Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ghost of Philip Marlowe

There is, however, a fault in incorporating, and it contributes to the evils you decry. Corporations have no consciences. Most people in them start life with consciences, but many lose theirs after a few years of basing decisions exclusively on the bottom line. When “bottom line” thinking pervades a corporation, the effect is not greed as such, but sociopathic corporate behavior: acquisitive behavior unrestrained by conscience.


19 posted on 01/01/2010 4:44:18 AM PST by JohnQ1 ("(BHO) can compress the most words into the smallest idea of any man I know." - A Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: JohnQ1

I acknowledge that any human system has its bright side and its dark side. Capitalism is no different. The dark side of capitalism is that it often sees nothing but the bottom line.

That said, you’ve left out one very important element of the free-market system and capitalism: competition. Competition is the often unacknowledged (or acknowledged and resented) “soul” or “conscience” of the free-market system and capitalism.

IF there is competition, then a corporation, if it loses its “collective soul/conscience” and if it does so to the detriment or disapproval of its market, will lose its customer base and be driven out-of-business. Case in point, the recent Tiger Woods scandal.

The act of incorporating does not cast immorality on the people who run a business anymore than a man of strong moral foundation is necessarily converted into a rioter with the anonymity of a massive crowd.

If a type of business is wrong, pass a law against it. But whatever is legal should be allowed to stand. If the people do not support the business, it will fail. If the people are immoral, then they will support a legal, immoral business.

All of this changes, however, when an enterprise destroys its competition. In such a scenario, they CAN and often DO proceed illegally and immorally.

But I would point to politicians and governments as the greatest example of such monopolistic immorality, not corporations. Thus, I don’t consider it primarily a fault of the free-market system or of capitalism, but of collectivism, which is why I urge the use of the term “corporate socialist” rather than “corporatist,” which is another invented term that was invented to shift focus from the true, underlying cause to a straw man.


25 posted on 01/01/2010 5:05:51 AM PST by Ghost of Philip Marlowe (Prepare for survival.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: JohnQ1
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.

Capitalism isn't perfect but there is nothing better.

59 posted on 01/01/2010 1:19:08 PM PST by VRWC For Truth (Throw the bums out who vote yes on the bail out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson