> American companies are so abusive, that's why I invest on them,
You don't think this is immoral?
You don't think this is immoral?
Some common examples: Housing equity competing with affordable housing. Stocks rise when new top management exploits existing resources for short term gains - making workers and products suffer.
It's hard to retire on morals.
Is the purchasing done by the brokers who purchase stocks or the HR dept that chooses a retirement fund or the employee who picks the employer that is least likely to leave them in financial straits?
Which of these shouldn't make an immoral investment choice - and should continually vet the ever rotating circumstances of their choices (and be ever ready to jump ship)?
For the most part this does not work. For one, the cheapest product tends to win. Consumers are highly price sensitive. Especially in the case where you have two mostly equal products that are only separated by their immorality in making the product.
Second, companies love morality washing. Put up a bunch of advertisements on how good for the world they are at whatever touches their buyers hearts and opens their purse strings. It's all bullshit, using immoral money to buy happy feeling of morality.
And lastly companies love buying premium 'moral' brands without much fanfare turning them into their corporate level of depravity while still pretending like the brand is a seperate moral entity.
It doesn't fucking work for the end user, between the massive consolidation of companies in must industries giving us no choices, and between the constant amount of work needed to ensure the product you buy isn't owned by vampires it's almost like we need business regulation.
I do not consider consumers as faceless automatons purchasing the cheapest items based on the latest advertisements. They are each intelligent, obligated citizens who vote with purchases every day to elevate the industry they want to enrich.
Companies are entities made up of such people and as such do not love (or hate) anything.
Consider that your business regulators are also vampires, many of whom previously worked in the industries and may very well return. I suggest that quickly seeking an authoritative solution to a problem is very similar to buyers purchasing the cheapest product based on the latest advertisement.
Then you have made a great mistake about the capabilities of your fellow humans and are not paying attention to their actual behaviors.
>They are each intelligent
Please define your definition of intelligence, there is no common standard definition that is agreed upon, and by the basis of your claim you seem to have a very particular definition.
>obligated citizens who vote with purchases
By buying the items they can actually afford, hence most commonly the cheapest item.
>Companies are entities made up of such people and as such do not love (or hate) anything
A convenient fiction you tell yourself, but this is a complete fiction. If I, for example, create a corporate and direct it, the company represents my loves and hates. We see this behavior in a large number of companies. It's funny you bring up anti-authoritarian sentiments, when companies are 100% authoritarian structures kept under control by regulations as to prevent them from simply buying compliance from everyone in the government.
When you choose your doctor, you choose based on morality rather than what your insurance allows?
When you choose your food at the grocery store, you choose based on morality rather than the 3 different potentially immoral brands the store carries?
You seem hopelessly out of touch with actual consumer behaviors. Maybe you're one of the lucky few that has the kind of wealth that opens up options like this. But you do not represent the average persons behavior at all.
This is a good observation. What is our obligation when our cognitive dissonance enables immoral/unethical activity at scale?
morality aside, it's not "cognitive dissonance".
That would require "behavior does not align with their values or beliefs", and they never stated their values on the matter.
"If nothing is right/ethical/moral so I can do whatever to the other"