment for the future by employers.
Why would company A give a s**t if their employees had money to buy stuff from company B, C, or D?
That doesn’t make them profits nor increase shareholder value.
So that employees can spend more money, thus making more companies richer, and in the end the stock holders richer.
Businesses aren’t in the business of increasing revenues & profits for other businesses. They are Only looking out for their Own bottom line - that’s it, that’s all. This is not complicated stuff here.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
20 Dec 2020, 7:10 pm
goldfish21 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
Why is any of this a surprise or revelation?
Corporations have one objective: Making profits. In fact, they’re legally obligated to make as much profit as they can - which makes the decisions of their boards of directors very predictable.
They’re in the business of making money, not enhancing their employees’ wealth & lives.
Corporations have one objective: Making profits. In fact, they’re legally obligated to make as much profit as they can - which makes the decisions of their boards of directors very predictable.
They’re in the business of making money, not enhancing their employees’ wealth & lives.
Though by providing good enough wages to guarantee dispensable income, as well as medical coverage that provides security from financial ruin, those companies would be providing a means for working people to buy even more products and keep the engines of capitalism chugging forward. In other words, it's an investment for the future by employers.
Why would company A give a s**t if their employees had money to buy stuff from company B, C, or D?
That doesn’t make them profits nor increase shareholder value.
So that employees can spend more money, thus making more companies richer, and in the end the stock holders richer.
Businesses aren’t in the business of increasing revenues & profits for other businesses. They are Only looking out for their Own bottom line - that’s it, that’s all. This is not complicated stuff here.
Yes, and selfishness can prove to be self-destructive. When the proverbial feces finally hits the fan, not only will they have only themselves to blame, but the rest of us will have them to blame, too. That's when it'll be lynching time.
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
20 Dec 2020, 7:13 pm
And yet, based on the numbers, you are wrong. They have record amounts of cash because people keep giving them their money despite any corporate citizen shortcomings they may have.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.20 Dec 2020, 7:19 pm
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
20 Dec 2020, 7:47 pm
