Federal Government Meddling In Corporations

[Big Guy]

Our federal government has decided that it should meddle in private corporations to have them meet their “social quotas”.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2014/07/02/widen_the_old_boys_club_on_corporate_boards_editorial.html

It seems that our government has decided that it knows what is better than our private business system than those who created it. These social architects have decided that at least 30% of the boards of private companies should be female so they are prepared to “back it up with monitoring, moral suasion and political pressure”.

If the Conservatives are prepared to dictate the make up of private corporations then maybe they should include quotes of aboriginals, visible minorities, handicapped and minority religions on private boards?

Is creating a quota system for the boards of private corporations a good thing or a bad thing?

If it a good thing, should those quotas include other minority groups that are either not represented or under represented?

[Shady]

The target is voluntary, but regardless, it's completely absurd.

[Shady]

And there's a status of women's minister? Wtf for? More absurdity.

[August1991]

I would move this OP to the Moral Questions thread because in the federal politics category, it will quickly become a boring "he said, she said/Harper-bad, Leftists-bad" debate.

But as a moral/political question: so what if the federal government insists that half of corporate boards are women? Will it change anything?

----

You are at the grocery cash register and the cashier makes a mistake, in your favour. Should you correct her, point out her mistake - or simply take the money and walk away?

The cashier made a mistake, and in a small sense, is incompetent in her job. If you point out her mistake, then she can survive as an incompetent in the wrong job for another day. And the store will move more quickly to bankruptcy.

If you take the money and walk away, then the grocery store will more quickly realize that she's incompetent because she loses money. And more quickly avoid bankruptcy.

====

The great thing about the market system (including corporate boards) is that it eventually discovers the truth.

Edited July 2, 2014 by August1991

[-1=e^ipi]

Sexism is wrong, including state institutionalized sexism. The most qualified candidates should be chosen and sex, race or sexual orientation should not matter.

[guyser]

I swear August< sometimes you come up with the most bizarre and off topic posts of anyone here.

Anyhow....

The cashier made a mistake, and in a small sense, is incompetent in her job. If you point out her mistake, then she can survive as an incompetent in the wrong job for another day. And the store will move more quickly to bankruptcy.

Well.....if all it took to go bankrupt was 45 cents, then they have bigger issues than this clerk.

If you take the money and walk away, then the grocery store will more quickly realize that she's incompetent because she loses money. And more quickly avoid bankruptcy.

Id probably look to head office and the UPC code input person. But thats me

You can blame a girl for scanning a bar code and it being wrong all you like. I would nt

The great thing about the market system (including corporate boards) is that it eventually discovers the truth.

Well then , heres to them finding out who fucked up the bar codes

[August1991]

I swear August< sometimes you come up with the most bizarre and off topic posts of anyone here.

Guyser2, you get my key point.

In a world of 7 billion people, some critical questions are decided at the margin.

Edited July 3, 2014 by August1991

[guyser]

Guyser2, you get my key point.

In a world of 7 billion people, some critical questions are decided at the margin.

No no I dont.

And this post? What margin , what questions?

Esoteric <---- youi be that.

[GostHacked]

I think you have more corporation meddling within the government via lobbying and donations. You can essentially look at corporations and the government as one in the same. They are obviously working together.

[overthere]

I think you have more corporation meddling within the government via lobbying and donations. You can essentially look at corporations and the government as one in the same. They are obviously working together.

Working together?

Japan, Germany, China and a few other moderately successful corporations I mean countries do just that.....

Imagine.

[idealisttotheend]

I used to be against quotas but now I find myself agreeing with them. One poster on this thread says that positions should go to the most qualified, a common argument. Is it realistic then to believe that men are so much more qualified than women that 90% of board positions go to men? Wouldn't that indicate that sexism exists? What makes a man 90% more qualified than a woman?

Also, these positions are "who you know" decided on golf courses etc? Wouldn't that indicate that a quota would lead to long term change with more women on corporate boards if they are let into the old boys club?

[August1991]

I used to be against quotas but now I find myself agreeing with them. One poster on this thread says that positions should go to the most qualified, a common argument. Is it realistic then to believe that men are so much more qualified than women that 90% of board positions go to men? Wouldn't that indicate that sexism exists? What makes a man 90% more qualified than a woman?

Also, these positions are "who you know" decided on golf courses etc? Wouldn't that indicate that a quota would lead to long term change with more women on corporate boards if they are let into the old boys club?

Anyone can post on Wikipedia and yet about 90% of contributors are men. Indeed, subjects such as "Star Wars" have much more complex entries than, say, "Sex and the City".

It happens that, apparently, men are more interested in contributing to Wikipedia than women are.

Should Wikipedia insist on a 50/50 split for its contributions?

[cannuck]

Also, these positions are "who you know" decided on golf courses etc? Wouldn't that indicate that a quota would lead to long term change with more women on corporate boards if they are let into the old boys club?

A directorship is something that generally goes along as a right of a certain block of shares to appoint. The responsibility of the board is to represent shareholders, as they own the company. The notion that some...ANYoutside force should have the right and power to decide who, how, what, why or when a director of a private corporation is appointed or removed is ludicrous.

The concept that seems to be lost on some here and definitely on the idiots on the Hill is that a private corporation is just that - PRIVATE. Even a publicly traded company is still someone's property. With the massive drift to the left - and specific lack of respect for private property - the concept of what I do, when, where, with whom and why with MY property is even lost on what laughably passes for government of the "right". It should be nobody else's damned business but the owner of the property in question.

Now, if we were talking about shareholders' rights and particularly minority shareholders' rights, that is a very different story. The way that financial institutions have highjacked corporate governance is way out of control, and should indeed be the place where government regulates what people do with someone else's property and money.