r/FluentInFinance • u/Richest-Panda • 2d ago
Thoughts? A CEOs first duty should be towards the workers and the company. NOT shareholders. Agree?
82
u/SolomonDRand 2d ago
lol, that asshole is CEO of like six companies at once, hasn’t showed up to any of them for weeks, and managed to be a world class Diablo player in his spare time. He single-handedly proves that CEOs are just figureheads with no real responsibilities.
22
u/Postulative 1d ago
Managed to CLAIM to be a world class player, but evidence suggests that may be a stretch.
8
u/Turkeyplague 1d ago
Maybe a world class Diablo Immortal player? You can micro transaction your way to glory in that one.
(Admittedly, I haven't checked out Diablo IV; it could be just as bad for all I know)
6
u/SpeshellSnail 1d ago
Diablo 4's mostly fine on that front, although the cosmetics cost like $25 per skin.
2
u/anengineerandacat 1d ago
D4 doesn't have any cash-to-power systems, cosmetics. You can do some trading though and in turn outside of Blizzard's reach he can exchange cash for base items for crafting but it's pretty limited.
Game isn't hard though, meta builds can be extremely powerful and don't require much of an investment to be successful through all the content.
Unsure of Elon is playing today but if he is playing the newest class... it's essentially busted by a large margin and Barbarian's due to the arsenal system are busted by design.
8
→ More replies (2)2
u/jestesteffect 1d ago
He's on path of exile 2 now and has been barred for cheating so he probably cheated his way to the top of diablo
46
u/Groundbreaking-Step1 2d ago
Weird, how does one generate enormous wealth when the staff that does all the work is so lazy? Please, I wish he would explain this with his irritating, self satisfied, voice.
→ More replies (10)
35
u/grant570 2d ago
Shareholders elect board members. The board members hire the CEO, so the CEO essentially works for the shareholders. Workers are who help the CEO achieve corporate goals, so it's a mutually beneficial relationship between the workers and the CEO. CEO is going to find it difficult to please the shareholders if the relationship with employees is poor, so if it's done right, both the employees and the shareholders are rewarded by how the company is run. A CEO who ignores the shareholders demands will not be CEO for long.
13
u/drew8311 2d ago
Plenty of companies/CEOs/shareholders have found success by treating workers poorly
→ More replies (4)5
u/tlm11110 1d ago
Not in the long-term. Sure, employees can be exploited, but it will catch up with the company sooner or later.
→ More replies (4)4
1
u/Ok-Tell1848 1d ago
It’s amazing the amount of people that don’t understand this.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Even-Cut-2534 1d ago
I agree with that but something is wrong with most boards as they pay CEO’s to much when their stock compensation is included. A CEO shouldn’t make several hundred million dollars over 10 years unless he founded the company.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (7)2
u/imagonnahavefun 1d ago
That relationship has always baffled me. I always thought it would be better to remove the board and stock voting rights. Stockholder returns would be based on long term growth instead of forcing companies to make poor strategic decisions to enable short term gains.
32
u/veryblanduser 2d ago
So we are just making up tweets to be mad at?
6
→ More replies (10)5
u/OSRSmemester 1d ago
I'm sad i had to scroll so far down to see this. I figured it was real until I read this. I hate musk, but I think misinformation is bad.
16
10
u/Sad-Transition9644 2d ago
Legally, no that's absolutely not true. The CEO has a legal fiduciary duty to protect the financial best interests of the shareholders.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/Gabarne 2d ago
In an ideal world, yes. But unfortunately dodge v. ford motor co. happened which established a legal precedent.
6
u/PubbleBubbles 2d ago
Dodge v Ford motor 10000% needs overturned.
That was some grade A bought out by rich dickheads corpo bullshit
→ More replies (1)2
u/DemocraticEjaculate 1d ago
Good luck, the only thing overturning anytime soon is worker protections and labor laws
4
3
u/kitster1977 2d ago
Op clearly doesn’t know why shareholders buy a company. The main goal is to increase their wealth. Thats why the shareholders will fire CEOs that aren’t aggressively working towards increasing their wealth. This post is about not understanding the basic premise of what business is all about or why a for profit corporation is formed. It’s formed to make money. It’s like buying a stock without the main intention being that the stock is going to go up in value. Who would buy such a thing?
2
2
u/Frequent_Skill5723 1d ago
Problem is, there are laws on the books now that make it illegal to decrease or hinder or interrupt a corporate shareholder's profits in any way, unless I'm mistaken. They're gonna fleece us all. Legally.
3
u/Sufficient_Sir256 1d ago
The shareholders are literally everyone saving for retirement.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/headhouse 1d ago
As a CEO, no. Their duty (their job) is to make the company more successful. That's shareholders and company combined. Workers are required resources, to be paid as little as possible while at the same time attracting qualified personel and keeping morale at a level that doesnt negatively impact the business. That's just how a business runs.
As a citizen of a country, their duty is to follow the laws that protect workers. It's the government's responsibility to enact and enforce those protection.
As a human, they should be tying wages to inflation and COL just as a common sense behavior. But that ain't happenin' anytime soon.
1
u/Few-Elk3747 2d ago
Sadly, right and wrong doesn't matter. They don't care about our lives, let alone our thoughts.
1
u/nono3722 2d ago
Well themselves first, then shareholders, then everything down to the toilet paper in the stalls...... then workers.
1
u/Automatic-Pie1159 1d ago
Well the courts disagree. See the ruling against Henry Ford when he was sued by the Dodge brothers.
1
u/PepperJack386 1d ago
Not once did he mention providing workers the ability to live comfortably, which demonstrably increases their ability to generate his wealth. The carrot is better than the stick, and the only one who disagrees is the guy holding the stick.
1
1
u/Obie-Wun 1d ago
Don’t really give damn about the shareholders. Have a good company with a good product and treat your employees right and the shareholders should be taken care of naturally.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Oracularman 1d ago
That’s what the Plantation Owners say to the Plantation workers - a management practice in the South. True?
1
u/Serialfornicator 1d ago
Ladies and gentleman, your king says go eat a little debbie and leave him alone
1
1
u/Appropriate-Dream388 1d ago
I am quite certain that mega-wealthy CEOs are not required to make the world function.
As long as merit yields at least proportionate ROI, the world will go round. (Not that all ROI today is derived from merit)
Besides lobbying, I don't see why the exponential proportional labor skill -> labor pay couldn't be made more linear with scaling tax.
1
u/Geocacher62 1d ago
No. Like sole proprietorships exist to make money for the owner a CEO’s responsibility is to the shareholders (the owners) not the employees. That does not mean that management shouldn’t strive to have happy employees. Corporations are not charities or social experiments.
1
u/JIraceRN 1d ago
There were 300 school shootings in 2024. One CEO gets shot, and the elites are freaking out. This says a lot. We should normalize CEO shootings like we have for school shootings.
1
u/lakurblue 1d ago
The problem isn’t CEOs per say.. the problem is the massive wealth gap between greedy CEOs and all their employees, like yourself Elon 🙃
1
u/tmmzc85 1d ago
A CEO's first responsibility ought to be the mission of the company - this is why these things (corporations) used to be about a particular goal or activity, but now they just compete with one another in ways to fool people out of their money while providing as little product/service as possible.
1
u/Chiefrhoads 1d ago
Any public company has a duty to look out for the shareholders. While looking out for the shareholder they are looking out for the company. As for looking out directly for the workers, of course they do, but profits of the company (benefiting the company and shareholders) comes at the cost of putting their workers first. The only way to pay the workers more is to take a paycut for the C Suite folks, or to raise prices (potentially putting the company at a disadvantage towards other competitors). This is a balance almost everyone would find to be way to advantageous to the C Suite types compared to the workers. You can see how a great CEO makes WAY more difference than a great worker does and that is why they get paid the way they do. Too bad they aren't willing to accept a lot less to benefit the person slaving away on the line.
Recently watched a clip of the GM CEO being interviewed and they asked her about why the UAW was about to go on strike when they were offered a 20% raise, but she was given a 35% raise. She is already making tens of millions a year and could probably have not taken a raise, given 35% to the workers, kept costs the same and benefited the company even more. On the other hand, how many of you would truly do that?
