Parent categories:
Science: Social ・
Social Justice ・
Social Protection ・
Social Welfare ・
Social issues ・
onOS`` ・
lPVyL #VX lPVy`` .
Sentience of Companies and their Ownership/Trade Rights
Should we allow companies to be owned, when they are sentient supra-organisms, based on subtle human-to-human relationships?
+
–
–
If you think of companies as a higher form of life (social supra-organisms), you may end up thinking that it's unethical to own and trade them, like it is unethical to own and trade human slaves.
So, should we outlaw company ownership -- and let shares represent something different: from the rights to revenues to the uniqueness of particular human relationships within the value systems of each organization?
What would be the ethical implications of companies being sentient social supra-organisms to the rights of their ownership?
No child categories.
+[question]
+[idea]
+[project]
This reminds me of my MRSGREN idea on github.
https://github.com/samsquire/ideas3#35-mrsgren
Then the company can truly be a lifeform. As it sees, it hears and it talks.
I see. Sometimes, we have ideas of such significance, that they seem to connect to many ideas of others, and we start to think of each others' ideas as ours. I wonder, what's the limiting case of inventive cross-pollination?
[+]
//shares represent something different: from the rights to revenues to the uniqueness of particular human relationships //
Cool, so let's explore - what would shares represent?
[+]
Once a company is set up it doesn't really need owners anymore. You could say that owners take investment away from the company that could grow in scale and size without owners taking profits out the company.
I use the example of a supermarket logistics network. Once the people are all placed and people know what they are doing and doing it, the organisation operates without oversight. The managers don't need to do anything for the shelf stackers to keep stacking shelves and the procurement department to procure products. The owners may well be irrelevant to the success of the operation of the company.
Yet the cashiers still mange the ownership of the owners ownership of products in the store. They could well do their job without owners. They essentially do all the work and get none of the benefits of ownership.