Has Humanity Evolved Beyond the Need for Corporations?

[Sordhau]

Whether they're deliberately polluting the environment because it's cheaper than properly disposing environmentally harmful material, covering up the effects of climate change, bribing (oh, sorry, I mean "lobbying") government officials into opposing pro-worker legislation, underpaying and overworking their employees, disrespecting cultural and religious heritage for profit, destroying ancient ruins and burial sites to build shopping malls, engaging in wide-scale environmental destruction for the sake of profit, funding death squads and warlords in unstable countries to protect their investments, violating labor laws to maximize profits at the expense of the healthy, safety, and well-being of employees, engaging in predatory business practices that manipulate consumers into paying more for goods of inferior quality, supporting sweatshops and/or the slave trade in countries with weak labor laws to minimize expenses for labor...

Okay, this is getting pretty long. I think we all get the picture, right? Corporations are bad and do bad things. It really shouldn't come as a surprise that an organization lead by a bunch of rich people who are quite literally only there to make decisions that make themselves more money is a model of business that necessarily leads to regularly unpleasant behavior. Whether they're poisoning our air, poisoning our water, poisoning our food, or poisoning our very minds corporations have proven time and again that they are not at all good for society. Perhaps then it's time they go the way of the Dodo?

What say ye, NSG? Is it time we send corporations to the big farm up north so they can roam free with your childhood dog who definitely didn't run away and get hit by a car? I think my answer is rather obvious.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

We need to get rid of corporations, but not necessarily because they are corporations. We need to get rid of the underlying structures that create both corporations and their destructive behaviour. This means, as a first step, abolishing capital owmership of companies (ie the fact that you can buy a company and thereby gaining access to a portion of the profits. Capital investment in general should be abolished. It is one of those things that is only required because competitors have access to it, and thereby you are outcompeted if you don’t. Instead of initial investments being required, companies need to get used to buying machines and such and paying those machines back in installments, rather than taking on investors who want profit in perpetuity.

This is not easy, and of course does not remove every bad impulse, but worker control of companies instead of capital control, and limiting the usefulness of capital in the first place, would do much to limit the destructive and antidemocratic tendencies of companies.

[Sordhau]

We need to get rid of corporations, but not necessarily because they are corporations. We need to get rid of the underlying structures that create both corporations and their destructive behaviour. This means, as a first step, abolishing capital owmership of companies (ie the fact that you can buy a company and thereby gaining access to a portion of the profits. Capital investment in general should be abolished. It is one of those things that is only required because competitors have access to it, and thereby you are outcompeted if you don’t. Instead of initial investments being required, companies need to get used to buying machines and such and paying those machines back in installments, rather than taking on investors who want profit in perpetuity.

This is not easy, and of course does not remove every bad impulse, but worker control of companies instead of capital control, and limiting the usefulness of capital in the first place, would do much to limit the destructive and antidemocratic tendencies of companies.

Basically abolish Capitalism.

100% support.

[Michel Meilleur]

Corporations in general aren't necessary evil but multinationals corporations end up trying to become pseudo states of their own because, once they've hit a certain point, they simply have enough power and money to act this way and, being motivated solely by greed, they do not shy away from it.
Personally, I see the solution to that in the form of Distributism rather than Socialism. Break up the "too big to fail" conglomerates, nationalize key-interests businesses and then divide the rest into as many smaller private enterprises as possible.

[Ethel mermania]

Kind of impossible to do anything large scale without them. Whether the corporation is state or privately owned.

[Gallia-]

There are some nice incorporated workers' cooperatives like Mondragon, so they're not all bad.

[Sordhau]

Nobody voted for the fifth option. I guess this is my supervillain origin story.

[Ifreann]

Kind of impossible to do anything large scale without them. Whether the corporation is state or privately owned.

That would seem to only be true if you're using "corporation" to mean "literally any organisation".

[The Holy Therns]

Yes. It's all witch covens from now on.

[Saiwania]

Before a company even gets off the ground, it needs a plan- along with money, lots of money. But no one is just going to want to give them money unless they get something in return for the risk they're taking with that money. If a company borrows from a bank, that bank is going to want collateral if not interest on the loan. A good alternative for most companies is to simply sell stock.

Seems like a fair trade to me. If they want to raise money from rich and ordinary people, they can split themselves up into shares which people can buy. No one is going to want to buy the stock however, unless if the investor knows that they can possibly sell it later for a return, or if they get a dividend. That is why stock market exists, people want a share of all profits/revenue if they believe in the business model and are willing to directly fund/back it, but companies on occasion want/need to raise money.

Both sides benefit if they're getting what they want from eachother. That is why corporations aren't obsolete, not even close. Its a good way of setting a big business up in terms of running it. What would fix things more, is to break up monopolies and have Glass-Steagall regulations back to the way it should be.

[El Lazaro]

Unelected aristocrats shouldn’t be so powerful. Instead, a group of unelected aristocrats should seize control of everything and rule benevolently to create a worker’s utopia. Clearly the wealthy and powerful will behave better when they have unrestricted control over the country.

[Jabberwocky]

Without corporations, what would CEOs do?

[Ifreann]

Without corporations, what would CEOs do?

Get a real job?

[Valentine Z]

Replace every single company under the Sun and Earth with one big "Mom & Dad Corporation". Literally, we will assign one couple to run the whole thing as dual CEOs.

Trust me, it will work.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Unelected aristocrats shouldn’t be so powerful. Instead, a group of unelected aristocrats should seize control of everything and rule benevolently to create a worker’s utopia. Clearly the wealthy and powerful will behave better when they have unrestricted control over the country.

