The debate "Companies should be prohibited from making any political or ideological manifestation" was started by
June 11, 2019, 11:48 pm.
12 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 22 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
Rodolfo posted 7 arguments to the agreers part.
Allirix posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
Potatochiper, sssk, kuku, Rodolfo, bernie and 7 visitors agree.
Potato, hollieg, Allirix, DrWho, MADHURA, MightyJackalope and 16 visitors disagree.
They're legal entities run by PEOPLE yes.
so you believe companies are people?
In a free country companies can make whatever political stance they want. It's usually unwise to make political stances though because you always stand on someone's toes in politics
you should really work on your reading skills.
I hope one day you and the society will understand about professional ethics and equality of opinion!
I specifically said, in the post I am replying to, a post you thumbed down, that companies are not to take stances on random political issues, but only on subjects related to their industries.
a hospital may be able to make a statement about abortion (a medical procedure), but a toy or food company cannot.
Is the same use of power, only in the case is not right, but the influence of the company!
They want to think they create an organization just for this, but do not use the social power of a company that did not get where it arrived like that!
Think of them opining about abortion, while attending patients with very adverse opinions theirs! You are being led away!
most people, when they go home, want to spend time with their family and friends. And they certainly don't want to complete and fund a comprehensive project by themselves on their time off.
a company can hire a team to gather comprehensive data from many people, from the directors, the doctors, the nurses, even the patients, and compile it into effective facts and recommendations. this will not be done by a single individual on their free time.
once again, all they can do is release a statement with recommendations based on their expertise. they cannot take our representatives to a $10,000 lunch or buy them an exotic car. no more lobbying. we agree on that.
A hospital has no experience whatsoever, it's a company, its employees and directors are those who can think like individuals, but never using the name and power of the company!
It was exactly the lobby I was talking about, but it's not direct, and more because of power, monopoly and influence!
The money you receive as a company should serve the focus on your work!
how does me saying the hospital can make a statement mean that patients have no say?
how much of my posts are you reading?
how is it not fair to them? did I say they cannot speak? not only can they also all speak, but they also get to vote. hospitals do not get to vote.
business's power, without money influence, is much less then a person's. but their knowledge and experience may be invaluable in relevant decision making. by silencing their expertise completely you are making a fool's mistake.
Hospitals should not comment on health laws because their patients and staff may be against it, it is not fair to them!
when did I mention any stances or opinions? I'm not talking about companies having political positions on things like a war or abortion. I would want hospitals to chime in on health laws. trucking companies to chime in on new traffic laws. etc. and no they should not be able to spend millions to outshout ordinary people. but they should be allowed to release a simple statement.
honestly I don't think your understanding what I'm trying to say, including the fact that *I agree with you* in general.
humans as individuals are part of the conversation, not a company, it stays in your industry!
Do you talk about exceptions, so long as their opinion is the same as yours?
I explicitly said no donations (or gifts). and no marketing campaigns. how is that lobbying? I agree with everything you said in 99% of situations. but absolute positions are usually wrong. there are always exceptions.
they should be part of the conversation, but they should not be allowed to dominate the conversation.
You are only justifying lobbying of those who use their power, to stimulate certain political views to power!
Companies do not have their power by the opinion but by the products, many that are their consumers may be contrary to such opinions and must be respected, there must be professionalism!
while I agree with you in general I disagree with the absoluteness of your statement.
if it is relevant, I would like companies to state their opinions on matters of trade or regulations that directly effect them. I dont think they should start a propaganda campaign or fund pseudo science. I do think they should be allowed to release *A* statement, or call *their* (not all) representative. and talking should not involve massive donations.
we need to make sensible regulations, but a complete ban is not too extreme.
They should focus only on their work, in their area, respecting their clients, assuming a neutral position!
Only employees as individuals could position themselves!