Do publically traded companies cause more harm than good nowadays?

[Montoya]

You hear it all the time, "I have a responsibility to the stockholders". Should their duty be to the product they produce or sell? To the workers who keep their corporate machine going? This may sound crazy but wouldn't putting your top priority on your products or services be a better model? Nowadays especially we see all these giant corporations doing whatever they can to squeeze every nickle out of consumers and workers. All "for the shareholders" and the "bottom line". And they do these things right out in the open, with layoffs outsourcing, lobbying for deregulation, less worker and consumer rights. All in the name of those holy "profits". I always thought when consumers are sold superior quality and given superior service profits will take care of themselves.

It just seems today is so anti-worker and so anti-consumer that it doesn't surprise me that products produced today are of much lesser quality than even 15 years ago. Not to mention worker performance.

Thoughts?

[Newest Reality]

1. To me,

it is a matter of who owns the controlling shares and how they, in effect "own" the corporation in a way that the corporate veil allows them to act without liability and yet enrich themselves.

The corporation has become a means to retain power, control and influence while expanding corporate influence and shadowing the underlying elitist, almost royal echelons of our stratified, classist culture allowing for a facade of democracy and an largely illusory sense of representation. Corporate law has changed and mutated over the years and as we see, attained "person hood" even though it is, in itself a soulless ghost that veils and protects the 1%. One wonders when we will be compelled to vote for "corporate persons" rather than their paid-for, revolving door puppets?

The public part is the other portion which reminds me of a gambling parlor where the right people get the right tips at the right time. The rest play at their own risk and are subject to factors to which they are not privy.

As long as profit is the sole motive of the corporate charter and is required exclusively by law, then what should we expect other than it being a means to amass money, influence and power while shunning responsibility, loyalty and compassion for individuals, lifeforms, people and the viable state of the planet?

If we were to add some sort of an incentive, (like megalithic corporations would allow it) that pits profits against a some sort of benefit/detriment factor, (to environment, communities, flora, fauna, etc.) then, perhaps the profit motive would become less fatal to life, the commons, liberty, privacy, and a host of other issues.

[Montoya]

2. n/t

I agree but in today's corporate America "incentives" are a dirty and "socialist" concept. Just look at the tea party extremists (the few that survived 2012) spouting off nonsense on how we should be groveling at their feet for the job they graced us with.

[JayhawkSD]

3. They've merely changed from long term to short term interests

The long term best interest of the shareholder involves acting in a manner which respects the environment and the society in which the corporation exists. Short term interest goes for the "quick buck" of immediate profit, while depleting resources and creating a society which is unable to buy its products. Henry Ford paid wages which allowed his employees to buy his products, while today's employers seek only to reduce wages for the sake of illusory profit.

The responsibility of the management is to the shareholder, that's why that shareholder invests, but present policies of shortsightedness is not actually meeting that purpose.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Yes, but not for the reason you think

Corporations have a responsibility to investors by law.

If we want this to change, a whole slew of laws need to be changed.

[Montoya]

5. n/t

And these laws were literally written by giant corporation. Literally they wrote the bill and submitted it to congress! Is this even legal?

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. ALEC is an ongoing industry

We have a level of corruption not seen since tea pot dome. Something will have to give.

[Recursion]

7. In the US, the only legally recognized stakeholders of a business are holders of debt and of equity

There's no absolute reason to limit it to that; in Germany the legally recognized stakeholders include employees, I think in Iceland they include employees and physical neighbors of the firm, and in Japan (or maybe Singapore?) they include employees and (bizarre as this sounds) customers and vendors.

That's the problem, not publicly traded companies or the profit motive per se.

[raouldukelives]

8. If it wasn't for the careful management of our natural resources, labor and children's futures.

That Wall St has bestowed. I shudder to think of how it might look today.
If it wasn't for the diligent efforts of shareholders, we'd be forced to live in it.