This is capitalism for you.

Before a company even gets off the ground, it needs a plan- along with money, lots of money. But no one is just going to want to give them money unless they get something in return for the risk they're taking with that money. If a company borrows from a bank, that bank is going to want collateral if not interest on the loan. A good alternative for most companies is to simply sell stock.

Seems like a fair trade to me. If they want to raise money from rich and ordinary people, they can split themselves up into shares which people can buy. No one is going to want to buy the stock however, unless if the investor knows that they can possibly sell it later for a return, or if they get a dividend. That is why stock market exists, people want a share of all profits/revenue if they believe in the business model and are willing to directly fund/back it, but companies on occasion want/need to raise money.

Both sides benefit if they're getting what they want from eachother. That is why corporations aren't obsolete, not even close. Its a good way of setting a big business up in terms of running it. What would fix things more, is to break up monopolies and have Glass-Steagall regulations back to the way it should be.

Thank you, economy 101. Now for the 102 class:

Why are rich citizens rich?
What makes more money: morality or amorality?

[Saiwania]

A CEO is sort of a real job, just like a CFO is, or a COO if there is one. They're all business school educated people who're supposed to know what they're doing in terms of making macro-economic decisions that will keep the board/investors happy with the direction such an organization is going. If they're in the financial red too much, they risk being fired. They're not easy to replace in terms of talent/skill. They're up to Postgraduate education at minimum.

[Ethel mermania]

Kind of impossible to do anything large scale without them. Whether the corporation is state or privately owned.

That would seem to only be true if you're using "corporation" to mean "literally any organisation".

Organization that is a legal entity in and of it self, can organize abs direct tasks for a specific goal? Be bonded without the principles be completely liable?

A corporation is a specific type of organization, ownership doesn't matter. Joint stock, state owned, workers cooperative, sole proprietorship. Ceo is paid the same as line workers, or makes 300x, doesn't matter.

The idea that we don't need corporations is silly.

[Floofybit]

It's likely that we would need corporations to destroy corporations, further probing the point, that maybe corporations are okay to stay.

[Ethel mermania]

A CEO is sort of a real job, just like a CFO is, or a COO if there is one. They're all business school educated people who're supposed to know what they're doing in terms of making macro-economic decisions that will keep the board/investors happy with the direction such an organization is going. If they're in the financial red too much, they risk being fired. They're not easy to replace in terms of talent/skill. They're up to Postgraduate education at minimum.

I dont know many CEO's of businesses in the trades who are businesses school grads. Mostly the electrical shops are run by electricians. Plumbing concerns, plumbers, etc. My plumber makes 3x what I do

[Valentine Z]

A CEO is sort of a real job, just like a CFO is, or a COO if there is one. They're all business school educated people who're supposed to know what they're doing in terms of making macro-economic decisions that will keep the board/investors happy with the direction such an organization is going. If they're in the financial red too much, they risk being fired. They're not easy to replace in terms of talent/skill. They're up to Postgraduate education at minimum.

I dont know many CEO's of businesses in the trades who are businesses school grads. Mostly the electrical shops are run by electricians. Plumbing concerns, plumbers, etc. My plumber makes 3x what I do

I agree. I would add on that (most) relatively smaller companies, or companies that fill a niche, have a CEO and even the management that is not completely out of touch.

[Saiwania]

I dont know many CEO's of businesses in the trades who are businesses school grads. Mostly the electrical shops are run by electricians. Plumbing concerns, plumbers, etc. My plumber makes 3x what I do

Yes, for a small business/sole proprietorship. Just that the larger an organization gets and the more white collar it is objectively speaking, it needs someone who can manage such a large ship- figuratively speaking- see the larger picture, if not being just very good at financial matters. The cash flow is usually what is most important, if the business at the end of the day- has more money than it is losing.

[The Holy Therns]

A CEO is sort of a real job, just like a CFO is, or a COO if there is one. They're all business school educated people who're supposed to know what they're doing in terms of making macro-economic decisions that will keep the board/investors happy with the direction such an organization is going. If they're in the financial red too much, they risk being fired. They're not easy to replace in terms of talent/skill. They're up to Postgraduate education at minimum.

I dont know many CEO's of businesses in the trades who are businesses school grads. Mostly the electrical shops are run by electricians. Plumbing concerns, plumbers, etc. My plumber makes 3x what I do

He keeps saving the Mushroom Kingdom, he deserves it.

[Sordhau]

Unelected aristocrats shouldn’t be so powerful. Instead, a group of unelected aristocrats should seize control of everything and rule benevolently to create a worker’s utopia. Clearly the wealthy and powerful will behave better when they have unrestricted control over the country.

TIL factory workers are aristocrats. I had no idea I was part of the upper class! Where's my boatloads of money?

Without corporations, what would CEOs do?

Actual work like the rest of us.

[Chan Island]

They are an observable, repeated product of capitalism- if you run the simulation 1000 times you'll get corporations 1000 times.

Now, has humanity evolved beyond the need for capitalism? Well, its destroying the planet so I'd hope so but there's been precious few viable alternatives proposed as of late.

[Ethel mermania]

I dont know many CEO's of businesses in the trades who are businesses school grads. Mostly the electrical shops are run by electricians. Plumbing concerns, plumbers, etc. My plumber makes 3x what I do

He keeps saving the Mushroom Kingdom, he deserves it.

All while keeping the pipes clean, No arguement.