(03-29-2023, 12:23 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote:

(03-29-2023, 10:48 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: What are you saying?  First you say, "Stakeholder capitalism is the new brand being worn by companies to give credibility to this idea."  Then you say, "This is not shareholder capitalism."  Which one is it?  You seem to be saying they are faking their stakeholder capitalism, then you say they are not practicing shareholder capitalism.  Which one do you think they are actually practicing?  

I'm just trying to understand what you are saying, because you seem to be contradicting yourself.

Stakeholder capitalism is fundamentally different than shareholder capitalism. Stakeholder brands itself a more caring form of shareholder capitalism, which it isn't. The reason they hide behind that "brand" is because people would object to corporations controlling our governments. How does that not make sense?

Yes, I understand the difference.  What threw me off was your saying they were faking stakeholder capitalism and also not practicing shareholder capitalism, which makes it sound like you think they are doing neither one.   I was of the opinion it had to be one or the other.  But you have introduced a third possibility, which is that they are doing something else.  

I think it's still shareholder capitalism, because shareholders own the company and basically control the company.  You and I don't seem to agree on that, but I have a feeling we would be going back and forth for a year on that one.  To me, to the extent that corporations attempt to control the government, it is for the purpose of maximizing their profits for the benefit of the shareholders.  You seem to think it is something even more sinister than that.  But I don't think a corporation has any desire other than maximizing their profits.  To the extent that they pursue power, it is all for the purpose of making money.

---