[falcolas]

Amusing. The purpose of a company was originally exactly that: to employ people and provide services and value to the community they existed in. I mean, this is still the exact reason politicians cite when providing incentives to companies - bringing jobs to their cities/states.

I'm pretty sure I don't like this new definition; it feels like it's based on greed, not value.

[JumpCrisscross]

> purpose of a company was originally exactly that: to employ people and provide services and value to the community they existed in

This describes charities, trusts and local governments. Maybe artisans. The East India companies weren’t trying to “provide services and value” to anyone but their owners. Even going back to Roman times, civic duty and commercial interests were distinct parts of peoples’ work. You were expected to do both. But the unification of the two pursuits appears to be more modern.

[falcolas]

Shareholders are not the only stakeholders who should be considered in a company.

"The purpose of a corporation is to ... create value over the long-term, which requires consideration of the stakeholders ... (shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers, creditors and communities) ..."

https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2020/05/27/on-the-purpose-of...

[JumpCrisscross]

> Shareholders are not the only stakeholders who should be considered in a company

Sure. (Though this is far from settled.) But saying this was the "original...purpose of a company" is inaccurate.

[yowlingcat]

That's not historically accurate. Historically, the purpose of a company was to be a vehicle that a passive partner could invest capital into an enterprise providing a return on investment, such that an active partner (who did not) could manage it [1].

I do not see historical support for your claim that the purpose of a company was "to employ people and provide services and value to the community they existed in" even if that would be an ideal social outcome (and one which I'd personally prefer to see everywhere).

[1] https://news.law.fordham.edu/jcfl/2018/11/18/a-brief-history...

[falcolas]

https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2020/05/27/on-the-purpose-of...

The purpose of a corporation is to conduct a lawful, ethical, profitable and sustainable business in order to create value over the long-term, which requires consideration of the stakeholders that are critical to its success (shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers, creditors and communities) ...

https://www.aspeninstitute.org/programs/business-and-society...

Business corporations are perhaps the most influential organizations in society and have long been recognized as important contributors to the common good. Society grants corporations unique privileges in order to harness their great capacities to serve its needs.

https://www.ft.com/content/482a8435-c04c-4be8-9856-941e7ecf1...

... it would abandon shareholder primacy and redefine corporate purpose to create an economy that “serves all Americans”.

https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/the-role-of-the-corporation-in-so... :

... scholars Berle and Means (1932) predicted ... both owners and "the control" accepting public interest as the objective of the corporation.

[yowlingcat]

It's not clear how those 4 quotes are supposed to relate to each other without added interpretation. Is there something more you'd like say?

For what it's worth, I don't know if any of those sources cover broad economic trends across history. I do find them in pursuit of noble goals for the early 2020s.

But in this case, my opinion is that there's a bit of a gulf there in between "this is how I would like things to work" and "this is how things have worked today/in the past/for a long time".

[bigfudge]

The reason companies are given legal standing and privilege is because they serve a useful social function, in addition to being a legal nicety for investment. If companies don’t serve useful social purposes we can change the law to withdraw those privileges.

[yowlingcat]

That's incorrect. They are given legal standing and privilege because they serve a useful /economic/ function (tax base).

The social function is downstream from this, and it's also what creates friction to actually /change the law/ to withdraw those privileges -- you do it at the risk of hemorrhaging that tax base which funds the governing apparatus.

[bigfudge]

I think you have a narrower definition of ‘social’ function. I mean the things that are useful to society as a whole. Things we seem not helpful/useful/conducive to people leading best lives can be curtailed. Not everyone shares the view that “economic freedoms” are inalienable when they entail externalities.

[over_bridge]

Hence why every business owner boasts about being a job creator. This despite these jobs being an unwanted side effect of the actual goals of the business. Cost centres.

'Look at all these employees I resent having to spend money on and actively try to make redundant and underpay. Aren't I just great?'

[jokethrowaway]

Employment is just a necessary evil. I can't wait until I can just spawn an ai instead of hiring someone

[jimbokun]

When was this time?