I wondered why the Langley Advance would print this tangent column defending the honour of corporations until I got to the end and saw who wrote it [Where there’s smoke, there’s fire and some excuses, July 15 Opinion].
A corporation does not “have to care” and it’s demonstrated every day. At best, they may choose to care to serve their interests.
The responsibility is to the shareholders, not to society. A shareholder expects the corporation to do everything within the law to increase said wealth. I think that tied in with columnist Bob Groeneveld stating, “unless we made it specifically illegal to smoke while driving”.
All those things you mentioned are side effects of increasing wealth for the shareholders who may sometimes be society (e.g.charities).
I think Bob was entirely correct to refer to corporations as inanimate objects because they are and are only treated as persons by law to assign rights and protections in our capitalist society (i.e. they are persons on paper).
There was just no better solution they could come up with. I don’t think this problem exists in communist states.
Anyways, I think Bob is right in what he said.
Case in point, corporations sell the cigarettes to begin with.
Michael Rex, Maple Ridge