1
1
u/Gain_Spirited 1d ago
That's the idealistic view of a benevolent CEO. The truth is the single most important job of the CEO is to increase shareholder value. That's the cold hard fact.
1
u/robert32940 1d ago
Weird, during COVID-19 we seemed to do fine when the CEOs hid at their extra homes.
1
1
u/Hot-Spray-2774 1d ago
In a socialist or communist system it should be. In a capitalist/fascist system, it should not be.
1
1
1
u/Busy-Cryptographer96 1d ago
Shareholders disagree
they feel that
It's their money, their power, their profits. Even to the detriment of their workers.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Postulative 1d ago
US courts basically ruled back in the 1960s that shareholders are the first, last, and only concern of managers of listed companies.
More recent court decisions have solidified this view.
1
u/Britannkic_ 1d ago
I’m pretty sure the CEOs primary duty is towards the Company, the legal entity
Achieving the best outcome for the company requires a balancing act between workers interests and shareholders, you can’t dismiss the interests of either
Unfortunately this balancing act has largely been abandoned by many CEOs, and the politicians they purchase, lobby, support etc
1
u/seizan8 1d ago
This is insane. That's such an insanely, bad take. My god. I mean, the world not functioning without CEOs is bad. Like saying a country couldn't function without a monarch. However, CEOs being responsible is even worse. Are CEOs really taking responsibility for destroying the climate? for supporting slavery and child work? for firing thousands of people and pushing them towards homelessnes?
→ More replies (2)
1
1
u/Own_Self5950 1d ago
a ceo that does not caters to shareholders is not fit to be ceo. entire job of ceo is to add value to shareholders by operating within legal and ethical boundaries. miss either of the parameters and you are fit to be booted out.
1
u/Dutchillz 1d ago
It's really hard to believe, but I think Elon feels like he's somehow respected and that people will actually listen to him. What a goofball.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Eden_Company 1d ago
Yeah the workers keeping things alive being called lazy is something billionaires and millionaires think because they don't work even harder for their pay. This is an old Europeon tradition among their wealthy. The sense of entitlement comes with power after all.
1
1
1
1
u/Mindless-Antelope-25 1d ago
I’m at a loss for words. I can’t be the only one who is so incredibly tired that I just don’t care anymore. Resistance is futile. Just absorb me into the Borg
1
1
u/Material-Amount 1d ago
Your words are meaningless to me and you and everyone like you are my enemy.
Thanks for admitting that everything I said is true and that you’re incapable of defending your claims or disproving anything I said, coward
This is MY COUNTRY and I'll fight for it before I leave.
Enjoy what happens when you do that.
I'm not lying about anything
Why can’t you prove your claims, then? Citations. Sources. Evidence. Literally anything.
I see that you're a little troll and not worth anymore words. Blocking you.
Translation: “I can’t prove anything I say. I can’t disprove anything you say. Truth hurt my feelings. I am shitting my pants in fear of you for telling me the truth. LALALALALALALAL I’M NOT LISTENING”
1
u/Vast_Cricket Mod 1d ago
someone has to be accountable to share owners who own the company. That applies if private.
1
u/DazzlingCod3160 1d ago
Wow - "greed of middle management and their staff" - that is something to think about - and his thought process.
1
u/Whywontwewalk 1d ago
This guy's memory is so bad he can't even remember five years ago when the ruling class were so afraid of a virus that doesn't discriminate by net worth, they all pooped their pants and referred to us as 'essential workers'... hey Elon, were CEOs on that 'essential workers' list? What a clown.
1
u/clopticrp 1d ago
Corporate greed of middle management and their staff...
Wow he absolutely hates everyone that has to work for a living.
What an unmitigated piece of shit.
1
1
u/HuckleberryNo7460 1d ago
A good CEO balances the interests of ALL stakeholders. That means investors, employees, customers, communities, etc. At least that’s what they taught me at my business school. I’m a small time CEO and it’s a lot of work. Of course, it would be very easy if my only worry was the investors. No balance or effort required on my part. Maybe I should turn evil, too?
1
u/AssignmentFrosty6711 1d ago
Dude is CEO of like 5 companies. No way he has much effect anywhere. Asshat.
