View Single Post
Old 06-07-2015, 08:18 PM   #17
barryem
Wizard
barryem ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.barryem ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.barryem ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.barryem ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.barryem ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.barryem ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.barryem ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.barryem ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.barryem ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.barryem ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.barryem ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
barryem's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,459
Karma: 68781975
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Arkansas
Device: Paperwhite 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg View Post
The belief that shareholders come first is not codified by statute.
I'm now lawyer but that statement and the article it came from contradicted things I've heard all my life, so I did a bit of googling. It seems that fiduciary responsibility of corporate officers to shareholders is defined in the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Sarbanes-Oxley, whatever that is.

Anyway that's my legal research for today.

I can't claim that I read it all or understood it all but it seems that it does contradict what was said in that article.

I suspect it's entirely reasonable for a corporate officer to make a decision based on the good of his community as long as it's not too harmful to his shareholders. I seriously doubt that it would be reasonable if he made all his decisions with that in mind.

I'm sure not going to say that Capitalism is a pretty thing. There's much about it that's ugly. But what are our choices?

Barry
barryem is offline   Reply With Quote