[Capitalist_Eagle]

I always here this with regard to profit:

"Profit shouldn't be #1"
"This industry shouldn't be in it for profit"
"These people are only after profits"


Okay, and your point is? Your job is not to decide what other people value. If they value profit, then they value profit.

THE ONLY thing to worry about is whether or not they harm others or fraud others in going after their profit. Otherwise, leave them alone, it's not your job to tell others how to live their lives or what to seek in life.

[U184]

OK. Then why worry, about what they worry about?

[Social_Critic]

I always tell my clients profit shouldn't be goal number one. The best indicator should be return on shareholder equity at an acceptable risk level (meaning one shouldn't be borrowing 50 % of the company's worth and taking a junk bond rating to invest in a deal with a 10 % return).

I've seen CEO's who pump profits by shifting operating expenses to capital, which is one of the dumbest moves one can make. This pumps up profits for the quarter, but it increases taxes. And it reduces cash flow. So this deal of making profits number one can be taken way too far. One has to be a lot more sophisticated than that.

[Capitalist_Eagle]

Social Critic, that's great, but that isn't what I'm talking about. I'm talking about letting people make their own decisions in their lives, even if they are stupid decisions.

[The Clockwork Rat]

Because they're right obviously.

[Social_Critic]

Capitalist Eagle, I'm all for that. But there's a slight problem. Say your decision can cause so much harm, we can't shoot you enough times to punish you afterwards. This is a comment I used to make to management when I was a corporate monkey. We used to have these stochastic models and the wonks who ran them would come in and tell us "the risk weighted return for this venture is 17 %". What the nerds didn't tell us was that we were making a $5 billion bet, and the 17 % return sure looked nice, but if we failed, then the stockholders weren't going to be too happy, and there weren't going to be enough bullets to shoot us dead.

Take BPs decision to drill the Macondo well with a substandard set of specs and inexperienced personnel. Or TEPCOs decision to build six nuclear reactors side by side, and put the emergency generator sets next to each other and close to the sea, so they could be sure to be put out of action by the same event which took the reactors off line. These are the types of decisions we really can't let you take on your own, because when the doodoo hits the fan, then we can't shoot you enough times to punish you. Get it?

[Fasces]

Who are YOU to tell me I can't murder pelicans? How dare you, Social_Critic. I value the slaughter of pelicans through the spilling of oil, and frankly, you should let me be.

[Capitalist_Eagle]

Nice fallacy.

I specifically said AS LONG AS YOU DO NO HARM TO OTHERS. Nice ignoring my statement.

Liability laws are extremely important and if you do harm others' property, then you pay accordingly.

[Rei Murasame]

Who ultimately determines what is or is not 'harm'?

[Fasces]

So, as long as I am not the cause of harm, I can do it?

May I lead a man into a pit? If he starves, it is his own biology that is failing him. I am not the cause of his organ failure - the lack of nutrients are.

[Social_Critic]

I do apologize because I missed the harm to others bit. But then, like Musarame said, it all depends on how you define harm to others. Evidently one pelican is ok. Maybe two hundred is ok, we just fine you. But three thousand pelicans is far out. So the question is, where do we draw the line?

I've seen some pretty bad decisions taken by corporate chieftains while I was sitting in the room. And I have received orders from above to do some pretty nasty stuff - which I refused to carry out. So this is what goes on in the world out there in the trenches. And it goes on day after day, event after event. I think in the USA we do a pretty fair job, but I sure wish we charged royalties for minerals taken from federal lands. And we do need to tighten up on the oil industry to make sure they don't spill oil and give me diarrea from eating contaminated shrimp. Oh, and the bankers. We need to have some kind of law providing the death penalty for irrational lending behavior.

[Capitalist_Eagle]

Fasces...no, you are making very ridiculous assertions which I never said.

You can not cause harm to others, period. You cannot force them to do anything against their will, either, unless your rights are being violated (self defense, e.g., is therefore justified even though you harm others, because they initiated aggression against you)

[Social_Critic]

This guy must have been reading Robert Heinlein.

[Fasces]

Heinlein has nothing to do with the idiocy this man is spouting. Heinlein is a national conservative.

You cannot force them to do anything against their will, either

I am not. They want food, but I am not providing it. I am not violating their will by not providing it. They were freely led to the pit.

[Capitalist_Eagle]

Then what is the concern you are bringing up?

[CounterChaos]

I'm talking about letting people make their own decisions in their lives, even if they are stupid decisions.

I'm glad you said that sir...Let me tell you my ideology.

"I like educating people so they do not make stupid decisions"

Who here seems to care the most about his fellow man?

Wait, before you go and get all soapbox on me, let me ask you this:

Do you make stupid decisions? I bet your answer is no...If so, then what do you care if I focus on those that are?


Socialism will never be as a result of revolution, but rather as a product of reason. ~Sandori~

[El Gilroy]

Then what is the concern you are bringing up?

People starving in pits because they were stupid enough to fall into them. Obviously, capitalism says to let them die, they made the wrong mistakes.

[xoplytnyk]

Why are conservatives control freaks?

[Social_Critic]

xo, that's a good question. I believe it's conservatives who want to impose their Christian religion, have serious concerns over homosexuality, want to tell women they can't have an abortion, like to prohibit marihuana use, really like the Patriot Act, and so on and so forth. I'd say they're control freaks.

[ninurta]

To the OP:
Why do the Conservatives want to decide other peoples values?

As for:

Why are conservatives control freaks?

Not all of them. Some are just paranoid. So much so, they think they need to expand our military budget that is way too big, and take rights away from americans because they're afraid they might be terrorists.