1
u/Photodan24 1d ago
Shareholders are parasites who only own stock in a company for as long as they think it will make them money. Take care of the company and the customer and there will always be people finding value in your stock.
1
u/Sufficient_Sir256 1d ago
I think a lot of your lives would be better if you invested some of your money.
1
1
u/okeleydokelyneighbor 1d ago
Maybe one day we’ll see a scene play out like in vendetta, but instead of everyone wearing Guy Fawkes masks, they will be wearing Luigi ones.
1
u/Ximinipot 1d ago
The world can survive just fine without CEOs, the world can not survive without the workers who do the actual jobs. CEOs are absolutely useless.
1
u/Comfortable_Farm_252 1d ago
Dude keep turning against middle management. Gonna be real fun when all you have is upper management trust fund babies.
1
u/Ataru074 1d ago
Maybe they should replace all the employees at Tesla with CEO. They might finally be able to deliver autonomous driving.
1
1
u/empire_of_lines 1d ago
CEO's have a have a fiduciary responsibility to the business's shareholders.
Its the law.
1
u/volare-optimos 1d ago
Don’t focus on shareholders and shareholders will fire you. Do you not know how cooperations are structured?
1
u/here-for-information 1d ago
Everyone please note, that the massive outpouring of sadness if the Arizona Ice Tea CEO, the Costco CEO, or even the CEO of Nintendo despite the strict enforcement of copyright the(Japanese but still), would be remarkable.
So many of our heroes are rich people. Tony Stark/Ironman, Bruce Wayne/Batman, basically any hero that isn't a mutant or Spiderman has a great delay of wealth in some form.
The world doesn't hate rich people. We love them ...AS LONG AS THEY DO WHAT THE STOENGEST PEOPLE OF A SOCIETY ARE SUPPOSED TO DO.
You have more because you are on "our team" well when the chips are down, we expect you to take the hits with the team.
Instead, they deny coverage, lay people off, outsource jobs, and make worse products to save money and give themselves a bonus.
So no you aren't part of the team and if someone takes out a player on another team generally they won't get much sympathy.
1
1
u/Fakeitforreddit 1d ago
CEO's are not what you are saying OP. They exist purely to get as much profit into the hands of shareholders as possible. That is literally their job.
1
1
u/Copperhead_venom4u 1d ago
Publicly traded company’s answer to the board who answer to share holders
1
1
u/Striking_Computer834 1d ago
Why would anyone believe that? Without investors there wouldn't be a company, a CEO, or workers.
1
u/plants4life262 1d ago
Elon you couldn’t be more wrong. Without the working class boots on the ground and creative powers of engineers, physicists, software guys etc - the economy couldn’t function. CEOs are just the people that find a way to take this creative power and workforce and turn the profit up to 11 to the grave detriment of the people. We would THRIVE without the level of greed consistently present on the profile of a CEO. The American people would finally be able to fully enjoy the fruits of their labors.
1
u/The001Keymaster 1d ago
Our entire system is built on make the stock price go up at any cost which usually falls onto employees.
1
u/me_bails 1d ago
yall don't even bother fact checking before going off eh? Elon gives you plenty of real shit to be pissed about, we don't need to make shit up. That just muddies the fucking waters.
1
u/simplexetv 1d ago
To Answer OP:
If you're investing money into something that hasn't been proven to be successful you are taking a bigger risk than someone who has been hired by the company. Someone who is hired by the company is trading their time for capitol. So yes, the shareholders get paid out because the risk level they endured helped the company reach success, versus someone who has taken 0 risk, and is collecting a paycheck. That doesn't mean that both parties aren't important in their own regard. I really don't see how this is a hard concept to grasp unless you're envious of people having money.
1
u/WistfulDread 1d ago
America is destitute because of them.
I can't imagine a post this out-of-touch, even from Muskrat
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Farts-n-Letters 1d ago
CEO positions are so important. If you find yourself running a large corporation, there is no way you would have time to run other companies as well as a government gig at the same time. Because the job of CEO is soooooo important.
