John Hinderaker of Power Line writes what I wish I wrote about the inconsistency between the left’s objection to corporation’s being treated as people and their repeated accusation that corporations experience the human emotion of greed:
Lately, we have heard a lot from the Wall Street occupiers as well as more mainstream Democrats about “greedy corporations.” But wait! This is sheer anthropomorphism: if companies aren’t people, how can they be greedy? In fact, referring to a company as “greedy” makes little sense.
A for-profit company exists to make money for its owners, and secondarily to provide wealth and opportunity for its employees. The managers who run any company have a fiduciary duty to try to maximize returns for their company’s owners–that is to say, profits. If a company’s executives decided not to be “greedy,” but rather to operate their company at a break-even level so as to avoid profit, they would be violating their legal duties and would be subject to shareholder lawsuits. And properly so.
The same principle applies to taxes. Every company has a duty to minimize its tax liability–legally, of course. If a company’s management were to volunteer to pay more taxes than the law requires, it once again would be violating its legal duties and would no doubt be dismissed by its board of directors, and subsequently sued by shareholders.
There are two types of people who claim corporations are greedy:
- Those who have an agenda to diminish the power of the private sector and enhance the power of centralized government; and
- Those who are ignorant of the way corporations work.
Left-wing intellectuals occupy the first category. Occupy Wall Streeters, generally, the second.
In theory, the federal government has a fiduciary duty to taxpayers in much the same way a corporation has a fidiucary duty to shareholders. But in the case of government, this duty cannot be and is not enforced.
In short, taxpayers are the shareholders of government, but, unlike their private sector counterparts, they lack recourse when the entity they have invested in (i.e. the federal government) breaches it’s duty to them. They cannot fire government bureaucrats and cannot bring derivative lawsuits against the government.
The private sector, as imperfect as it is, is infinitely more accountable than the public sector. So, people, toss your anti-corporation signs and start toting ones that say,
STOP GOVERNMENT GREED!
2 responses so far ↓
1 Xerographica // Oct 21, 2011 at 5:04 am
Choice is the only thing that makes non-profit organizations accountable. If donors aren’t happy with how a non-profit is using their money then they can choose not to donate to that non-profit in the future.
To make government accountable we simply allow taxpayers to choose which government organizations (GOs) receive their individual taxes. If they aren’t happy with how one GO is spending their taxes then they will just choose to give their taxes to another GO. Nothing will send a louder message.
We know that “choice” forces private sector organizations to be accountable…yet we scratch our heads when it comes to making GOs accountable.
We know that it would be ridiculous if we all had to purchase the same private goods… yet we scratch our heads and wonder why we bicker so much when we all have to purchase the same public goods.
Eh, I just don’t get it. Either I’m blind and missing something obvious or everybody else is blind and missing something obvious.
2 Peter // Oct 31, 2011 at 7:52 am
Xero,
It seems that you’re a one trick pony.
For you, the answer to everything is letting taxpayers designate how their tax dollars will be spent.
I think its much more complicated than that.