C. Why End Corporate Abuse?

POST A. An Invitation

POST B. How Important Justice?

POST C. Why end corporate abuse?

   1. Profiting from Injustice

               2. Making abuse less profitable

               3. Does Job Creation justify injustice?

               4. Holding companies accountable

POST D. Taking Action

POST E. Politically Speaking

POST F. Black Lives Matter....To the Christian Church? 

1. Profiting from Injustice

The issue of injustice involves more than police shooting defenseless black people. Injustice exists at all levels and in all institutions of this country. As long as anyone is experiencing abuse, there will be an issue of injustice. There is a more politically/economically powerful class of American citizens which profits from abuse.  If you need some verification of widespread abuse, feel free to read the following shaded section. Also, my book,

      There are millions of financially needy people in this country. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 5.2 percent of the 2011 American population were dependent on TANF (program that replaced public assistance), SNAP (formerly Food Stamps) and/or SSI (1) for more than half of their total family income (https://aspe.hhs.gov/report/welfare-indicators-and-risk-factors-thirteenth-report-congress).The official 2014 US poverty rate was 14.8 percent of the population (https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/demo/p60-254.pdf).

      The average salary of the Fortune 500 corporation CEOs was 373 times greater than the income of an average production worker's income in these companies in 2014 (http://www.cnbc.com/2015/05/18/why-corporate-ceo-pay-is-so-high-and-going-higher.html). If  Fortune 500 CEOs made an average of only three times as much as the average income of the lowest paid employees, it would free up enough money to create 185,000 new entry level positions in these companies. Or these companies could decrease the CEO salaries and at the same time decrease the cost of their goods and services. This would result in more product being sold which would necessitate more hiring to keep up with increased demand. Some companies seem to have a standard operating practice of contributing millions to political candidates and paying millions more to lobbyists to get legislation enacted that is in the best interest of the company or industry without regard to the effect of the legislation on the common good(2). There are companies that keep billions in profits overseas to avoid US federal tax. Those millions and billions could be used to create jobs in this country. Or how about using that money to install more pollution control technology that would help people with airborne allergies and asthma to live more healthfully? Increasing the energy efficiency of offices and production facilities might have the same effect. How about using some of that extra money to increase the safety of products or worker safety?

      Should corporations be allowed to utilize profits in any legal way they please? Certainly. Should American citizens be allowed to express their disapproval of corporations utilizing profits at the cost of the common good? Absolutely.

      Organized protests, petition campaigns, and letters can all be effective in opposing abuse especially if they lead more people to exercise their personal power of the purse for the cause of justice. I believe the rich and powerful pay more attention to financial pressure than they do to demonstrations When enough people stop purchasing the goods and services of abusive companies and stop investing in those companies, we will have gotten their attention. I call this the application of accountability to encourage social responsibility. Corporations use the excuse of fiduciary responsibility to justify their unfair treatment of the poor and of society in general. They rationalize that their first duty is to make as much money as possible for their stock holders.

2. Making abuse less profitable

If the majority of American citizens decided to hold these corporations accountable through selling off their stock holdings in these companies and boycotting their products and services, the company bosses would suddenly realize that fiduciary responsibility and social responsibility don't have to be mutually exclusive.  I am not suggesting that anyone should boycott any products that they need for their personal health/survival unless affordable alternative products of equal quality are accessible to them. 

3. Does Job Creation justify injustice?

Certainly companies, no matter how abusive or self-serving, provide people with jobs. That may be a good thing depending on the nature of the job and the amount of worker compensation. Is that sufficient reason to give all abusive companies a free pass? What if there were a company that developed a food supplement that was proven to add ten years to anyone's life if they took it every day? Sounds good. What if the company that produces these supplements was located in a heavily populated area of India? What if that production process resulted in uncontrollable toxic emissions and for every million pills that are produced, two hundred poor people would die from exposure to the emissions? And what if the supplements were so expensive that only upper class people could afford them? How would you feel about owning stock in that company or purchasing any products from that company? What if the company employed a thousand people who would otherwise be impoverished?  Is that sufficient reason to give the company a free pass, that is, not hold it accountable?

4. Holding companies accountable

 Should/do people who stand for justice care enough about the victims of abuse to hold the abusers accountable?  If you are such a person, I urge you to read the next post which names some companies I think need to be held accountable and the reasons why. If you find any information that is out of date/inaccurate or you feel strongly about a particular large corporation not named that needs to be held accountable, I would appreciate hearing from you. I can be reached via the e-mail address, rqpublic1@gmail.com. Subject line should read "accountability". I think it will be most effective to go after the biggest players first. When they fall in step, smaller companies will follow.

~~~~~~~ 

 

(1)"Supplemental Security Income (SSI) was established in order to help children and adults with limited income and resources who are disabled, blind, or over the age of 65. SSI benefits cover necessities such as food, clothing, and shelter. These benefits are not financed by the social security fund." (https://www.disabilityapprovalguide.com/what-is-ssi-what-is-ssdi/?src=GSN_DSA&gclid=CPGD68Cn3c8CFcxkhgodK3QB1A).

 (2) common good: That which is owned and/or administered by some level of civil government and which benefits citizens in general but which most individual citizens could not afford. Such things as the infrastructure, libraries, public health protection, environmental preservation, the courts, law enforcement, national security, firefighting, public education, public parks, public playgrounds, public green spaces, employment security, government fiscal responsibility, responsible foreign policy, and caring for the disabled and retired citizens in need are all aspects of the common good.