User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 81

  1. #31
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander29 View Post
    I do not think that comparing the business form to a human is so pointless as it is an entity in our society, which interacts with the rest of society. The point I took out of it is not that EVERY corporation literally does the things you mention. There are people working in these organizations who are moral, responsible, etc. What I took out of it is that there is enormous pressure in the system, and present in the overall value structure, to make decisions to achieve continued and growing profits, which benefit the corporation but are not for the benefit of humans. It is a critique on the business form which has become a dominant force in our society and the externalities that occur as a result of lots of those entities being around and continuing to increase in power and influence. The evidence would appear to be everywhere around us that the analysis has some merit.

    "Externalities" has become the favorite word for anti-capitalists to throw around of late, and it is getting to be quite tiresome. Besides, if corporations are made up of humans, how could achieving profits benefit them but not humans? Corporations are made up of individual people who pool their resources. They are as good or as bad as the behavior of the people who comprise them.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  2. #32
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    "Externalities" has become the favorite word for anti-capitalists to throw around of late, and it is getting to be quite tiresome. Besides, if corporations are made up of humans, how could achieving profits benefit them but not humans? Corporations are made up of individual people who pool their resources. They are as good or as bad as the behavior of the people who comprise them.
    I dont think that's the whole story, you could as easily say soviets or dictatorships are as good or ill as the individuals who operate them, in the main I believe its the individual and not the office that counts but the office still matters too you know?

    I wouldnt ignore a valid problem because you think its tiresome or because of who's conveying it.

  3. #33
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    How about a "cooperative competition"? That which I was proposing as the ideal - the seesaw, when balanced?
    What of it? I wasn't looking for an ideal myself, I was looking for the direction human behavior would go in, which is never ideal. I don't think what I described was good, only increasingly common.

    As for the whole of your response, I don't understand why you said competition before, when what you're elaborating now is that one might as well say it is indestinguishably both.

    And in regards to game theory, of course it accounts for both. The point I was making is how frequently models (though the cliche one's are the prisoner's dilema and it's extensions of players or options) applicable to real life favor a cooperative or reciprocal approach. And with things like the prisoner dilema, we find that the attempt to get more for yourself frequently costs more than if you settled for less with the other player. In a sense, even the most selfish individual, if truly rational, would take a cooperative approach of sorts because it yields better results more frequently.

    The point is a mindset we often assume to act in competitive ways may actually, if privy to this knowledge, be more inclined to act cooperatively. This is why game theory has been used to great extent to understand the evolution of society. Humans clearly have cooperation driving mechanisms hammered right into them (language, involuntary emotional expressions, empathy, guilt, these are culturally universal) so the question is why? It be yield results that will create success over the ones that don't have it.

    At the most, I can concede, and even already started to in my first elaboration, that we could look at this as being all parts competition and cooperation. I can never really see it as more competitive, however, and competition is not "human nature".
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  4. #34
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I dont think that's the whole story, you could as easily say soviets or dictatorships are as good or ill as the individuals who operate them, in the main I believe its the individual and not the office that counts but the office still matters too you know?
    You could say that, and some dictators were/are worse than others, but that statement wouldn't stand to reason. Soviets and dictatorships are bad IN AND OF THEMSELVES, even if they are made up of people with good intentions. Corporations are useful and often produce positive results both for themselves and society at large, but they can also do very bad things. They are exactly like individual humans in that aspect.


    I wouldnt ignore a valid problem because you think its tiresome or because of who's conveying it.
    It's tiresome due to the fact that the concept of "externalities" (which are real, and sometimes positive rather than negative) is being twisted to fit truly crazy political agendas. I have had people seriously tell me that corporation derive all or most of their profits by foisting externalities onto the general public. That's colossally stupid, and a perfect example of the danger of teaching people a concept without providing the full context.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  5. #35
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    17,904

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    "Externalities" has become the favorite word for anti-capitalists to throw around of late, and it is getting to be quite tiresome. Besides, if corporations are made up of humans, how could achieving profits benefit them but not humans? Corporations are made up of individual people who pool their resources. They are as good or as bad as the behavior of the people who comprise them.
    If you look at the executive ranks, they are heavily compensated by the performance of the stock and there is enormous pressure to do whatever is necessary for the profits to steadily increase and meet expectations on a quarterly basis. As you go higher up the ladder in business, you realize that P&L simply is the single most important factor in driving behavior. In fact, retaining your job is completely dependent on financial results. You can be concerned about environment and all these other things related to society. However, you have a job, you have a family to support, and you make decisions to keep that job as well as to advance out of self-interest, you turn a blind eye to the things you don't want to see, and are subject to the value structure of the organization you are part of.

