Liz Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

[OODA_Loop]

Warren and others are trying to change "shareholders" to "stakeholders", and that would be a pretty profound change.

Please differentiate a stakeholder from a shareholder in this context.

 

[Mac1958]

Warren and others are trying to change "shareholders" to "stakeholders", and that would be a pretty profound change.

Please differentiate a stakeholder from a shareholder in this context.

Sure. A shareholder is a person who owns equity (stock) in a corporation.

In Warren's context, a stakeholder would be people who are affected by the actions of a corporation: Employees, consumers and society in general.
.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Everything the government touches gets better, so why not?
Said no one ever.

Correct, because most people don't exist in a shallow, simplistic, binary world.

Most know that this all exists on a continuum, and that the key is striking the proper balance.
.

If people don’t like what a company does they don’t buy from that company. Ask Facebook and Twitter.

If people don’t like what an unelected and unaccountable Government agency does, too bad.
Ask anyone who’s had to deal with the IRS, BLM, EPA, etc etc.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Sure. A shareholder is a person who owns equity (stock) in a corporation.

In Warren's context, a stakeholder would be people who are affected by the actions of a corporation: Employees, consumers and society in general.
.

So shifting the means of production to .gov through regulation ?

 

[Mac1958]

Everything the government touches gets better, so why not?
Said no one ever.

Correct, because most people don't exist in a shallow, simplistic, binary world.

Most know that this all exists on a continuum, and that the key is striking the proper balance.
.

If people don’t like what a company does they don’t buy from that company. Ask Facebook and Twitter.

If people don’t like what an unelected and unaccountable Government agency does, too bad.
Ask anyone who’s had to deal with the IRS, BLM, EPA, etc etc.

The counter-argument is that because a corporation exists within a society in which there are many shared and symbiotic affects of behaviors, it must be held to a certain level of corporate responsibility and regulation. So the question, again, is striking the proper balance between pure free market capitalism and corporate responsibility.
.

 

[Mac1958]

Sure. A shareholder is a person who owns equity (stock) in a corporation.
In Warren's context, a stakeholder would be people who are affected by the actions of a corporation: Employees, consumers and society in general.

So shifting the means of production to .gov through regulation ?

No, she specifically wants to avoid that.
.

 

[OODA_Loop]

No, she specifically wants to avoid that.
.

You mean she wants to avoid the appearance of that.

It makes no sense otherwise.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Everything the government touches gets better, so why not?
Said no one ever.

Correct, because most people don't exist in a shallow, simplistic, binary world.

Most know that this all exists on a continuum, and that the key is striking the proper balance.
.

If people don’t like what a company does they don’t buy from that company. Ask Facebook and Twitter.

If people don’t like what an unelected and unaccountable Government agency does, too bad.
Ask anyone who’s had to deal with the IRS, BLM, EPA, etc etc.

The counter-argument is that because a corporation exists within a society in which there are many shared and symbiotic affects of behaviors, it must be held to a certain level of corporate responsibility and regulation. So the question, again, is striking the proper balance between pure free market capitalism and corporate responsibility.
.

So people go to prison because an unaccountable Government employee feels an employee was not treated “fairly”

Sounds like communism.

 

[Mac1958]

No, she specifically wants to avoid that.
.

You mean she wants to avoid the appearance of that.

It makes no sense otherwise.

No, that's not what I mean, but that's probably your perception.
.

 

[Mac1958]

Sounds like communism.

I'm sure it does.
.

 

[Weatherman2020]

No, she specifically wants to avoid that.
.

You mean she wants to avoid the appearance of that.

It makes no sense otherwise.

Yep. Need you to work OT.
Call the government!

 

[OODA_Loop]

No, that's not what I mean, but that's probably your perception.
.

How does one shift ownership/control of private concerns from those with hard capital invested to "Employees, consumers and society in general" without regulatory governmental control ?

 

[Natural Citizen]

From the revolutionary marxist perspective it isnt socialism if capital exists.

Any philosophy that begins by idealizing government will end by idealizing subjugation. History is ripe with replete, Tehon. Ripe indeed. It's why we're in the mess we're in now. To Marx's credit, I doubt that he ever intended for his docrtrines to bring all of the tyranny and death to the hundreds of millions of its victims. But he was certainly naive to expect good results from a system which gives unlimited power to omnipotent rulers.

 

[Tehon]

Everything the government touches gets better, so why not?
Said no one ever.

Correct, because most people don't exist in a shallow, simplistic, binary world.

Most know that this all exists on a continuum, and that the key is striking the proper balance.
.

Either you have a capital investment in the corporation, in which case you have a stake in the outcomes, or you don't. Where is the continuum?

 

[JoeB131]

Corporations provide jobs. Well paying jobs when you have value to offer.

Another battered housewife Republican who thinks that a parasite is a vital organ.

 

[Pilot1]

A shareholder is a person who owns equity (stock) in a corporation.

In Warren's context, a stakeholder would be people who are affected by the actions of a corporation: Employees, consumers and society in general.
.

This in a nutshell. It is giving PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS to those with NO ownership rights. Employees, and consumers CHOOSE to work, or buy from the corporation. They are not forced to do either. They have NO ownership rights at all. Warren is wrong.

 

[Tehon]

From the revolutionary marxist perspective it isnt socialism if capital exists.

Any philosophy that begins by idealizing government will end by idealizing subjugation. History is ripe with replete, Tehon. Ripe indeed. It's why we're in the mess we're in now. To Marx's credit, I doubt that he ever intended for his docrtrines to bring all of the tyranny and death to the hundreds of millions of its victims. But he was certainly naive to expect good results from a system which gives unlimited power to omnipotent rulers.

You don't understand Marxist theory. It's okay to admit you have never read him outside of maybe the manifesto.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Corporations provide jobs. Well paying jobs when you have value to offer.

Another battered housewife Republican who thinks that a parasite is a vital organ.

Thank you dad for teaching me to live from the output of my own hand and that I am the victim of no one.

 

[JoeB131]

If people don’t like what a company does they don’t buy from that company. Ask Facebook and Twitter.

Didn't you right wing jackasses just spend the last week bitching that Facebook banned Alex Jones?

If people don’t like what an unelected and unaccountable Government agency does, too bad.
Ask anyone who’s had to deal with the IRS, BLM, EPA, etc etc.

Actually, if you have a valid case, most of these agencies are pretty accommodating.

You also have the option of going to your congressman, and they usually are pretty good at getting problems sorted out.

Of course, if you are cheating on your taxes or polluting the environment, then these agencies really will crack down on your ass... which is their job.

 

[JoeB131]

Thank you dad for teaching me to live from the output own hand and that I am a victim of no one.

Naw, man, you are like most battered housewife Republicans, making excuses for your abusers...