User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 93

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    473

    Default

    Unless the company is going to commit insurance fraud and have you killed, or unless they somehow managed to get profitable odds on their insurance policy, how would they profit from the death of their employees?

  2. #32
    What is, is. Arthur Schopenhauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    1,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Yes, it is life insurance, as is explicitly explained in the article. Life insurance isn't news. The way it's being used in this case is.
    My point was, firstly, anyone can open up a life insurance policy that will provide some income for their relatives. Those relatives might not get jack shit from the company but the companies we're talking about are not insurance companies nor are they entitled to compensate people for the loss of their loved ones. Do you think these companies should compensate people? I don't think that's reasonable.

    If you want to leave something behind for your family then open up a policy for yourself. Simple.

    Money that the company could use on something else, is being used to set up a policy (without notice), that makes it so when an employee dies, the company profits, and uses the profits only to excessively reward already well paid big whigs.

    This action has no social utility. But it does come at a cost.
    I have no problem with the policy itself but I would like to see the profit flow directly into the company instead of directly into the pockets of the executives. In the end though, the executives will profit regardless and that's their right.

    I'm sure there's some utility there. The money doesn't just disappear.
    INTJ | 5w4 - Sp/Sx/So | 5-4-(9/1) | RLoEI | Melancholic-Choleric | Johari & Nohari

    This will not end well...
    But it will at least be poetic, I suppose...

    Hmm... But what if it does end well?
    Then I suppose it will be a different sort of poetry, a preferable sort...
    A sort I could become accustomed to...



  3. #33
    Aquaria mrcockburn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    ¥¤
    Enneagram
    3w4 sp/so
    Posts
    1,907

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    Why?

    The untimely death of a skilled employee represents a significant material loss to a company. Why should the company not be allowed to insure against this loss?
    Years after the employee leaves the company? (While still alive)
    3w4-9w1-?w6 (nearly headless nick)
    sp/so
    Lawful Evil

    COCKBURN:

    http://sundrytimes.files.wordpress.c...tomic-bomb.jpg


  4. #34
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentMind View Post
    What do you mean though - Morally? The moral difference between the two?

    I don't see a difference.

    Wat yoo meen?
    Morally, ethically, and economically. The fact that you don't see a difference leads me to the conclusion that you have a blind spot.

    Part of me feels like I should write out a long post explaining, in detail, many of the differences. But right now, I'm feeling lazy. Maybe another time.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  5. #35
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Yes, it is life insurance, as is explicitly explained in the article. Life insurance isn't news. The way it's being used in this case is.

    Money that the company could use on something else, is being used to set up a policy (without notice), that makes it so when an employee dies, the company profits, and uses the profits only to excessively reward already well paid big whigs.

    This action has no social utility. But it does come at a cost.
    If the company is profiting and not actively or passively doing anything to speed up employee deaths, then that is socially useful.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  6. #36
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    If the company is profiting and not actively or passively doing anything to speed up employee deaths, then that is socially useful.
    Profit is not inherently useful. Perhaps it was in the past, but financial games have become so complicated that you can make a profit without providing anything beneficial to society, and sometimes you can even profit through activities detrimental to society. Sorry, but profitability is not the ultimate measure of value.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  7. #37
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Profit is not inherently useful. Perhaps it was in the past, but financial games have become so complicated that you can make a profit without providing anything beneficial to society, and sometimes you can even profit through activities detrimental to society. Sorry, but profitability is not the ultimate measure of value.
    There is no "ultimate measure of value." But profits DO have utility, and I don't see the cost here. And who decides what is "beneficial to society?" You?
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  8. #38
    ^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
    There is no "ultimate measure of value." But profits DO have utility, and I don't see the cost here. And who decides what is "beneficial to society?" You?
    This has come up a number of times, and I want to turn the question back over onto you. Who do you think defines what's beneficial to society?

    What do you think is beneficial to society, and where did you get the idea from?
    Go to sleep, iguana.


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

  9. #39
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    There is no "ultimate measure of value." But profits DO have utility, and I don't see the cost here. And who decides what is "beneficial to society?" You?
    In this case, does it add to the economic pie? No, this is just a transfer of wealth, not much different than a welfare or social security payment. The insurance company may be more efficient at distributing its payments than government, but they both accomplish this through bureaucracy.

    The costs are:

    -Mental anguish for the families that find out a company profited from the death of a loved one

    -Potential conflicts of interest for the employer

    These are moral and ethical costs which are impossible to quantify, but they are real. For me, the question becomes: Given the costs, can we justify allowing an activity that provides no value? My answer: Only if the company would suffer greatly from the death of the employee. That's why I think this should be limited to high level employees (CEOs, VPs, etc) only.

    Edit: Some people do view profit as the ultimate measure of value.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  10. #40
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    In this case, does it add to the economic pie? No, this is just a transfer of wealth, not much different than a welfare or social security payment. The insurance company may be more efficient at distributing its payments than government, but they both accomplish this through bureaucracy.
    You don't think that buying insurance adds to the economic pie? I would say that it does.


    The costs are:

    -Mental anguish for the families that find out a company profited from the death of a loved one

    -Potential conflicts of interest for the employer

    These are moral and ethical costs which are impossible to quantify, but they are real. For me, the question becomes: Given the costs, can we justify allowing an activity that provides no value? My answer: Only if the company would suffer greatly from the death of the employee. That's why I think this should be limited to high level employees (CEOs, VPs, etc) only.

    Edit: Some people do view profit as the ultimate measure of value.
    I don't agree with those who view profit in that manner, but we are talking about a business decision here. Profit is sort of the idea. It's a good idea, too, and one that is beneficial for society, assuming fair play is involved. My mindset is not "can we justify allowing an activity?" To me, it should be "is there a compelling reason why we must PREVENT this activity?" That is liberalism (in the classic sense) in a nutshell.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

Similar Threads

  1. Monsanto doesn't want you to know you eat genetically engineered food.
    By Rail Tracer in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 01-21-2016, 06:03 PM
  2. Ism, I want you to PIMP MY AVATAR.
    By Ism in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 127
    Last Post: 09-10-2012, 09:56 PM
  3. The TED talk TED doesn't want you to hear.
    By 011235813 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 05-21-2012, 06:08 PM
  4. what the oil companies don't want you to know
    By INTJ123 in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-16-2009, 01:31 AM
  5. media coverage of the tea parties Part 2, (the video they don't want you to see)
    By cogdecree in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-24-2009, 06:36 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