Jump to content

This morning I rushed downstairs to look at the headlines.......

Rate this topic


Paul_M

Recommended Posts

View PostThat's not true.

Some entity has to "intervene" when transgressions against the public occur.

Business won't police itself, & the government is controlled buy business interests.

A socio-political cconundrums if you will.

 

I think many people left & right want honest and accountable

business & government.

Unfortunately we have to work with what we have.

And that means cleaning out the dirt bags...

Ted Stevens, Charley Rangle whoever,

drag em into the light of day and expose them.

Which is part of the thinking behind the Accepting Responsibility thread.

 

Although I agree with the latter part, let me ask you this...

 

If our Representatives/Senators were not corrupt...or shall I say the "corporatists" that many have become, would many of the problems we face exist?

 

Ya see, in the end, when the proverbial ****e hits the fan, you can guarantee there was a politician(s) behind the buffoonery...and in most cases, caused by their own self-interest.

 

I'm not saying corporations are free from scrutiny at all. But they have been ENABLED by our corrupt government. And that is the reason why we're struggling so badly and why I am 100% against having these people tell me what they think is best for us in the form of this joke of a Stimulus package.

 

In the end, less intervention would be required to ensure proper business practices...which in the end, is what most of us desire.

Kikkoman Pro Staff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

View PostA CEO thinks that by taking as much as he can in compensations he is providing for his family and his heirs, is he acting morally? Yes he is aware that he is paying a mere pentance to his botton line workers, but that is what they are willing to work for, he is not willing to work for less. Is he really amoral or just does not live up to your moral standard, and who/what decides what the moral standard is.

 

That's sounds like moral relativism.

If a CEO takes 20 million dollars (no one is worth that)

That means other down the line will have less money, benefits or both.

That means some people will be out of work, lose their home,

endure marital conflict due to financial stress, neglect seeing doctors

because it's not affordable etc... I think most rational people wouldn't ask

who/what decides the moral standard.

 

OR, we could just let religious fundamentalists tell US what the moral standard is cwm31.gif

 

Point being we all know what is ethical, equitable & fair.

It's the choices we make that determine if we actually embody those qualities.

Few people think they are unethical, regardless if they are or are not.

It's called rationalization...aka. moral relativism.

Destroying psychological barriers to the stateless society of free people since 1966.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the problem is that the private sector AND the government both operate under the same premise: get as much as you can. The thing is the private sector does it MUCH more efficiently and it often benefits other people (workers, clients, partners, and the government through taxes). When the government does it, all it does is cost people.

-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

View PostIn the end, less intervention would be required to ensure proper business practices...which in the end, is what most of us desire.

 

See here's the problem on this issue.

You are saying if there's no regulations people WILL do the right thing.

But the reason there are regulations is because people DIDN'T do the right thing.

This is a chinese finger trap.

 

I believe in "circles of responsibility"... think outwardly expanding rings

The innermost circle is the most basic personal responsibility.

Being honest, moral, following an ethical path.

As we master those responsibilities we turn outward to larger issues of responsibility, being part of a family, then a community, and so on.

The point at which the individual fails to hold up their part of their "responsibility" is where the things fall apart.

 

I don't see or hear much about those "values" form people.

Just a lot of hot air about how bad institutions are.

All the while ignoring the individual's failure to behave responsibly.

Blaming "the government" or "corporations" is absurd.

It's about the people who run those institutions.

 

Hard not to see that America is overwhelmed by a culture of corruption.

Destroying psychological barriers to the stateless society of free people since 1966.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

View PostBut the problem is that the private sector AND the government both operate under the same premise: get as much as you can.

 

No, those institutions don't operate under that assumption.

They are institutions made up of individuals.

This is the same flawed logic that excuses corporate malfeasance.

 

It's the individuals who choose to work in those institutions

who bear the brunt of that unethical mindset.

Where's the personal responsibility?

Destroying psychological barriers to the stateless society of free people since 1966.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

View PostThe thing is the private sector does it MUCH more efficiently and it often benefits other people (workers, clients, partners, and the government through taxes). When the government does it, all it does is cost people.

 

So those trillions of taxpayer dollars are examples of private sector

"efficiency" and benefits to others headscratch.gif

I think that myth has been throughly BUSTED.

Destroying psychological barriers to the stateless society of free people since 1966.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

View PostThat's sounds like moral relativism.

If a CEO takes 20 million dollars (no one is worth that)

That means other down the line will have less money, benefits or both.

That means some people will be out of work, lose their home,

endure marital conflict due to financial stress, neglect seeing doctors

because it's not affordable etc... I think most rational people wouldn't ask

who/what decides the moral standard.

 

OR, we could just let religious fundamentalists tell US what the moral standard is cwm31.gif

 

Point being we all know what is ethical, equitable & fair.

It's the choices we make that determine if we actually embody those qualities.

Few people think they are unethical, regardless if they are or are not.

It's called rationalization...aka. moral relativism.

 

 

 

Again, I guess either you think that all these CEO's and other executives making the extremely large salaries are people with no morals or maybe their morals are different than yours.

 

So who determines that everyone's morals will align with Punk Frued's moral compass, is there a website we can go to get the rules, a book or somewhere/something else.

"meet our growth targets that put us on a pathway to growth."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, those institutions don't operate under that assumption.

 

They are institutions made up of individuals.

 

This is the same flawed logic that excuses corporate malfeasance.

 

This is untrue. Businesses run with the main goal of pleasing their shareholders (which requires them to get what they can now). Governments run with the main goal of re-election. That requires them to focus on themselves rather than issues.

 

 

Your second question did not make sense. I said that part of the side effects of businesses that are making money is that more and more tax dollars go to the government. A side effect of government doing well is they spend more and more and get re-elected. A money-making business can positively effect many many people.

-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

View PostSee here's the problem on this issue.

You are saying if there's no regulations people WILL do the right thing.

But the reason there are regulations is because people DIDN'T do the right thing.

This is a chinese finger trap.

 

Please understand, I said "less regulation," not "no regulation." Many of the problems we face today are caused by relaxed regs. I understand that. But in my opinion, the ground floor issue are the Pols sucking from the Corporate teet. When those two entities are married, then we have major problems.

 

If political corruption is eliminated, the room for corporate maneuverability (i.e,. corporate corruption) is reduced greatly.

 

Listen, I know there are many companies who are not playing on an ethical plane. But I truly believe our government's enabling has played the largest role in allowing this behavior.

 

Remove the D.C. corruption, regulate as needed, and damn, you've got a system that might work - minus nationalizing everything to "stay afloat." wink.gif

Kikkoman Pro Staff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

View PostThis is untrue. Businesses run with the main goal of pleasing their shareholders (which requires them to get what they can now). Governments run with the main goal of re-election. That requires them to focus on themselves rather than issues.

 

If pleasing shareholders comes at the expense of clean air, clean water,

a living wage, diminished public resources etc is that an example that all

citizens should follow? Is it ethical?

 

The example you give of the hand in glove between business & government is part and parcel of a corrupt culture.

Short term gain at the expense of long term stability, and social equity.

 

 

View Post

Your second question did not make sense. I said that part of the side effects of businesses that are making money is that more and more tax dollars go to the government. A side effect of government doing well is they spend more and more and get re-elected. A money-making business can positively effect many many people.

 

Yes, a money-making business can positively effect many many people.

But that's not the dominant corporate paradigm.

Currently only a SMALL elite group of people are benefiting while the majority are kicked to the curb.

You also neglected to mention the corporate payola to campaigns.

Destroying psychological barriers to the stateless society of free people since 1966.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

View PostRemove the D.C. corruption, regulate as needed, and damn, you've got a system that might work - minus nationalizing everything to "stay afloat." wink.gif

 

Yep. My sentiments exactly.

How we get there is another issue wink.gif

 

But the hyperbole about nationalizing "everything" is a bit much.

If things were truly nationalized wouldn't the people be getting

the profits and not just the bailout bill?

Destroying psychological barriers to the stateless society of free people since 1966.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It IS the corporate paradigm....the corrupt ones are the exception but they make it into the news. As far as pollution and social factors go, all businesses are trying to make money for their shareholders while operating within the confines of government regulation. If they do that and they are polluting, that is poor govt. regulation. The entire middle class of this nation has been supported by business now for 110 years...to say that they do not help the people is ludicrous. I think what you are saying is that they are not helped as much as the execs. Well, plenty of execs came from middle class backgrounds. It's part of the reward system that our Democratic bretheren hate.

 

If business were not good for the economy and the people in America, why are we trying like hell to jump-start business?

-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

View PostYep. My sentiments exactly.

How we get there is another issue wink.gif

 

It our responsibility to make this happen by voting in public servants who actually want to abide by the oaths they take.

 

View PostBut the hyperbole about nationalizing "everything" is a bit much.

If things were truly nationalized wouldn't the people be getting

the profits and not just the bailout bill?

 

I don't know. Ask the hundreds of millions of peasants in China.

Kikkoman Pro Staff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

View PostYep. My sentiments exactly.

How we get there is another issue wink.gif

 

But the hyperbole about nationalizing "everything" is a bit much.

If things were truly nationalized wouldn't the people be getting

the profits and not just the bailout bill?

 

 

 

Don't most countries that are Nationalize just have the a ruling class and the rest are peasants?

 

Not sure what everyone means by nationalized, but wouldn't old Russia count as an example? If so, none of the elite suffered, but damn if you were a peasant.

"meet our growth targets that put us on a pathway to growth."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

View PostIt IS the corporate paradigm....the corrupt ones are the exception but they make it into the news. As far as pollution and social factors go, all businesses are trying to make money for their shareholders while operating within the confines of government regulation. If they do that and they are polluting, that is poor govt. regulation. The entire middle class of this nation has been supported by business now for 110 years...to say that they do not help the people is ludicrous. I think what you are saying is that they are not helped as much as the execs. Well, plenty of execs came from middle class backgrounds. It's part of the reward system that our Democratic bretheren hate.

 

If business were not good for the economy and the people in America, why are we trying like hell to jump-start business?

 

 

It is not just CORPORATIONS who polluted because they wanted to do it on the cheap. Boston Harbor is a fine example of how the Government decided that dumping all the untreated sewerage into Boston harbor was a good idea and even if they did not thnk it was a good idea, they did it because it was cheaper than not doing it. Regulations changed and even Government had to follow their own new regulations. Hence, the MWRA and people in and around Boston pay through their noses for the water they use.

"meet our growth targets that put us on a pathway to growth."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...