  6. #36
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Besides, if corporations are made up of humans, how could achieving profits benefit them but not humans? Corporations are made up of individual people who pool their resources. They are as good or as bad as the behavior of the people who comprise them.
    To say human vs corporation would be false. It would probably be accurate to say that corporations are a model which sacrifice the good of a larger number of humans at the benefit of a smaller number of humans. And this is not just a matter of being in or out, but also where you sit if you are in.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  7. #37
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    What of it? I wasn't looking for an ideal myself, I was looking for the direction human behavior would go in, which is never ideal. I don't think what I described was good, only increasingly common.
    Okay. We'll have to disagree then on the increasily common aspect. That's where we differ.

    As for the whole of your response, I don't understand why you said competition before, when what you're elaborating now is that one might as well say it is indestinguishably both.
    My response wasn't to explain why it's moreso competition, my response was tackling your point of oligopoly as cooperation, and explaining why I couldn't buy the 'cooperative' angle.

    I do believe that in the global market, oligopoly as cooperation, as you explained it previously, is much less common than the capitalistic bent of competition for monopolizing the market. Sure, countries make cooperative deals with one another, e.g., free trade agreement, and even that, isn't all cooperative as it speaks of itself on paper. But, at the global level, dropping and rising values of currencies, driven by all the likely shifts in economies, and, differing monopoly on natural resources, rather than a near equal dispersion, hints towards competition driving the vehicle more than cooperation. And, it's also hard to believe that the vested interests of all the players in the global economy merges so well as to make it that oligopoly you speak of.

    Cooperation is likely when the other has a similarly equal "worth", so it does well to play nice with them because they will likely have something you need, and/or, their [potential force of] action can likely affect you. Unfortunately, this is not so, within all players of the global economy. So we see a lot more exploitation of the advantage one (top dog) has over the other (weaker betas), to gain advantage over another top dog, and on it goes. Chasing the $.

    Note: within this, there's still instances of cooperation, I'm not denying that. My point was in regards to the main driving force of the global economy as it stands now, and I stand by my claim of competition, due to the reasons outlined above.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    At the most, I can concede, and even already started to in my first elaboration, that we could look at this as being all parts competition and cooperation. I can never really see it as more competitive, however, and competition is not "human nature".
    Just like cooperation is human nature, so is competition (ask Darwin). I don't know why but I'm getting the feeling that you think the existence of one negates the other. Or whether you want to believe it to be so.

  8. #38
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    You could say that, and some dictators were/are worse than others, but that statement wouldn't stand to reason. Soviets and dictatorships are bad IN AND OF THEMSELVES, even if they are made up of people with good intentions. Corporations are useful and often produce positive results both for themselves and society at large, but they can also do very bad things. They are exactly like individual humans in that aspect.




    It's tiresome due to the fact that the concept of "externalities" (which are real, and sometimes positive rather than negative) is being twisted to fit truly crazy political agendas. I have had people seriously tell me that corporation derive all or most of their profits by foisting externalities onto the general public. That's colossally stupid, and a perfect example of the danger of teaching people a concept without providing the full context.
    Yeah, it sounds like you're holding a double standard there, either they are simply institutions and any wrong doing the fault of the individuals peopling them, like cars arent to blame for drunk drivers, or the institution has something wrong with it and will withstand even the best individuals attempts to put them to good purposes. You cant have it both ways.

    Now you could argue that despite being corrupted or subject to institutional malaise corporations are the best possible of all possible institutional arrangements but I dont think you're arguing that.

    Yeah, it sounds like you've encountered some sloppy thinking about externalities, in fact it seems like you're pretty partisan in favour of corporations and apt to react a certain way to what you preceive as criticism of them. It doesnt mean there's not an issue with externalities, whether its the people you imagine to be morons or villains which are mentioning it or not.

    I'm not a supporter or defender of capitalism but I would agree that capitalism's supporters and defenders have been much more articulate and clear than their opposite numbers and detractors. Although being good writers doesnt make them correct. At least not all the time.

  9. #39
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    Socialism will never be as trendy as Capitalism until it also invests large quantities of money into research and marketing to make it so.

    Corporations manufacture thinking to maintain their advantage. Making literally anything trendy is their greatest expertise.
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

  10. #40
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by toonia View Post
    Corporations manufacture thinking to maintain their advantage. Making literally anything trendy is their greatest expertise.
    Sell, sell, sell!

    Make ($), make ($), make ($)!

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-03-2014, 07:00 AM
  2. It's looking like Zimmerman is going to be Acquitted
    By DiscoBiscuit in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 472
    Last Post: 07-18-2013, 07:37 PM
  3. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 04-28-2012, 05:26 PM
  4. [NT] Is it possible to be a social INTx?
    By Illmatic in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 08-08-2011, 03:14 PM
  5. Is this where i go to be cut into the gang?
    By phthalocyanine in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 06-04-2009, 03:20 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO