this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
158 points (97.6% liked)
Asklemmy
43984 readers
940 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Shares / Stock
So you're saying every company should be owned by a single person? If two people want to start a company, it should only belong to one person? That doesnt sound right to me...
Maybe it's more about the legal requirement for infinite profit due to being publicly traded. This has led to such fun things like, rising costs, planned obsolescence, the general enshitification of everything.
The laws says (indirectly) that management must work towards profit. It doesn't specify long term or short term profit, though, and in many cases investors show up specifically for slow but steady returns. There's plenty wrong with capitalism, but it's not pure nonsense. If it was, it'd be really easy to get rid of.
So many people have no idea how finance works, but still comment. It's too bad, because there's things that do deserve criticism, but fly under the radar as a result.