Posted by ycandrea 5 months, 3 weeks ago to Business
10 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Why is everyone surprised that corporations have turned out to be so anti freedom? So woke? So everything that goes against the intentions of our original US Constitution? I certainly am not! The whole premise of incorporating is to get out of being accountable, liable and responsible for your business. So why are we shocked when they become irresponsible?<br> Ayn Rand did not particularly care for corporations either. In Atlas Shrugged, Dagney wanted nothing to do with the Board of Directors of Taggert Transcontinental, Inc. She considered them slimy, repulsive and left Jim to handle them. She knew they had no idea of how the industry worked. But she accepted them as a necessary evil in a dysfunctional world.<br> And in the Valley, there were no businesses with Inc at the end of them. All of the businesses proudly held the name of their creator.

Add Comment


All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ mshupe 5 months, 3 weeks ago
    Corporations are essential and legitimate. Because there is no evidence that a perpetual legal entity is or can be anti-freedom, this comment is a rationalization. To say that the purpose of incorporating is to evade accountability is absurd. To boot, I seriously doubt Ms. Rand "did not particularly care for corporations." To be more precise, she wrote that it was businessmen petitioning government for protective legislation that exacerbated the problem, but it began with the welfare state and the dominant philosophy of altruism. It is impossible to assign blame for this to a non-living legal entity.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 5 months, 3 weeks ago
      You need to reread Ayn Rands books. I stand by my statement of opinion. Nothing you have said disputes it. I saw this coming with corporations decades ago. It's only obvious.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Aeronca 5 months, 3 weeks ago
    The libtards do have a point, I hate to admit, that Corporations should be "responsible." Obviously they should pursue profit, but not when pursuit of profit is clearly damaging to everyone.

    Not that the new ESG rubber stamp mantra will make them any more responsible. They will continue to pollute, push out small competitors and steal from the little guy, while receivng applause for "going ESG." Libtards.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by j_IR1776wg 5 months, 3 weeks ago
    I remember reading, in the 1990s in B school, that IBM employed 750,000 people. How would have Hank Rearden organized and run his steel company without a board of directors?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 5 months, 3 weeks ago
      Why is that so hard for you to imagine? Of course he would have trusted leaders in his company to help.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by j_IR1776wg 5 months, 3 weeks ago
        Would a rose by a different name smell as sweet? paraphrasing Wm. Shakespeare.

        How do you differentiate between board of directors and trusted leaders?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by freedomforall 5 months, 3 weeks ago
          Today boards of directors are most often selected from outside the company
          for the connections they have in banking, other companies, or governments.
          The majority of boards have no direct experience in the running of the
          company on whose board(s) they sit.

          In Rearden's case, there were few outside his company he could trust to
          even think, much less act to any advantage for his company.
          Those who could think and would be trustworthy had their own
          companies to manage (also without anyone to help.)
          Note that every time Dagny wanted to promote someone competent
          they had been turned by Galt. Ditto for anyone who competently
          ran a business Dagny needed for support.

          The very nature of business puts experienced directors in a conflict of
          interest in their role as a director of another company. People in finance,
          in particular, use their position as directors to destroy small companies
          in favor of other larger customers to enrich themselves.
          Boards are often as useful as governments.
          Often, the genius who started a company and produced great products
          is ousted by the company board for refusing to sacrifice quality for
          profit. Profit the board requires to make their stock options valuable,
          or to pay debt service that the board took on to enrich themselves.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 5 months, 3 weeks ago
          There is a huge difference. Trusted leaders would be employees. Read freedomforall post for an explanation of what a Board of Directors is. Have you not read anything from Ayn Rand? Just wondering.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  


  • Comment hidden. Undo