And then there's corporate ethical and/or moral corruption, most of which goes unmentioned by the corporate mainstream news-media. ...
The common yet questionable refrain incredibly still prevails amongst supposedly-free-market capitalist nation governments and corporate circles: It claims that best business practices, including what's best for consumers, are best decided by business decision-makers. But that has been proven deadly false numerous times.
And, increasingly problematic is the very large and growing populace who are too overworked, worried and even angry about food and housing unaffordability for themselves or their family — all while on insufficient income — to criticize or boycott Big Industry for the societal damage it needlessly causes/allows, particularly when not immediately observable.
Also, mega-corporation lobbyists pull corpocratically orientated Western governments [especially those of Canada and the U.S.] by the nose. Once in power, established political parties will kowtow to big business’s threats of transferring or eliminating jobs and capital investment, thus economic stability, if corporate ‘requests’ aren’t accommodated.
Worsening matters, such big businesses (via their lobbyists) can get, or are getting, unaccountably even bigger, defying both the very spirit and letter of government rules established to ensure healthy competition by limiting concentrated ownership. It really does seem there's little or no moral/human(e) accountability when huge profit is involved. ‘We are a capitalist nation, after all,’ the morally lame business-as-usual justification typically goes.
I keep asking myself and concluding: There must be a point at which corporate greed thus practice — where already large corporate profits are maintained or increased while many people can’t afford even basic necessities (including healthcare) — will end up hurting big business’s own monetary interests. I can imagine that a healthy, strong and large consumer base — and not just very wealthy consumers — are needed.
Or is the unlimited-profit objective/nature somehow irresistible? It brings to mind the allegorical fox stung by the instinct-abiding scorpion while ferrying it across the river, leaving both to drown.
The more that such corporations make, all the more they want — nay, need — to make next quarterly. It's never enough. Maximizing profits at the expense of those with so much less, or nothing, will likely always be a significant part of the nature of the big business beast.
One can see corporate officers shrugging their shoulders and defensively saying their job is to protect shareholders’ bottom-line interests. And the shareholders also shrug their shoulders while defensively stating they just collect the dividends and that the big bosses are the ones to make the moral and ethical decisions.
And then there's corporate ethical and/or moral corruption, most of which goes unmentioned by the corporate mainstream news-media. ...
The common yet questionable refrain incredibly still prevails amongst supposedly-free-market capitalist nation governments and corporate circles: It claims that best business practices, including what's best for consumers, are best decided by business decision-makers. But that has been proven deadly false numerous times.
And, increasingly problematic is the very large and growing populace who are too overworked, worried and even angry about food and housing unaffordability for themselves or their family — all while on insufficient income — to criticize or boycott Big Industry for the societal damage it needlessly causes/allows, particularly when not immediately observable.
Also, mega-corporation lobbyists pull corpocratically orientated Western governments [especially those of Canada and the U.S.] by the nose. Once in power, established political parties will kowtow to big business’s threats of transferring or eliminating jobs and capital investment, thus economic stability, if corporate ‘requests’ aren’t accommodated.
Worsening matters, such big businesses (via their lobbyists) can get, or are getting, unaccountably even bigger, defying both the very spirit and letter of government rules established to ensure healthy competition by limiting concentrated ownership. It really does seem there's little or no moral/human(e) accountability when huge profit is involved. ‘We are a capitalist nation, after all,’ the morally lame business-as-usual justification typically goes.
I keep asking myself and concluding: There must be a point at which corporate greed thus practice — where already large corporate profits are maintained or increased while many people can’t afford even basic necessities (including healthcare) — will end up hurting big business’s own monetary interests. I can imagine that a healthy, strong and large consumer base — and not just very wealthy consumers — are needed.
Or is the unlimited-profit objective/nature somehow irresistible? It brings to mind the allegorical fox stung by the instinct-abiding scorpion while ferrying it across the river, leaving both to drown.
The more that such corporations make, all the more they want — nay, need — to make next quarterly. It's never enough. Maximizing profits at the expense of those with so much less, or nothing, will likely always be a significant part of the nature of the big business beast.
One can see corporate officers shrugging their shoulders and defensively saying their job is to protect shareholders’ bottom-line interests. And the shareholders also shrug their shoulders while defensively stating they just collect the dividends and that the big bosses are the ones to make the moral and ethical decisions.
Trudeau speaks many languages: French, English, Bullshit, and Bafflegab. Trudeau, indeed.