Market watch: "The New Left: Corporate America"

[Worst Username Ever]

SANTA MONICA, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- The people gathered in the room all raised their hands in support of being more environmentally responsible. They embraced notions of furthering gay rights and labor rights and spoke of how we need to feed the poor and fight HIV/AIDS.

These people weren't from the ranks of nonprofits, academia or what might be thought of as liberal-leaning institutions. These were executives from Fortune 500 companies gathered in a daylong summit to discuss how they can implement more socially responsible policies.

Corporate America, it seems, is charging in where liberal government is refusing to tread, supporting more social programs to help not only employees but also people in their community, throughout the country and all over the world.

Take global warming. The entire semiconductor industry and 50 utilities have voluntarily agreed to reduce "greenhouse" gas emissions at the same time the U.S. government refuses to endorse the Kyoto Protocol, which calls for mandated emission reduction.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid=%7B3EA512C8%2D64D9%2D40DE%2DBBBA%2D2B81825ADA2C%7D&siteid=myyahoo

IMO, they are only doing it to make a show and avoid gov't regulation. Corporations never, never look past the bottom line. On the bright side, I am sure some of the individual people in this movement really do understand that it is important for people to at least BELIEVE that their corporations are taking up social causes.

[0rganism]

1. At this point, I'd even welcome lip-service

Every tenet of the "left" has been so thoroughly denigrated and degraded by the MSM that I find any mention of CEOs verbally supporting these issues -- no matter how cynically -- somewhat uplifting.

[bloom]

2. On a recent NOW show

that was about Exxon paying for propaganda to confuse people into thinking that there is some question about global warming being a problem - they had a segment with Cinergy (an electric Co.) and the steps that they wanted to take...

I don't know why electric companies worry about PR anyway - it seems like people are going to use what they are going to use for the most part. For awhile electric companies were advocating for conservation - maybe they still do. Anyway - it's interesting that they are not encouraging people to use more, more, more - like a lot of commodities.

What I don't get is why (as someone in a committee hearing claimed) if it would cost $18/dollars/house/year for an electric company to add pollution reducing devices (ie.that would reduce mercury emissions by 80%) - that they don't do it. The health costs are so much more than the implementation costs.

Maybe it's the companies that use the electricity - not the creators/sellers that fight it. Maybe they can't pass off their costs as easily? :shrug: