It really tells you that the nobility class never went away, it just rebranded itself.
Wealth hoarding, not to be mistaken with accumulation, should be grounds for investigation, and redistribution if necessary.
Comment on Capitalism is all about using state power to protect capital by force
realitaetsverlust@piefed.zip 5 days ago
CEOs should be personally liable for grave mistakes made by their company. Then a lot of this nonsense would end.
Napster153@lemmy.world 5 days ago
dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 days ago
“Limited Liability” means what then? There are legal constructs that exist that have not been dismantled to even allow an idea like that to exist in legal doctrine.
TronBronson@lemmy.world 4 days ago
It means limited, as in imposed limits. No doing wide spread economic or environmental damage is an existing limit?? Also no ones talking about LLC CEOs, we are talking about c corps lololol. Take your little libertarian ass back to school.
dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 days ago
What the fuck is your problem?
TronBronson@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Linited Liability makes it so the CEO of Activision faces no accountability from the government when he caused his employees to kill themselves. Or the CEO of BP suffering consequences after those oil spills. Or the CEOs of for profit private prisons being held responsible for all of the illegal activities done inside the prisons. But they arent. That’s not a libertarian opinion you fucking moron. That’s a fact of life. Get your shit together the next time you comment.
After Deepwater Horizon, BP itself pleaded guilty to 14 criminal counts, including 11 felony manslaughter counts, obstruction of Congress, and environmental offenses, and received $4 billion in criminal fines and penalties. More importantly for the “LLC protects the humans” theory, federal prosecutors also personally charged two BP well-site supervisors with manslaughter and charged a former senior BP executive with obstruction of Congress and false statements.
Get your shit together kiddo use an AI if you want to argue with me.
TronBronson@lemmy.world 3 days ago
TLDR big corporation doesnt need you defending it by making up weird corporate law in your head. We used to throw a CEO in jail before they owned the whole government
TronBronson@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Okay, well let me help you understand what limited liability limits: Your personal assets. Thats it dude, it means your debtors cant go after your personal house. It doesn’t say your company can commit wage theft and no one’s legally responsible. I would be selling crack under an LLC to your mother if i could.
The reason why you’re confused and why i was attacking you is you vomited up a bunch of words that didnt make sense and it hurt my brain. The point we’re all making is wage theft is a crime, not a bad obligation. you’re protected from obligations not legal threat lol. You can absolutely be targeted and prosecuted for the company you oversee committing crimes. So what we’re all saying is we’d like to see more of that and much harsher penalties, to prevent companies from exploiting power imbalances and stealing large sums of money???
ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 3 days ago
That is only the case if you’re the CEO of a small mom and pops business. Then oh boy, the state makes sure you’re responsible, to show the people they hold CEOs accountable for their behavior (read: they close shops for small accounting mistakes they forgive big corporations to “save workplaces”). If you even manage to get to that point, and not just being prematurely shot down with “why don’t you just work hard at <insert corporation name here> to climb the rank ladder to CEOdom?” and cost of entry into forming your own business.
FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 5 days ago
CEOs shouldn’t exist. Workplaces should be managed by the workers.
realitaetsverlust@piefed.zip 4 days ago
Cool in concept, not feasible in real life.
FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 4 days ago
lol what? Even setting aside worker-owned socialist societies, worker-owned businesses exist and prosper in the United States today. It is obviously feasible.
adjectivenoun@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Which would suggest workers owning the means of production is compatible with market capitalism. Just heavily incentive coops and other collective ownership schemes.
TheKingBombOmbKiller@lemmy.zip 4 days ago
What makes a workplace owned and managed by the workers incompatible with the role of a chief executive officer?
FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 4 days ago
CEOs exist to siphon surplus value to shareholders instead of letting the people who produce it retain it. It’s more that the CEO role is unnecessary in worker owned businesses than incompatible.
TheKingBombOmbKiller@lemmy.zip 4 days ago
CEOs exist to execute the decisions of the board. In a capitalist system the decisions can often be boiled down to “siphon surplus value to shareholders instead of letting the people who produce it to retain it.”
In a socialist system where the workers have a controlling majority of the board, you still need someone to execute the decisions of the board. Or are you suggesting that a worker owned company doesn’t need any top leader beyond the board?
Tiger666@lemmy.ca 4 days ago
Finally real democracy!
FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 4 days ago
For sure. Can’t have democracy without democracy in the workplace.