If a corporation were subject to normal human health risks, we would have a clean environment and trillions invested in fighting climate change.
If a corporation were subject to normal human health risks, we would have a clean environment and trillions invested in fighting climate change.
They are, because they're made up of humans with human health risks. The shareholders just dont realize that yet.
35Or they think the consequence won't apply to them, and they're probably right. The nz compounds are real.
17Yeah things will clear up just in time when their food runs out. Just wait.
2
"The shareholders" usually equates to a couple of insanely wealthy majority holders. The rest are mostly just regular people with regular people opinions of things.
3This means nothing except that we are all implicated on the destruction of the planet. Burn the Altars of Wall Street and the world will heal.
3
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood
Corporate Personhood, all the rights of people, none of the responsibilities or jail time.
....and not a status an average person would allocate them, but for some reason judges and politicians are just that anti-humanist.
29They're pro-money more than anti-humanist. They vote with their investment portfolios more than their heads.
4
You can always dig a canal to bring flooding into the business district, think outside the box!
This is obviously a crude attempt at a joke and not real advice.
10Depending on the source, Wall Street is somewhere between 3 and 25 feet above sea level. It wouldn't take much to dampen the market's spirit. :-)
2
Corporations are the only ‘persons’ it should be acceptable to subject to capital punishment.
If one is found to have behaved in a destructive or sociopathic way, its capital should be seized, socialised or auctioned off, and the proceeds primarily put toward remediation.
Corporations are more amoral than immoral, their undesirable behaviours are typically the result of the incentives they’re rewarded for exhibiting. It would also help if their involvement in the creation and policing the rules they’re expected to follow were severely diminished.
9true and capital punishment is already a more fitting term for this than for executing humans
1
Nah. How many people still smoke, or eat a heap of crap food, knowing that it will effect their future health.
They will carry on on for the immediate dopamine hit of profits!
7How many people still smoke
Not many. It's been a long time since the last time I saw a smoker.
3Addictive tobacco has reinvented itself. Vaping, gummies, and probably more.
2There are lots still. Typically in lower socio-economic communities, as well as certain countries.
But, they still smike
1
Wars would look a lot different too.
6I'm not really convinced that this would change their behavior much tbh, given that corporations are already prone to sacrificing their own financial future for short term profit increases, despite existing for nothing but financial gain.
6Corporation is just a group of people extracting value on behave of the "owners"
The "leadership" always serves themselves first, that's the entire point of the gig.
3
If waste and pollution would count as cost, you'll see this effect. Now they benefit that people all over the world bare their costs
6This is one reason it is so wild that corporations in the US are entitled to "free speech" (in the form of spending) after the Citizens United decision. They get benefits as if they were a person, but far fewer of the natural restrictions.
4I guess if they’re considered “rich”. I just figured out I’m technically middle class and I ignore most health issues. Granted i don’t smoke, drink alcoholic drinks rarely, or have any sort of entertainment budget or discretionary monies for extracurriculars.
If obly there were a way to pass off my CC debts like corporations lol.
2