Some mainstream group of Baptists [hard to keep track of all of them] actually had the same statement regarding wife beating up for consideration as part of church doctrine here in the states around a decade ago. It got some publicity and outcry and the statement was quietly buried. It’s the O.T. og [the genocidal/joker one] who thought it would be a good idea. So just don’t carp about the UAE or whichever old-tyme religion revives the women beat-down thing.
Everyone gets oil from wherever is cheapest. Anything else is marketing.
Why? Because if they don’t, it would be massively irresponsible to shareholders and the people in charge would be replaced by someone who knows what the term ‘profit margin’ means.
Not if the shareholders all agree that something is important enough to them that they will or won’t conduct the company’s business accordingly.
Not every single person on earth is willing to sacrifice morals and/or ethics for the sake of profit at all times, ya know.
True. But the people and companies that own shares are typically in it for the money. Finding a large enough bunch of shareholders to back a non-best cost solution without some tangible other upside from them would be difficult in the short term and almost impossible to maintain it the long term.
Almost impossible.
SD
So it is kinda like the US enhanced interrogation model? All is okay if no permanent marks are left?
Unless you can show me an entire portfolio full of companies that use literal slave labor, I’m pretty sure you’re a moron who’s full of shit.
That doesn’t make any sense at all. You need to spend more time on comprehension and less time on reprehension.
I may be a moron, in fact it’s likely. Particularly because I can’t understand what the fuck you’re trying to say here.
First, I doubt there are any companies using literal slave labour – but I’m sure there’s a few that have parts made in dubious factories with poor conditions and worse pay. Heard of Foxcomm? The reports of the conditions there haven’t really made a dent in Apple’s share price. Where are all the ethical shareholders deserting Apple and Dell.
Oh, they aren’t. Because Apple make a metric fuckton of money. And the majority of shares are owned by pension funds, management companies and other entities who don’t give a fuck. Until consumers start boycotting Apple and it hits their bottom line. Which isn’t likely either given Apples continuous production of shiny things which ridiculous mark-ups.
Sure, there’s a few people probably ditched their shares but as long as a company’s stock is going up there’ll be a lot more that are buying into it.
My pension fund is invested in the stock market, I have no idea what stocks are actually owned. And there’s very little I can do about it unless I take control of buying individual stocks myself, which with my record is just going to leave me with less pension than the other options.
Maybe I should care. I’d honestly never considered it until this thread.
Probably like 99% of the other morons out there.
Your faith in humanity is touching.
Unbelievably stupidly fucking wrong in this case.
But touching.
SD
AFAIK, Canadians only beat red-headed stepchilden.
Sure it does. The absolute cheapest form of labor is slave labor. Accordingly, every company should be using it, and everyone should be investing in those companies. If that’s not the case, it’s safe to say that there are some ethical lines that people are unwilling to cross in the pursuit of profits, and that those lines will vary from person to person and from company to company.
Haaaaaaahahaha. I have no faith in humanity. I think the world would be better off if a lot of it were to drop dead right now. However, I *do *think that there is a small but viable population of what I will call “ethical investors”–people who research the companies they invest in to ensure that the companies’ business practices align with their own standards. What, exactly, those standards are will vary from person to person, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
Just because you, personally, have the investment goal of making the most possible money regardless of how the company is making it doesn’t mean that every other investor does. Some of them are willing to take an income hit in exchange for supporting what they see as ethical business practices, which includes the sourcing of their goods.
You might as well claim that non-factory farms don’t exist because it’s the cheapest way of producing meat, so nobody would buy anything else. :rolleyes:
Slavery is illegal. I’m pretty sure that’s in the Constitution.
Wondering the same thing.
I never claimed there were no ethical investors, I’m just claiming that there aren’t enough of them to make that much of a difference. Because the majority of ‘real people’ investors are at least one step away from the actual stocks they own.
And I’m talking about investors. Not consumers, consumers are different and they can have an impact on a companies practices (although oil is bad example just because is so vital to just about everything).
Consumers and public opinion, not investors, are the best way to affect a change in a company. Investors tend to be biased for the reasons I’ve explained above and for the fact that the majority – not all – investors tend to be people interested in making money. That’s why they’re investors. However we’re all consumers.
I shop with at least a mild notion of ethics. Investment, not so much.
SD
Cite? I doubt that slave labor is cheaper than sweatshop labor. For one thing, you have to feed slaves, and ensure they have enough healthcare to justify your investments.
It’s also illegal in the U.S. for “a man [to] beat his wife and young children as long as the beating leaves no physical marks.” We’re not talking about what’s legal in the U.S. We’re talking about what companies do in other countries. It may shock you to realize that it *is *possible to invest in companies that do not solely employ people in the U.S.
Right now, we’re WAGing at each other. But I know people who make their investment decisions this way. Obviously, it’s becoming more common for people to make their investments, e.g., 401(k) accounts, through a variety of mutual funds instead of handpicking stocks. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t still people who do it.
Oh, look, there’s even a fucking Wikipedia article on the subject. Idiot.
So am I. Did you see the word “consumers” anywhere in my post? The fact that you’re claiming that this “can’t” happen *in the face of a company who does it *is laughable.
My cite is the American South prior to the Civil War.
So, your cite is a largely pre-industrial economy and society explicitly based on the concept of slavery as a strong positive good for both the white and black races.
Try and Buy? Is that like the Pick ‘n’ Save?
Showing my age I’m sure but this was my exact thought when I saw the tread title…
Are you retarded? Nobody said it was good for the slaves–simply the cheapest labor you can get, once you’re past the initial investment hump.
Why those damn toque-headed walrus-jockeys! :mad: