HughBeaumont
HughBeaumont's JournalWhy the "World's Dumbest Idea" is Finally Dying: The "maximize shareholder value" myth
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2014/06/17/why-the-worlds-dumbest-idea-is-finally-dying/Thats the big news coming out of a recent report from the Aspen Institute which convened a cross-section of business thought leaders, including both executives and academics. The reports most important finding is that majority of the thought leaders who participated in the study, particularly corporate executives, agreed that the primary purpose of the corporation is to serve customers interests. In effect, the best way to serve shareholders interests is to deliver value to customers.
snip
Friedman won the way a great debater wins, says Martin, by cleverly framing the terms of the debate Because Friedman was so inflammatory in his call for a 100 percent versus 0 percent handling of the trade-off, his entire opposition has focused on making arguments for a number lower than 100 percent for shareholders. In doing so, they implicitly accepted Friedmans premise that there is a fundamental trade-off between the interests of shareholders on the one hand and other societal actors such as customers, employees and communities on the other hand. Ever since, the Friedmanite defense has been to force the opposition to prove that making a trade-off to any extent whatsoever against shareholders wont seriously damage capitalism.
Had the opposition been cleverer, it would have attacked the premise from the very beginning by asking: what is the proof that there is a trade-off at all? Had they done so, they would have found out that Friedman had not a shred of proof that a trade-off existed prior to 1970. And they would have found out that there still isnt a single shred of empirical evidence that 100 percent focus on shareholder value to the exclusion of other societal factors actually produces measurably higher value for shareholders.
Hello internet right wing! (Big Fat PDF ahead!)
How you doing out there? Like I care!
I've officially decided that you people suck hearty balls at internetting.
So, without further ado, please read THIS handy, dandy chart listing all of the things you're doing wrong before you ruin my day with your inane, linkless, partisan comments on image macros regarding life issues that no other country besides OURS seems to take interest in politicizing.
Pay special attention to the following sections:
The entire "On the Attack" section
Two Wrongs Make a Right
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc
Circular Logic
False Dilemma
Hasty Generalization
Appeal to Authority
The entire "Appeal to Emotions" section.
Have a pleasant day. But you won't, because you aren't wired that way.
http://pzxc.com/logical-fallacies-cheat-sheet
Slum Life In New York City During the Nineteenth Century's Gilded Age
This is "Laissez-Fail".
Here's what life would be like without social services, laws or regulations of any kind, with as small a government as you could imagine and corporate America's "you're worth what you're worth" wage acumen. Put the economy in the hands of the Peter Thiels, Peter Schiffs, Thomas Petterfys, the Kochs, Bernie Marcuses and Ken Langones of the world, and this is what you're going to get. This canyon-gapped two-tiered life is what they would love to send us back to.
Some "utopia" . . . .
http://io9.com/slum-life-in-new-york-city-during-the-nineteenth-centu-1584688488
Profile Information
Member since: Fri Aug 13, 2004, 03:12 PMNumber of posts: 24,461