Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I believe part of the purpose of corporations is to create an entity that is capable of doing "icky" things that might be unpalatable for a person to do, but need to be done nonetheless. Specific examples of "icky" things include building war weapons, producing/testing drugs that we know will kill some patients, performing tasks which create pollution which will kill people, etc. I want to be clear that I'm not proposing how anything should be, and am definitely not implying we should let corporations run amok. I'm just suggesting I believe we're lenient on the icky behaviors of corporations by design. It saves legislators from having to specifically carve out exceptions in the law to allow dangerous things things. Nobody wants their name next to something that sounds like, "XYZ is allowed to kill some people". Instead, they just try to corral them in when it gets to be "too much."



If that's the case, that sounds like a good argument to not allow incorporation.


Do you have another suggestion for how to get icky things done which must be done?


Your argument is predicated on the fact that ‘they must be done’. I disagree.


Almost every meaningful human endeavor will result in some human deaths from time to time. A position of zero harm closely resembles a position of zero progress.


Could anyone down voting provide counter examples? I propose no one reading this could even produce the devices we're typing on without mining, handling and transporting hazardous materials, and using heavy equipment which will occasionally result in an unfortunate human death and or harm to the environment.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: