[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

View post   
File: 684 KB, 3200x1920, 15204692418204958.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11892271 No.11892271 [Reply] [Original]

the city you live in would be a better place if it was run by a corporation. prove me wrong (you can't)

>> No.11892284

b-but the city I live in is run by a corporation

>> No.11892318

>>11892271
corporations are inherently for profit, by treating people as a means to an end (profit) you disregard their inherent worth and intrinsic value and your actions no longer have intrinisc value only extrinsic (ie how much profit was made).

In conclusion the city would lose its soul.

>> No.11892454

>>11892318
actually lets back track a little and ask what you even mean by ‘better’ ? What qualifies the condition of something as better or worse than what it used to be like ? I’m assuming in this case you are referring to notions of safety, the effective utility of infrastructure and so on. But all of these things are of an extrinsic quality, not an intrinsic one. Furthermore, we are judging these extrinsic qualities by their utility to achieve something, for example we are judging the extrinsic quality of safety by its utility to enable citizens to achieve a long lasting life and so on. However, if we are to judge extrinsic qualities from by their utility in terms of instrumental value we must concede that when we say ‘better’ we are actually departing from any and all notions of a moral ‘better’, of a moral ‘good’ and so on. As such I believe the very notion that a city could be ‘better’ if run by a corporation is actually nonsensical because the word ‘better’ in this case signifies, in all honesty, nothing of an instrinsic character or nature, therefore it really signifies nothing at all, because in order to define ‘better’ or ‘worse’ we need an objective absolute to refer to or measure against, but in this framework there is none.

>> No.11892468

>>11892318
>inherent worth and intrinsic value
People have no such thing, you worthless beta cuck.

>> No.11892526

>>11892468
We absolutely do because we are able to reason and experience, as iterated by Immanual Kant, one of the most influential philosophers of all time. But yeah, whatever you need to tell yourself anon.

>> No.11892979

A corporation exists to make profit, therefore they have every incentive to create as much economic rent as they can on its citizens. That means high fees, high tolls, high taxes, and lots of ads. Dont think they wouldn't liquidate you if they had the chance

>> No.11893051

>>11892271
What would the company do with the profits collected from the city?
Cities are run like companies silly, exept every citizen is part of the company we elect our directing board and CEO (mayor)
The difference is that unlike a private company the CEO and others don’t get immense multimillion dollar bonuses, instead they get large wages and the money the city makes its re invested back into the city unlike private companies.
Just a reminder that this financial year companies spent over a trillion dollars in shares buybacks and bonuses at the higher level while only 6billion dollars were bonuses for mid management and lower level workers.

>> No.11893306

>>11892271
The whole world would be a better place if everything was run by benevolent corporations balancing everything out.

Trouble is though, 90% of people are jerks so it'd never work.

>> No.11893744

>>11892454
you are such a faggot. wow

>> No.11893779

>>11893306
>benevolent corporations
That only works on the level of small, privately owned companies. The moment you get huge and go public you're at the mercy of your shareholders who are going to drive you to pinch every single penny out of what you have and do

>> No.11893813

>>11892271
https://youtu.be/wA_P8CaNwro