[nittiley]

optional if anyone wants to debate it..

should a corporation's sole function be to incur profit, or should it have mandatory ethical safeguards in place?
--------

1 example of, sadly, so many horrific breaches in today’s corporate world.

'The university completely abdicated its role as an educational institution committed to the public good in order to protect its corporate brand, image, and market value... 'The outrage over this case is certainly justified, and we should encourage greater degrees of transparency and accountability in our institutions.'

'At the same time,' he continued, 'we shouldn't overlook or forget that the corporate university of today makes ethically suspect decisions all the time.'

http://chronicle.com/article/Penn-St...&utm_medium=en

-----------------------

more lives ruined, destroyed, or impacted negatively -- except in a less obvious way when compared to the above example.

a 2003 article below, still pertinent. unethical business practices benefitting the few at the expense of many appears to be destroying what capitalism was suppose to be.

on the republican side(1 of a likely very long list!), *temporary owners* destructively seeking quick money describes bain capital. we also have jon corzine of mf global for the democrats, & PFGbest is officially listed as an apolitical organisation.

..accused the market of being dominated by 'temporary owners' looking for the fast buck...stating that corporate capitalism had devolved to 'speculator’s capitalism.'

Its critics alleged that shareholders capitalism drove managers to short-termism at the expense of the corporation’s long-term growth and health. Moreover, serving shareholders’ interests...was done at the expense of other corporate stakeholders, like employees (displaced by mergers and downsizings), suppliers, customers, and local communities.

http://people.hofstra.edu/George_J_P...T%20WISDOM.pdf

[Wino]

If we would adopt the Chinese method of handling miscreant and crooked corporate people - execution - I believe the possibility of wrong doing by them would be greatly reduced - not eliminated, but reduced (after all the DP does not prevent people from murdering - it just prevents them from doing it again).

[pyritechips]

My business knowledge is almost non-existent and I don't track socio-economic trends but from what I have seen there tends to be a drift away from ethics in business and a focus on profit-above-all-else policy. I did see a documentary about the toxic derivative market that interviewed the very people that developed the technique. They were very frank and candid about what they were doing and how, despite feeling that it was wrong, were seduced by the extremely large profits that they were earning.

[nittiley]

Originally Posted by Wino

If we would adopt the Chinese method of handling miscreant and crooked corporate people - execution - I believe the possibility of wrong doing by them would be greatly reduced - not eliminated, but reduced (after all the DP does not prevent people from murdering - it just prevents them from doing it again).

you can't kill them ! (surely you jest..) they have to be re-trained & given new jobs.. maybe harvesting produce on a seasonal basis, or working at walmart for a while would expand their horizons!

Originally Posted by pyritechips

My business knowledge is almost non-existent and I don't track socio-economic trends but from what I have seen there tends to be a drift away from ethics in business and a focus on profit-above-all-else policy. I did see a documentary about the toxic derivative market that interviewed the very people that developed the technique. They were very frank and candid about what they were doing and how, despite feeling that it was wrong, were seduced by the extremely large profits that they were earning.

agreed -- the financial sector seems to have internalised a lack of ethics, at least considering this (only 1 -3 of the excuses..).

First, it is argued that this kind of cheating around Libor has been going on for a long time...Statements about a pattern of behavior only strengthen the case that incentives, culture and organizations are all badly broken at the heart of the world’s financial system.

Second, it is also asserted that “everyone does it.” This is not any kind of defense – try it next time you are accused of fraud.

Third, Libor-rigging is defended as a “victimless crime.” This is untrue. Traders at Barclays and other banks gained from this series of manipulations, so someone else lost. That may have been investors, who received lower returns...Or it may have been borrowers, who paid higher interest rate and related costs than would have been necessary in an honest market.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...-it-is-rigged/

[poochee]

The love of money is the root of all evil. I expect no change.

[buffoon]

Originally Posted by nittiley

optional if anyone wants to debate it..

actually, rather not.

Seeing how the title holds a question and challenge and thus provokes answers that are most likely to arouse controversy, it's been changed to debate.

[Drabdr]

Well... I tend to not engage in Corporate Greed discussions, as I feel a lot of it is Class Envy talk.

However, the Penn State instance is totally unacceptable. To put the Game of Football above the well-being of kids and any hint of moral decision-making... is sad.

[Bastiat]

You all of course realize that Penn State is, in fact, a state created not-for-profit corporation and therefore has no profit motivation.

[1956brother]

todays, corperate world is profit above everything else. even, worse for the most part it is short term profits not long term goals.

when, an employee is looking to get a eight or nine figure salary plus bonus at the end of the year, do you really think he/she cares about ethics ?

i love it when, corpertations talk about maximizing shareholders returns. this is pure bs. they want to maximize their own returns.

in todays corperate world it will never happen.

as the man said "greed is good" in todays world it is only about greed...for themselves.

[ekim68]

Even the Non-Profits are profits for someone. I heard that the CEO of United Way rakes in well over $500,000.00 a year...

[poochee]

Originally Posted by ekim68

Even the Non-Profits are profits for someone. I heard that the CEO of United Way rakes in well over $500,000.00 a year...

I check before I donate. I dropped them a long time ago. http://www.charitywatch.org/aboutaip.html

[buffoon]

Originally Posted by Bastiat

You all of course realize ...................

.........having a hopeful spell, are we?

[Littlefield]

Originally Posted by Bastiat

You all of course realize that Penn State is, in fact, a state created not-for-profit corporation and therefore has no profit motivation.

But the football program has profit motivation

The football program brings in more than $50 million in profit annually for Penn State, according to a Forbes study, funded in part by lucrative sponsorship deals with corporations including PepsiCo Inc and Nike Inc.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-...State-football

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmi...aluable-teams/

[Bastiat]

Originally Posted by Littlefield

But the football program has profit motivation

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-...State-football

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmi...aluable-teams/

And the state subsidy to the college is reduced. There is no profit and the quoted statements are misleading. Yes the football program generates more than it costs but that additional income goes back to the college and offsets operating costs paid by the state of Pennsylvania.

[Bastiat]

Originally Posted by ekim68

Even the Non-Profits are profits for someone. I heard that the CEO of United Way rakes in well over $500,000.00 a year...

You of course realize how silly this sounds. First, you are comparing corporate profit to someone's income. Second, you make it sound like people who work for non-profits i.e. United Way (as opposed to not-for-profits) are suppose to work for free. Can we agree that's silly?