Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
*snip*
I mean bottom line is if you look at the executives running the banks they are running incredibly profitable organizations, so why punish them for generating that wealth, or the CEO's that run major Oil in this country, they're generating amazing wealth and they answer not to the 99%, but to their shareholders.
*snip*
|
The extent to which businesses should be responsible to the 99% is a good question though. It seems to have become taken for granted that big business should be run with responsibility to shareholders only and that if any business acts responsibly towards the communities they operate in that should be thought of as a bonus. That does seem twisted to me. It seems very reasonable that businesses should be thought of as having responsibility to the communities in which they operate and that this should be expected, just as we expect other legal persons in our communities to share some responsibility for the community.
When it becomes taken for granted that members of the community should only act for themselves, even if this may be knowingly screwing over other people in the community in order to benefit from them, then the community has a problem.