In the wake of BLM, many corporate executives are standing up for social and political causes. Most recently, many companies released statements disapproving of Georgia's voter restricting laws. Despite being a fan of socially aware corporations, the many corporations allying themselves with social causes never sat well with me. Finally The Economist published an article that best explains my reservations.
The Economist leans heavily on Milton Friedman's corporate obligation for profit maximization, which until 2020 I dismissed as being outdated in the modern era. Government is not particularly good at regulating new unknown technology/industries and the idea that Congressmen could ever properly regulate Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, Tesla, and the like seemed infeasible to me. A few years ago I am sure The Economist would have been more sympathetic of my dismissal but it seems like they have changed their mind. Give it a read! I linked the original Times article as well as the Economist piece.
Original 1970 NYT essay by Milton Friedman "A Friedman doctrine‐- The Social Responsibility Of Business Is to Increase Its Profits": A Friedman doctrine‐- The Social Responsibility Of Business Is to Increase Its Profits - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
The Economist: The political CEO | The Economist
Image URL: Delta CEO blasts Georgia voting law as 'unacceptable' and 'based on a lie' after backlash (cnbc.com)
Comments
Post a Comment