Comments on: Are businesses adding to the common good? http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2011/05/13/may-13-column/ Sun, 28 Jul 2013 14:34:09 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Kimano http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2011/05/13/may-13-column/#comment-1329 Thu, 19 May 2011 04:50:27 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1019#comment-1329 The amount of “good” that corporations do? You mean tax write-offs, outsourcing, political buyouts, come-on lets speak of the people and not the corporate wealthy. Baaa Baaa! Capitalism is dependent upon the righteousness of America as opposed to America is dependent upon capitalism. We are a people of faith in its own as a whole not of segmented, fragmented zealous fools who perceive there own selfish fame. Capitalism is not the enemy but creating the empires that hide behind the political savy to promote corporate entities who look down on individual independence. Let’s stop talking for the sake enjoying ourselves. How long must we continue to look the other way. I know it takes more than one. We don’t need global entities we need individuals who can commit to truth.

]]>
By: desonmeloren http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2011/05/13/may-13-column/#comment-1324 Tue, 17 May 2011 17:29:28 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1019#comment-1324 The amount of “good” that corporations will do is dependent upon shareholders and consumers. Boycotts are wonderful tools, far superior to weaponry. By joining endtheoccupation.org and/or supporting the boycotts of terrorist supporting companies, social good could be obtained.

]]>
By: Effie http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2011/05/13/may-13-column/#comment-1322 Tue, 17 May 2011 14:23:55 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1019#comment-1322 Read Paul Farrell. American Capitalism has destroyed
America.

]]>
By: arcoknuti http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2011/05/13/may-13-column/#comment-1319 Mon, 16 May 2011 18:22:35 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1019#comment-1319 Bingo. Slowly it dawns on us its madness that by eating the seed corn we can profit. Business has no reason to exist unless it enriches it’s employees, it’s customers and the community as a whole. To enrich but a few at the expense of all is robbery. Like oil and coal companies making billions in profits for shareholders but degrading the atmosphere and the environment of everyone including those same shareholders. Where is the profit?

]]>
By: Kimano http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2011/05/13/may-13-column/#comment-1317 Mon, 16 May 2011 15:29:14 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1019#comment-1317 We don’t need Roger Martin, nor do we need Chrystia Freeland to babble in todays media for their sake of exploiting the media for riches. Yes, it is as plain as the nose on your face that the sake of business is for businesses sake and not for country, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We the people are taking a back seat and that has been going on for a long LONG time. We are so vane america, meaning those who see only self in reality today. There are many who take a back seat and wait to throw those out of the front seat, including those who represent good business for good business sake. We are waiting for the prosecution of the criminal business minded that recently stole america. Lower case “a” because america is not the primary cause any longer or is it?

]]>
By: TrueIronPatriot http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2011/05/13/may-13-column/#comment-1316 Mon, 16 May 2011 13:26:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1019#comment-1316 I’m a little bothered by some of the insinuations here.

First of all, the position detailed in Martin’s book is neither radical nor political. People have been asking these questions since the industrial revolution, since slavery, since the birth of agriculture. If we centralize our efforts and put the good of all in the hands of a few, how can we maintain the individual rights we all believe in? The answers to that question have come in staggered improvements that we can see in minimum wage laws, unionized labor, and a hundred other regulations created by the government or the people to keep businesses in check.

However, as the article mentions, powerful corporations today are becoming harder to control. But this leads me to my next criticism. Cowen implies (or directly states) that these businesses are getting more powerful because the people who work there are smarter than the people trying to regulate them. This is simply not true. There are smart businessmen and dumb businessmen, just like regulators, politicians, journalists, activists and voters. We all have our passions, our areas of expertise, and our mistakes. Businesses are not getting more powerful because they’ve gained a monopoly on intelligence; they’ve gotten this way through accumulated wealth and growth. They are larger than our government. They have more money that the rest of us combined. The truth is, the one weapon we have left to fight them with is our wits. I suggest we it.

]]>
By: Wassup http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2011/05/13/may-13-column/#comment-1315 Mon, 16 May 2011 12:47:55 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1019#comment-1315 Is this a reasonable suggestion considering the turmoil that the NFL and the Player’s Association is dealing with at this time? I think another model might be more in keeping with common sense in this time frame.

]]>
By: Andrew150 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2011/05/13/may-13-column/#comment-1314 Mon, 16 May 2011 12:19:29 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1019#comment-1314 This is another weak attempt to capitalize on the current pop culture outlook on business.
The truth is that the government is as responsible if not more responsible for current recession. To have them more involved in business is ludicrous.

The government created the problems and now they want to run in and blame others and try and correct their own mistakes.

]]>
By: JeffWild http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2011/05/13/may-13-column/#comment-1313 Mon, 16 May 2011 12:12:28 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1019#comment-1313 You write that business is doing “Not so much” about ensuring that “the existing rules are working for the common good.”

What do you think about initiatives like the Global Reporting Initiative or the UN’s Principles for Responsible Investment, which Thomson Reuters signed last year?

There does seem to be a lot talk and even action about sustainability by investors (approx. 6 trillion EUR AUM in SRI funds), which should hopefully make a difference.

]]>
By: JeffWild http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2011/05/13/may-13-column/#comment-1312 Mon, 16 May 2011 12:10:58 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1019#comment-1312 You write that business is doing “Not so much” about ensuring that “the existing rules are working for the common good.”

What do you think about initiatives like the Global Reporting Initiative or the UN’s Principles for Responsible Investment, which Thomson Reuters signed last year?

There does seem to be a lot talk and even action about sustainability by investors (approx. 6 trillion EUR AUM in SRI funds), which should hopefully make a difference.

]]>