>> Those people have fiduciary responsibilities to their stockholders, not to your moral compass. This is something resolved on a societal level, not on the corporate level.
> This is the kind of ethical cop-out non-philosophy that's tearing then American environment apart.
It's possible to describe something without agreeing with it.
Responding to that statement the way you did is pointless. It's like getting angry at the doctor who tells you the cancer you have is almost certain to kill you.
What you quoted is simple observable fact, verified in many ways through history, and becoming angry at someone for stating it means you are angry and it is still a simple observable fact, verified in many ways through history.
> It's possible to describe something without agreeing with it.
GP was not simply describing - they were excusing. "Oh well, some corporations are evil, don't complain, it's not their job to be good corporate citizens."
Actually by calling out and disagreeing with this behavior we can change it. The most effective way is through strong regulations, but the current US government system is broken and flawed. But at the very least we can use websites such as change.org and sumofus.org to put pressure on bad corporate actors. Hell, we quite often see the same thing happen on HN in miniature when someone makes a post calling out a company - and that company is forced to respond to the resulting negative publicity.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good people do nothing", and all that.
Regulations? How about just not shopping there? Why must the government be heavily involved in everything?
Too bad we can't bring the Soviet Union back. They didn't have to deal with those pesky voters who obviously broken the American system so badly.
North Korea does a fantastic job of regulating business.. Freedom lies in the flaws of the system. That's the point. That was the entire reason the Constitution was written the way it way, to protect us from the tyrant of the majority. The system's flaws are a feature not a bug. Imagine what happens with a highly efficient government and suddenly people are leading that government that don't like you very much.. I'm sure history might paint a clear picture of the hell that situation can bring.
The less the government agrees with each other, the less opportunity for them to cause harm to the citizens.
> Responding to that statement the way you did is pointless. It's like getting angry at the doctor who tells you the cancer you have is almost certain to kill you.
Disagree. It's like getting angry at the doctor who tells you your two pack a day smoking habit is incredibly bad for you, and may well result in cancer or emphysema.
> This is the kind of ethical cop-out non-philosophy that's tearing then American environment apart.
It's possible to describe something without agreeing with it.
Responding to that statement the way you did is pointless. It's like getting angry at the doctor who tells you the cancer you have is almost certain to kill you.
What you quoted is simple observable fact, verified in many ways through history, and becoming angry at someone for stating it means you are angry and it is still a simple observable fact, verified in many ways through history.