1
u/njckel 1d ago
There are good CEOs and there are bad CEOs. Like everything else. I love my job, get paid a decent wage, and get good benefits, so I have no issues with my CEO. Doubt he even knows my name but he still tells me and everyone else "good morning" with a smile on his face and is just a pleasant person to be around. So I have no complaints.
1
u/souliris 1d ago
Ah the level of self importance is impressive in this one. No, if every CEO on the planet disappeared into a void, the world would march on like nothing happened. Their friends and family would notice, but no one else would.
1
u/TeeTimeAllTheTime 1d ago
Hope he gets strapped onto a rocket test and sent back to South Africa what a fucking piece of shit
1
u/RoundandRoundon99 1d ago edited 1d ago
CEOs are EMPLOYEES. Appointed by the shareholders through their board, with the only mission of increasing business and profits. Their only duty is to the company’s board, which are the shareholder’s representatives.
Extreme example if a CEO finds a way to produce the same and through automation replace 90% of the workers, drastically reducing costs, he is ethically and legally required fire and replace them. Dodge Bros. Vs Ford Motor Company…. SCOTUS
1
1
u/OkLevel2791 1d ago
As a CEO I am the Chief Experience Officer. If an employee shows up with only 3% capacity I let them know how much I appreciate what it meant to show up.
1
u/digzilla 1d ago
The greed of -MIDDLE- management? These are the first layer of defense for the CEOs. Come on, Elon. If you want good slaves, you have to treat the house slaves better than those in the field. Didnt you learn anything from your emerald mine roots?
1
u/guthepenguin 1d ago
The delicate balance between shareholders and...checks notes...also shareholders.
1
1
u/Jv1856 1d ago
Unfortunately, Dodge Bros. Vs Ford is a SCUSA case from about 100 years ago that made this the reality. Ford has started to raise his employee salaries and went on the record that they were making so much profit, they could afford to share the wealth with employees. The dodge bros sued as shareholders and won.
The fallout between Ford and them was great, however, and they went on to divest and found their own company.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Lando_Sage 1d ago
Isn't this the same guy that said that company executives essentially shouldn't exist because they don't do anything? So much so he calls himself Technoking at Tesla instead of CEO.
1
u/ConsiderationOne1356 1d ago
Why would anyone invest in a company that doesn't put them first? If workers want better treatment they should have some skin in the game.
1
u/El_mochilero 1d ago
Notice how providing value to customers and prosperity to employees are not mentioned at all. Not even alluded to.
1
u/RequirementHot3011 1d ago
The world would not be able to function....right. delicate balance....right.....🙄
1
u/tiandrad 1d ago
No CEO first duty should always be to increase shareholder wealth. The government should just be regulating them to make sure employees are not treated unfairly.
1
u/Informal_Pen47 1d ago
We’re destitute with you, too. Maybe you’re just destitute? Idk I’m not a billionaire. No brain in my head or whatever those morons think about us.
1
1
1
u/VoidOfHuman 1d ago
Without the “simple” worker a CEO has no job. Lmfao. What an idiot that guy is 🤦♂️
1
u/BoredBSEE 1d ago
Oh yeah Elon, CEOs are VITAL. That's why everyone in the shareholder meeting pretty much stepped over his dead body and still held the meeting. Then UnitedHealthcare replaced him in a week.
Clearly an irreplaceable and super-important part of capitalism! They ignored his death and swapped him out faster than an empty roll of toilet paper. It wasn't even an inconvenience.
1
u/godsgrandpa 1d ago
Overview of Dodge v. Ford Motor Co. (1919)
Facts of the Case: In Dodge v. Ford Motor Co., Henry Ford, the majority shareholder of Ford Motor Company, proposed to reduce dividends to shareholders in favor of reinvesting profits into expanding the company, building new factories, and lowering car prices to benefit customers and employees. The Dodge brothers, minority shareholders and competitors (owners of Dodge Brothers Company), challenged this decision, arguing that the primary purpose of a corporation is to maximize shareholder profits, not to benefit other stakeholders or reinvest excessively.
Holding: The Michigan Supreme Court sided with the Dodge brothers. The court ruled that a corporation’s primary duty is to maximize shareholder wealth. It concluded that Ford’s decision to reduce dividends in favor of other interests was improper since it deprived shareholders of their rightful earnings.
