There aren’t laws saying the company had to tell the truth, so if they lie, what’s the punishment?
Comment on The FTC isn’t too happy with Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard layoffs
gian@lemmy.grys.it 10 months agoCorporations aren’t people and don’t have morals to stop them from breaking promises or just flat out lying
I think this is pure bullshit. In the end corporation are guided by people, who make decision and have a clear chain of command. When a corporation promise something, there are people behind that signed off the promise.
And you can punish a corporation by simply punishing the people who sign off what the corporatoion does, at any level. I mean, it is good to be the CEO and get the big bucks, fine, but if the corporation you are CEO of does something wrong it is your responsability to fix it and take the punishment for it.
secundnature@lemmy.world 10 months ago
gian@lemmy.grys.it 10 months ago
There aren’t laws saying the company had to tell the truth, so if they lie, what’s the punishment?
Try to sign a contract (as company) lying about your obligations as see how it work.
What is missing is the will to punish them.
Maggoty@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I agree with you, but the organizations clearly have no morals. If you want to infer that means the boardroom occupants are a bunch of ghouls then sure. But we haven’t meaningfully held an executive to account for a corporation’s actions for a long time. The end effect is a sociopathic pursuit of money.
gian@lemmy.grys.it 10 months ago
But we haven’t meaningfully held an executive to account for a corporation’s actions for a long time.
That’s exactly the problem but it not the same than saying “Corporations aren’t people and don’t have morals”.
Maggoty@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Where’s the morality then? What have they done for their employees and customers that wasn’t forced by law?
gian@lemmy.grys.it 10 months ago
Nothing. Which is what is showing that companies could be punished for not following the laws.
Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
The problem is that the actual people who make decisions are -legally required- to seek as much profit as possible, for any public for-profit company. Saying you can punish the individual in charge for behaving immorally puts them in a catch-22. Suddenly, they’re damned if they make a moral decision that costs shareholders money, and damned if they make an immoral decision in pursuit of profit.
We need a better system where profit isn’t the final thing, or at least isn’t the ONLY thing. The punishments need to come, somehow, from the whole company, but as is that’s really only punishing the have-nots at the bottom of the stack, for any financial punishment for them will hurt much more than a punishment for those at the top, and obviously imprisonment is off the table unless -an individual- does something worth imprisonment.
Maggoty@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Not really, They’re already legally bound to seek profit, within the confines of the law. Changing the confines of the law doesn’t put them in a catch 22. It means they’re supposed to be professionals who can find profit in the white area.