To those of you who may read these rarely reliable random rants, I would like to introduce you to a blog of greater substance and intellectual rigor: I was a Difficult Child at http://www.iwasadifficultchild.blogspot.com/.
I would like here to revise and extend the remarks of my colleague at Child. Please check the original post for reference.
In the post, Child laments the growing frequency with which retail establisments embelish their purpose by sticking a hand out at the cash register. Every possible charitable cause seems to have found its way to the counter. Jars, cardboard quarter holders, giant symbols you can write your name on to show your generosity on the wall of fame, and even automatic deductions from your credit card.
Child accurately points out the awkwardness of these situations, and suggests that the semi-compulsory nature of these efforts undermines the true spirit of charity. It may be true that, "Abideth these three, and the greatest of these is charity," but that doesn't mean Wal-Mart should be in on the act.
Beyond concurring whole-heartedly with this thesis, I wish to add my own corrollary. Corporate charity is misguided and disingenuous. It is pandering and distorting to economics. It is a tax imposed by management on its owners, and it too should be eliminated.
Let me step back a bit to assert that corporations are a vastly misunderstood entity. The word corporate comes from the latin corpus, which is body. A corporation is nothing more than a large group of individuals working together as a single "body." The concept is highly democratic. Rather than having commerce controlled by a few, wealthy actors, as was the case 150 years ago when land and title were fixed and class pre-determined, the concept is to allow many less-well-off players to share in the commerce that drives the world.
Somehow this democratizing, wealth creating, people empowering concept became corrupted by leftist polticians and thinkers. Today "corporation" is almost a dirty word, and adding the adjective "big" drags the concept into subscription cable realms as goes proper decency.
In a misguided effort to curry favor with the masses, big businesses have suddenly become big charities. Corporations champion every cause from the environment to special olympics to prove their social bona fides. The ability of the United Way to manipulate corporations toward its fund-raising goals is but one egregious example. The problem is a corporation has a very narrow purpose: to pool investor or owner money, apply it to a commercial venture, and return the profits. Nothing about the corporate level ought act outside these bounds.
By funding countless social experiments and charitable causes, the management of these companies are failing in their fiduciary duty to the owners. The proper purpose of a corporation, at the administrative, as well as the retail level, is to engage in providing goods and services that compete favorably and win customers. They should cease trying to work as social services, return their profits to their owners, pass savings to their customers, and leave the business of charities to individuals.
I would like here to revise and extend the remarks of my colleague at Child. Please check the original post for reference.
In the post, Child laments the growing frequency with which retail establisments embelish their purpose by sticking a hand out at the cash register. Every possible charitable cause seems to have found its way to the counter. Jars, cardboard quarter holders, giant symbols you can write your name on to show your generosity on the wall of fame, and even automatic deductions from your credit card.
Child accurately points out the awkwardness of these situations, and suggests that the semi-compulsory nature of these efforts undermines the true spirit of charity. It may be true that, "Abideth these three, and the greatest of these is charity," but that doesn't mean Wal-Mart should be in on the act.
Beyond concurring whole-heartedly with this thesis, I wish to add my own corrollary. Corporate charity is misguided and disingenuous. It is pandering and distorting to economics. It is a tax imposed by management on its owners, and it too should be eliminated.
Let me step back a bit to assert that corporations are a vastly misunderstood entity. The word corporate comes from the latin corpus, which is body. A corporation is nothing more than a large group of individuals working together as a single "body." The concept is highly democratic. Rather than having commerce controlled by a few, wealthy actors, as was the case 150 years ago when land and title were fixed and class pre-determined, the concept is to allow many less-well-off players to share in the commerce that drives the world.
Somehow this democratizing, wealth creating, people empowering concept became corrupted by leftist polticians and thinkers. Today "corporation" is almost a dirty word, and adding the adjective "big" drags the concept into subscription cable realms as goes proper decency.
In a misguided effort to curry favor with the masses, big businesses have suddenly become big charities. Corporations champion every cause from the environment to special olympics to prove their social bona fides. The ability of the United Way to manipulate corporations toward its fund-raising goals is but one egregious example. The problem is a corporation has a very narrow purpose: to pool investor or owner money, apply it to a commercial venture, and return the profits. Nothing about the corporate level ought act outside these bounds.
By funding countless social experiments and charitable causes, the management of these companies are failing in their fiduciary duty to the owners. The proper purpose of a corporation, at the administrative, as well as the retail level, is to engage in providing goods and services that compete favorably and win customers. They should cease trying to work as social services, return their profits to their owners, pass savings to their customers, and leave the business of charities to individuals.
1 comment:
Agreed. Loving Child BTW. :)
Peace.
Post a Comment