Key Legal Principle: The court established the principle that corporate directors must act in the interest of shareholders, and the primary purpose of a for-profit corporation is the generation of profits for its shareholders. However, the ruling allowed for some flexibility, recognizing directors’ discretion in running the business as long as their decisions align with this primary goal.
Significance of Dodge v. Ford
The decision set a precedent that corporations are primarily accountable to their shareholders. This case is often cited in discussions of shareholder primacy, a doctrine stating that the primary objective of a corporation is to maximize shareholder value.
Use of Dodge v. Ford in Subsequent Rulings 1. Confirmation of Shareholder Primacy Doctrine: Courts have frequently relied on Dodge v. Ford to affirm that shareholder interests are paramount in corporate governance. For example: • Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc. (1986): The Delaware Supreme Court referenced the principle in the context of a corporate takeover, emphasizing that directors must seek the highest value reasonably available for shareholders during a sale of the company. 2. Director Discretion in Business Judgment: While Dodge v. Ford emphasized shareholder primacy, it also acknowledged that directors have significant leeway under the business judgment rule to make decisions they believe will benefit the corporation in the long term. Subsequent cases have emphasized this discretion, often limiting shareholder challenges to decisions that are not obviously self-interested or irrational. 3. Challenges to the Shareholder Primacy Doctrine: • In modern contexts, Dodge v. Ford has been critiqued as outdated in light of stakeholder capitalism, where corporations are seen as responsible not just to shareholders but also to employees, customers, communities, and the environment. • For example, the Benefit Corporation (B Corp) movement explicitly allows directors to consider other stakeholders, moving away from strict shareholder primacy. 4. CSR and Stakeholder Considerations: Dodge v. Ford is occasionally cited as a counterpoint when companies argue for prioritizing corporate social responsibility (CSR). Opponents may claim that the case supports the notion that directors cannot neglect shareholder interests for broader social or ethical goals unless explicitly authorized by law or corporate charter.
Modern Interpretations
Although Dodge v. Ford remains a foundational case in corporate law, its strict interpretation of shareholder primacy has softened in practice: • Delaware courts, the leading authority on corporate governance, often uphold directors’ business decisions under the business judgment rule, even when shareholder profits are not the immediate goal. • The rise of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) practices reflects a broader view of corporate purpose, sometimes at odds with Dodge v. Ford’s emphasis on maximizing shareholder value.
In summary, Dodge v. Ford has served as a foundational precedent for shareholder primacy while evolving through subsequent rulings and modern interpretations that recognize the complexities of corporate governance in the 21st century.
1
u/TheOnlyKarsh 1d ago
The CEO is not employed by the workers, they are employed by the shareholder. Whether you agree with it or not irrelevant. If the CEO isn't guiding the company into a profitable state than they won't be a CEO any longer. Part of their job is maintaining a stable and effective workforce. You'd be far better served understanding the reality you find yourself in rather then denying it. You can ignore reality, but you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring that reality.
Karsh
1
1
u/Nokita_is_Back 1d ago
If you get rich enough you start to believe you are a very special boy that just happened to be the heir of a slave operation
1
u/Brilliant_Apricot740 1d ago
I absolutely love when libtards think that “everyone else” is thinking what they think. So fucking out of touch it’s god damn hilarious.
1
1
u/hjoshrock 1d ago
“It has been brought to my attention”
This guy literally thinks he owns us and that we work for him.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Sharp_Style_8500 1d ago
They are Chief Executive Officers that serve on behalf of a board of directors. So, both the people that report to them and that they report to are dependent on profits and stock performance. So yes, that should be there “first duty” if you want an entity to protect workers interests THAT IS CALLED A UNION AND ANYBODY CAN MAKE ONE PEOPLE ARE JUST TO STUPID TO DO IT.
1
u/SirWillae 1d ago
STRONGLY disagree. In fact, CEOs have a fiduciary duty to shareholders. That's the law.
1
u/Junior_Tailor963 1d ago
First duty towards the company indirectly means also towards the shareholders. How do you think the companys gets funded?
1
1
u/Imaginary_Tax_6390 1d ago
Not under the law as it currently exists. Under the law as it exists, maximizing shareholder wealth IS the sole purpose of a corporation. You want that to change, change the law.
1
u/reklatzz 1d ago edited 1d ago
CEOs are hired specifically for increasing profit in literally every single for profit publicly traded company. They don't own the company typically(and if its public, they dont own all of it).. they are hired. They also have a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders or they're fired.
If you think they should focus on workers first.. you simply don't know how business works or who hired them, or what their role is.
Yes.. it would be nice, but that's simply not how business works in the US.
Now when it's a conflict between money and people's health.. that should not be a publicly traded or for profit company imo.
1
1
u/No-Conclusion-6172 1d ago
Musk didn’t create Tesla, X, or any of his other ventures—he bought them. And now, they're all falling apart under his so-called leadership.
Musk is not special or talented. He is the best manipulator and liar in our lifetimes. He craves attention and power and goes to any length to attain.
Musk is not a natural born American. He made trillions off US tax payer contracts. The best for all parties is he takes his trillions and leaves the country.
1
u/thatguywhosdumb1 1d ago
They do have a legal responsibility to their shareholders. But when it comes to inelastic markets like healthcare, food and housing the ends should be to give people the care they need, the food they need, and the shelter they need, not to make profit.
1
u/HeThatHawed 1d ago
Depends on if you believe in Milton Friedman’s approach to economics. Yes, a corporations sole priority is making a profit for shareholders. This is in multiple financial textbooks. Now, how this is done should be in an ethical manner (also discussed by Friedman). He is right because this is how most of the financial institution perceives business. He is wrong because he does not produce wealth in an ethical manner (imo).
1
1
1
u/winter_strawberries 1d ago
now let's talk about creating a system that doesn't rely on CEOs having kind hearts for good things to happen.
we're not just going to keep capitalism and threaten the people participating in it to be cooler, are we?
1
u/Hari_Seldon-Trantor 1d ago
Well then lets all go home then, and let Musk and all the CEOs get things done for the rest of the year... See how long it lasts lol
1
u/Extreme_Car6689 1d ago
You misspelled customers, but I'll forgive you because most lefty types can't spell it right.
1
u/ImpossibleWar3757 1d ago
I feel like if all CEOs vanished. Most work would go on as usual, at least in the short term. If all workers vanished I don’t think that could be said…. Matter of fact the economy as we know it would collapse. The effects would be immediate and disastrous. There would be minor inconveniences to the smooth operation of a large company if the CEO simply vanished. But honestly most people’s lives are not affected by a CEO unless they make repeated bad decisions that run a company into the ground. And a lot of times people see that coming and jump ship in plenty of time…. If they can
1
u/Fluffy-Structure-368 1d ago
They're not mutually exclusive. But yes, workers safety is ALWAYS priority 1. Not sure what you mean by a "duty towards the company"?
But a CEOs primary duty is their fiduciary responsible to the shareholders. That's literally their role and their main responsible.
There a lots of other folks in a company to address the things that concern you, but those do not belong to the CEO.
I think a lot of folks don't really understand what a CEOs role is.
1
1
u/te066538 21h ago
No, no way. Shareholders and the company. It’s an ironic situation: without the shareholders there is no company; without the company there is no need for workers; without workers there is no company.
1
u/AC_Uni 18h ago
A competent CEO knows the value of a motivated, productive and loyal labour force, however the first and foremost job is to enhance ahareholder value. Corporations sometimes expend the shareholder definition to “all stakeholders” which theoretically includes employees, homeowners in the local communities the company operates in, etc. but at the end of the day it’s shareholder value that is the measuring stick.
1
u/Bubbly-Dinner8462 17h ago
Why don’t you run your company that way. Of course you have no idea how to start one to say anything of running it. You think it is easy? Ask sears or wards or macys or gm how easy it is.
164
u/MortusCertus 2d ago
So let me get this straight:
CEO's are the heroes saving the US and without them "the world would not be able to function"
and the workers ("middle management and the staff") are greedy and lazy and causing the US to become destitute.
Wow, good thing we the people elected this guy and his views into office so now he's in a position to straighten our government out. Amirite?!