• JohnDClay
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I was confusing an obligation to shareholders with an obligation to profit. So if a share holder majority want maximized profit, I think the company needs to do it.

        • JohnDClay
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          But the shareholders can replace members who are not acting what they perceive to be their best interest, right? It seems like eventually the company will conform to what the share holders want.

          It seems like if a CEO publicly said they were shrinking the company to benefit the environment, they’d be replaced by the shareholders pretty quickly.

      • iHUNTcriminals@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Easy, just get society to treat those people for what they are… Greedy selfish inhumane criminals. I mean they usually share the same tactics as criminals so it’s not even a joke. Treat em for what they are… Life rapists.

        Treat em like they got rabies.

        It’s our duty as human beings.