Gregory's Server@gruber @stroughtonsmith Without making a moral judgment, the million dollar donation and fighting the DMA are both consistent with a business acting in accordance with the interests of its shareholders.
|
7 comments
@gruber @bretcarmichael @stroughtonsmith What if what’s best for the company’s products and services leaves the rest of us in dire straights? This “evolved” thinking applies across the industry now and we see the culture that results—demeaning oneself in deference to the authoritarian figure. It is in ways as short sighted as ignoring climate damaging aspects of their products. A healthy global free market and interdependence is a prerequisite for their success. Authoritarians undermine that. @Gte @gruber @stroughtonsmith There’s a misalignment between business and societal incentives. There has been forever, climate and healthcare being a couple of examples. Politicians have capitulated to business interests in exchange for career benefit at a cost to society. Here, it’s reversed. Businesses are capitulating to politicians (Trump), and the tradeoff is the same: cost to society. Companies may be thinking, “It’s only 4 years.” If not, it’s a collective action problem for them. @bretcarmichael @gruber @stroughtonsmith Agreed. And it’s not like companies don’t have government affairs to try to smooth their relationships with elected leaders.The difference here is that this is clearly the kind of thing Apple employee training videos tell you is corruption. As a company that has, as John points out, tried to look to the longer term, and plan and act accordingly, this is shortsighted. “Well, I guess a little corruption to get in the door is ok” is where things go south.  @bretcarmichael @stroughtonsmith What you're describing is a way of thinking where shareholders place demands and CEOs aim to meet them. That turns out to be a terrible way to run a country for anything but the short term. The modern thinking is the company to run itself as best as it sees and the message to shareholders is “Get on board if you believe in our vision.” @bretcarmichael @stroughtonsmith With Apple this is quite literally epitomized by an oft-cited quote from Steve Jobs: “It’s really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don’t know what they want until you show it to them.” That applies to shareholders in the company's stock as much as customers of the company's products. @gruber @stroughtonsmith That makes a lot of sense. I agree; that short-term thinking is a terrible way to run the country. Relatedly, I do think Apple [and others] is looking at their Trump investment on a relatively short timeline. Trump can’t run again. His proposed China tariffs have the potential to do real harm. He’s transactional and impulsive. Apple and others are going to pay protection money. CEOs are courting Trump more than Biden, because they didn’t fear Biden being vindictive. |
@bretcarmichael @stroughtonsmith I strongly concur, but I think in Apple's case, and in this century's rise of computer tech companies to the top of our economy, it's not about "pleasing shareholders” in the 1980s/90s sense. That's passé. The evolved thinking -- which is still decidedly capitalistic -- is simply to act in the company's own interests for the sake of what's best for the company's products and services, with shareholder benefit falling naturally out of that.