Apple backs move to make corporations accountable to citizens, not shareholders

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 67
    Good move. Economy have to serve society not society to economy.
  • Reply 62 of 67
    Nice concept, and I mean that sincerely.  Too bad the actual law doesn't support it...
    edited August 2019 JWSC
  • Reply 63 of 67
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member

    More importantly, the law in the US is clear: the primary purpose of a publicly traded corporation is to maximize profits (and by extension, shareholder value). This is also what the Board of Directors is required to do: that is their fiduciary obligation. 

    Companies that do not want to do this can incorporate as “B Corps” as some have done (e.g., Patagonia, Ben & Jerry’s). 
    And there is some serious push-back to this industrial-age mentality. About adopting doctrine that requires public companies to involve its workers and stakeholders beyond the investor alone. That's what this entire conversation is all about. It begins with words.
    Exactly.
    Its also always unlawful when the law violates human rights, directly or indirectly.
  • Reply 64 of 67
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member
    JWSC said:

    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    Best intentions won't go very far if there is no framework for accountability and comparison.
    Where are they advocating either of those things?
    Remember, I'm being cynical here. Intentions, guidelines, policies, practices or whatever you want to call them aren't worth much unless there is an agreed framework to be able to compare what different companies are doing.

    Nothing needs to be specifically advocated by them.
    Disagree. Cultural values are identified and popularized as ideas by the culture involved. If you don't have advocacy, you don't have anything.
    The trouble with "cultural values" is that it's not the same for you and me. Or a black person v. a white person, or a Muslim v. a Hindu v. a Christian v. Jew. Or a younger v. an oder person. Or a Republican v. a Democrat. Or people of different genders. And so on. When you run a firm with diverse employees and across multiple nationalities, there is no one one yardstick of "cultural values" to manage by. IMHO, it's recipe for disaster.

    The notion of of managing for "more money" -- crass as it is -- is using a yardstick that everyone understands. And it's transparent.

    While it may be a yardstick that, generally speaking, has been agreed to, it’s not a very good one.

    ... violating human rights in every way.
  • Reply 65 of 67
    sunman42sunman42 Posts: 280member
    Wasn’t Tim Cook raked over the coals by a small group of irate shareholders several years back for going with solar power for data centers because it didn’t maximize short-term shareholder value? And didn’t he respond that if your values were different from Apple’s, you should invest your money elsewhere?

    That degree of commitment, very different from Mr. Jobs’s, is the kind of thing that gets listened to when your market cap is at or near $1T.
    edited August 2019 JWSClostkiwi
  • Reply 66 of 67
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,043member
    If anyone think this is nothing more than companies trying to signal to the socialist they are abandoning capitalism to keep the crazies from breaking them up think again. Companies are hedging their bet on who will win the election next year and they do not want to be on the wrong side of the up and coming socialist.
Sign In or Register to comment.