- From: Gregory Rochford <gregory_rochford@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 14:37:36 GMT
Jim Carr wrote:
"Gregory Rochford" <gregory_rochford@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:8qhrh.16800$ZT3.9330@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Heaven help me for saying this, but "return value to its shareholders" is only one responsibility of a corporation. A corporation also has a responsibility to its workers and the community. IMHO, that phrase has been used by corporations to shirk these other responsibilites.
I disagree. The only responsibilities the corporation has to its employees or community are those that are aligned with returning value to the shareholders. Unfortunately, sometimes the goals are mutually exclusive.
Do you disagree that 'returning value' is not a stock phrase used to
explain away all manners of poor corporate citizenship? Did people really use that phrase before the 80's? Before all us yuppies decided to show the old folks how to really run a business?
There's also a difference between "returning value" and returning 'every last possible cent in every possible way so options (that were backdated) and performance bonuses give the executive team the most possible income'.
Why am I talking about this?
- Re: MIC?
- From: Jim Carr
- Re: MIC?