|
|
|
|
|
by al3xnull
3190 days ago
|
|
I don't think he was saying it's sole importance was employment. If you had read the sentence in a more critical manner, the purpose of the corporation is to generate value. They can't provide employment to citizens, tax money for the government, or help in charity work without generating monetary value for it's products or services. The New Deal(s) did not really do the above. Although it really provided value in the form of infrastructure as well as employment to citizens it had to take money from people as well as borrow large amounts to do it. Hating on corporations and trading them for the government as a pseudo-corporation is just as bad. Sounds like a comment dripping with naivety from a college history class as if it's a final 'gotchya' against someone who is looking at the situation from all avenues. |
|
There are definitely corporations that provide employment, tax money, and/or charity work without generating monetary value (how long until Facebook actually sold anything?). But you're larger point is correct; those companies either don't last, or don't stay in that state.
The entire point of the New Deal was to provide employment first and foremost (then, why not do something possibly useful with those employees? Hence the infrastructure.)
> take money from people as well as borrow large amounts to do it.
How is this different from any other corporation? Every company I interact with - including the ones I don't pay - takes value from me; and most (if not all) have taken loans and/or investment. Usually it is money, and I get back something; but it's not like I gave Equifax my personal info [from which the took monetary value].
While yes, taxes ARE categorically different than prices (and bonds are different than stocks), you can still definitely adopt the perspective that they're how you pay for all the civilization supplied by the society you're a part of. And if you don't want to pay for those things, there's still ways to stop; and you don't even have to give up all the things you're getting for the price you're no longer paying.
I'm not hating on corporations. I'm saying that I would expect a corporation whose primary purpose is employment of people to do a poor overall job of adding value to society; at least compared to corporations with goals of delivering products or services.
It's not a question of "does this not produce value", it's a question of which kind of value is most produced.
...And I'm probably wrong anyway, because that's basically what temp agencies do.
Overall, your reply sounds like a comment arguing with an imaginary person you disagree with as if your imagined reality resembles the real thing. Try starting with a question next time, it'll help you figure out if what you think is going is actually what's going on.