• ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    The most important step is to get rid of limited liability and corporate personhood. Until executives and shareholders can be held responsible for corporate actions, there’s no incentive for those executives and shareholders to make the corporation act on any ethic but profit or aggrandizement.

    • ALostInquirer@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      What do you think of corporations being able to persist almost indefinitely? As a part to introducing greater accountability, might dissolution be appropriate at times?

      • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t have a problem with businesses as a form of intergenerational wealth, actually. I could be persuaded to, I suppose; but as long as the people running it are able to be held accountable I don’t see the longevity as a negative.

    • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Workers act unethically all the time. We are just as deserving of regulation as any other economic entity.

      Source: waitress who has quit some disgusting restaurants

      • HelloThere@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Oh absolutely, my main point is that the people doing the work are more important than the people who don’t.

        The implication being that removing the "no control, all the work, vs “total control, none of the work” paradigm it would reduce the amount of unethical behaviour that is coerced from workers. It won’t get to 0, and I agree that there still needs to be extensive regulation, but it would be an improvement.