Should it go both ways?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

If the American people are gonna bail out ailing corporations, should corporations also have a responsibility to do right by the American people when times are good?

If this is an actual partnership, should corporations start doing their part?

Discuss.

[dalegg 143]

If you want to go both ways, I'm not going to judge you.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

If you want to go both ways, I'm not going to judge you.

[luckytxn 2,264]

Going both ways is so Californian.

[MrsCat 6]

should corporations also have a responsibility to do right by the American people when times are good?

gay jokes aside, I'm not sure what you mean by this?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

should corporations also have a responsibility to do right by the American people when times are good?

gay jokes aside, I'm not sure what you mean by this?

Well, when an insurance company lets a cancer patient die because they've done the math and figure they'd rather face a lawsuit than pay for treatment. That's not doing right by the American people and yet it happens all too frequently. But when that company is in trouble, our money is used to bail them out.

Where's the fairness in that?

If we exist to serve them in their time of need, then I think it should be reciprocal. Where are they in our time of need?

Edited September 18, 2008 by A.J.

[MrsCat 6]

should corporations also have a responsibility to do right by the American people when times are good?

gay jokes aside, I'm not sure what you mean by this?

Well, when an insurance company lets a cancer patient die because they've done the math and figure they'd rather face a lawsuit than pay for treatment. That's not doing right by the American people and yet it happens all too frequently. But when that company is in trouble, our money is used to bail them out.

Where's the fairness in that?

If we exist to serve them in their time of need, then I think it should be reciprocal. Where are they in our time of need?

ah I see.

I don't think its possible to have it both ways. Corporations are naturally self-interested beings, with a bottom line. If things don't meet that, then they're put by the wayside. If each corporation had a heart, the entire economic system would no longer be rational. It would be emotional based - and who would decide which cases merit acting in good faith towards customers.

I dunno - the government stepping in, I think he less to do with assisting individual corporations and more with protecting the national interests of the economy and creating more stability. Something that has been lacking.

Personally - I think the current system of voting by dollars is more effective than anything else. If a business acts in a fashion which is contrary to public values, people avoid their services. Often times, with a little publicity this forces an action which is contrary to the bottom line. I like this approach more than legislatively requiring businesses to care.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

should corporations also have a responsibility to do right by the American people when times are good?

gay jokes aside, I'm not sure what you mean by this?

Well, when an insurance company lets a cancer patient die because they've done the math and figure they'd rather face a lawsuit than pay for treatment. That's not doing right by the American people and yet it happens all too frequently. But when that company is in trouble, our money is used to bail them out.

Where's the fairness in that?

If we exist to serve them in their time of need, then I think it should be reciprocal. Where are they in our time of need?

ah I see.

I don't think its possible to have it both ways. Corporations are naturally self-interested beings, with a bottom line. If things don't meet that, then they're put by the wayside. If each corporation had a heart, the entire economic system would no longer be rational. It would be emotional based - and who would decide which cases merit acting in good faith towards customers.

I dunno - the government stepping in, I think he less to do with assisting individual corporations and more with protecting the national interests of the economy and creating more stability. Something that has been lacking.

Personally - I think the current system of voting by dollars is more effective than anything else. If a business acts in a fashion which is contrary to public values, people avoid their services. Often times, with a little publicity this forces an action which is contrary to the bottom line. I like this approach more than legislatively requiring businesses to care.

Well, one wouldn't need to legislate that they care.

For example, in the case of the health insurance industry, there is a lot that a drastically strengthened patients bill of rights can achieve. The insurance industry has fought it tooth and nail, for obvious reasons. But if they're gonna accept taxpayer monies when they need it, I don't think it's too much to ask for the government to attach conditions to the help, in the form of stronger regulations meant to prevent abuse of paying customers by the firm.

[rocks 494]

you could try recommending this to them http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_theory

i'm not sure that would go down too well though

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

you could try recommending this to them http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_theory

i'm not sure that would go down too well though

Interesting link. Thanks!

[rocks 494]

Interesting link. Thanks!

np, it's all a bit of a fantasy though, obviously

many multi nationals see the importance of acting locally, but they don't tend to act enough

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Interesting link. Thanks!

np, it's all a bit of a fantasy though, obviously

many multi nationals see the importance of acting locally, but they don't tend to act enough

Hell, if they'd treat their own customers right, that would be a great start. Insurance companies are especially problematic in this respect. But that's common knowledge.

[MrsCat 6]

Interesting link. Thanks!

np, it's all a bit of a fantasy though, obviously

many multi nationals see the importance of acting locally, but they don't tend to act enough

Hell, if they'd treat their own customers right, that would be a great start. Insurance companies are especially problematic in this respect. But that's common knowledge.

But AJ - insurance companies have the best corporate bonuses for screwing people over . . . . . sigh . . . . . . what great employers

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Interesting link. Thanks!

np, it's all a bit of a fantasy though, obviously

many multi nationals see the importance of acting locally, but they don't tend to act enough

Hell, if they'd treat their own customers right, that would be a great start. Insurance companies are especially problematic in this respect. But that's common knowledge.

But AJ - insurance companies have the best corporate bonuses for screwing people over . . . . . sigh . . . . . . what great employers

Yes, I've worked for one for many years now. The bonuses are nice.

[rocks 494]

Hell, if they'd treat their own customers right, that would be a great start. Insurance companies are especially problematic in this respect. But that's common knowledge.

not much can be done about insurance companies, they have too much money to care. i don't think there's any other way to help with medical treatment than for the government to introduce some kind of health care system...