81,841
edits
Stakeholder capitalism: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|devil|{{image|Stakeholder capitalism|png|}} }} | {{a|devil|{{image|Water Scarcity|png|Or you could spend more time managing your loan book? Just a thought.}}{{image|Stakeholder capitalism|png|}} }}=== Adam Smith’s Dangerous Idea === | ||
Once upon a time, not long ago, a [[shareholder]] was an opaque yet sacred being, somewhat divine, to whose improving ends everyone engaged in a company’s operation twitched their every fibre. | Once upon a time, not long ago, a [[shareholder]] was an opaque yet sacred being, somewhat divine, to whose improving ends everyone engaged in a company’s operation twitched their every fibre. | ||
| Line 99: | Line 98: | ||
Employees — especially those in the executive suite — have all the power they need to influence the company. They are there, every day, making every decision. | Employees — especially those in the executive suite — have all the power they need to influence the company. They are there, every day, making every decision. | ||
Of course the disenfranchised minorities at the margins of our community need a voice. As we argue [[Critical theory|elsewhere]], an optimal society is pluralistic, tolerant, defends those at the margins and, [[all other things being equal]], prefers their interests when they conflict with a majority that is perfectly able to look after itself. But the question is not ''whether'' to protect their interests, but ''how''. There are plenty of better ways than through stakeholder capitalism: representative democracy, for a start. | Of course the disenfranchised minorities at the margins of our community need a voice. As we argue [[Critical theory|elsewhere]], an optimal society is pluralistic, tolerant, defends those at the margins and, [[all other things being equal]], prefers their interests when they conflict with a majority that is perfectly able to look after itself. But the question is not ''whether'' to protect their interests, but ''how''. There are plenty of better ways than through stakeholder capitalism: representative democracy, for a start. | ||