Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Corporations have a larger responsibility
Editorial commentary
Recent contributions
- What Obama didn't say
- How my education and religious training failed me
- Can we be a two-trolley town?
- Striving for civility
- Commentary archive
From the RoundTable blog
Read the latest entries
Chad Braby
Braby is a regional manager for a general contractor and lives in Roanoke.
When historians set out to write the tale of Western civilization of the last 60 years, the executive summary might read, "Times were good, resources were abundant and business prospered. Corporations and government worked in cooperation, ensuring that the bounty flowed. Jobs were created, and the quality of life improved." But this story, like all others throughout history, is told by the victors. There is a darker, seedier truth that is more evident as each day of these troubled economic times unfolds.
Prevailing wisdom (as well as United States law) tells us that the sole purpose and obligation of the corporation is to maximize profit for the stockholder, and ensures us that the wealth will trickle down for all to enjoy. The executive rests easy at night on the grounds that the ends are justified. Job creation is good, right? We pay our corporate income taxes, right?
It is right, but it is not enough. Too often, the profit-only tunnel vision comes at the expense of the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food that nourishes us, the safety standards we cherish and the social equality we are morally obligated to uphold. And too often, the Reaganites are correct: Our government of, by and for the people is indeed part of the problem.
It's not due to any inherent evil in the philosophy of government, but because our government and corporations are increasingly indistinguishable. A walk down K Street leaves a person dizzy from trying to figure out where one starts and the other stops.
It does not have to be so. Government can be the solution, especially when the solution is expanded beyond the goal of profit, to the goal of improving people's lives. But in order for that to work, the marriage of government and corporation must be dissolved. It is irrational to expect and demand quality governance out of the current system. What can be expected today is what is seen repeatedly: The needs of corporations will be met first.
It does not have to be so. Government can provide the necessary vision and leadership, but must be staffed and funded adequately. It's absurd to drastically scale back the role of government and then complain that the services it provides are falling short, then, compounding the absurdity, using the shortfall as an example of why the government should be scaled back further.
And we all wish our taxes were a little lower, but the din is sounding whiny after decades of complaint. As Oliver Wendell Holmes succinctly said, "Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society."
It does not have to be so. The next time someone spouts the "sole obligation of business" mantra, call them out. Imagine meeting a new neighbor, who introduces himself, "Hi, I'm Steve. My sole function is to maximize profit for my stockholders." Huh? Not an acceptable way of operating? Then why is it acceptable behavior for the corporation, which, since the late 1800s, has been granted the same legal rights and status as individuals?
It does not have to be so. Business can do better. Once the pure-profit motive is discarded, business enterprise can act in the same way as individuals; with an eye toward the betterment of many. We must all move in this direction. Government, for the people. Business, for the people. Really, what else is there?
