[dwallin]

Just because a behavior may end up profitable for its owners doesn’t mean we should be just accepting it as a society.

Also viewing a company as just a collection of assets owned by capital can be somewhat limiting. Companies are generally made up of human employees, and many schools of thought treat employees as one of several stakeholders in a company and assign various rights to them and various responsibilities to the company for them.

Looking at it this way, the “owner” of a company can easily be described as looting the company if they are destroying a lot of value in the company for marginal benefit for themselves.

[chii]

> we should be just accepting it as a society.

This problem is solved using the court system, and then legislation system. Things which _should_ be unacceptable needs to be made illegal. And over time, this has indeed been the case. Things like environmental regulations etc are the examples.

> various responsibilities to the company for them

i think the employees are reading too much into this responsibility, because the only responsibility the company has for the employees are the legals ones: such as OSHA, timely payment of wages, safety from harassment etc.

Longevity of the job, social responsibilities (such as improving the community etc), are all secondary to the financial success for the shareholders.

[adwn]

> Longevity of the job, social responsibilities (such as improving the community etc), are all secondary to the financial success for the shareholders.

I think you're describing the way things are, while dwalling is talking about how things ought to be. There's no law of nature saying that companies can't or shouldn't behave socially responsibly.

Edit: I'm not advocating for socialism, not at all. There's a wide spectrum between pure laissez-faire capitalism and nationalization of all private property.

[katbyte]

companies behaving badly is bad for society as a whole, so allowing the "owners" ie shareholders to make a quick short term buck at the cost of employees or a local factory that supports the town because "it doesn't make ENOUGH" money chips away at society and drags down the country all so a couple people can make a quick buck destroying 1000s or 10,000s of lives and/or entire towns.

putting financial success for the shareholders above all is the reason for so many things wrong right now,

[ChatGTP]

Just because a behavior may end up profitable for its owners doesn’t mean we should be just accepting it as a society

I 100% agree with you, but isn’t this how capitalism works?

I do notice similar sentiments to use more frequently on HN lately. Feels like people are actually aware there are problems now but unsure what’s to be done?

[polygamous_bat]

Random thought, but perhaps trying to enshrine "customer or consumer rights" and "employee rights" as seriously as "shareholder rights" would be a good step.

[TheOtherHobbes]

What we have now is quite literally economic apartheid. Poor people are not allowed into the same spaces, not given the same legal and ethical privileges, denied adequate education and healthcare, increasingly barred from owning property (because "markets")... among many other challenges.

The model is that you can buy your way out of this slavery if you're talented (ruthless) and well-connected enough.

Otherwise you die, and no one - at least no one who matters - cares.

[Rooki]

> but unsure what’s to be done?

Can feel Lenin spinning in his tomb from here.

[b800h]

Ah yes, Communism! So successful at delivering productive happy societies that they needed walls around their countries to keep people in. Great idea.

[Rooki]

Sorry, was a 1/2 hearted attempt at a joke about his pamphlet titled "What is to be done?", similar to the wording used in parents comment. No need to alert the inquisition here just yet.

[selimthegrim]

Probably Chernyshevsky can spin a bit better, Lenin seems a bit tied down.

[b800h]

Apologies, I'm afraid that one was lost on me!

[CapstanRoller]

Capitalism! So successful at delivering productive happy societies that they need to stage coups worldwide to keep people from attempting to try alternatives and fund death squads to secure profits. Great idea.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_Massacre

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contras

[b800h]

Stronger national cultural and industrial policies.