• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Analysis and own opinion on:Chapter 3 "The Externalizing Machine" of "The Corporation, the pathological pursuit of profit and power" by Joel Bakan

Extracts from this document...


Analysis and own opinion on: Chapter 3 "The Externalizing Machine" of "The Corporation, the pathological pursuit of profit and power" by Joel Bakan Sociology 1010 February 21, 2006 In todays mostly capitalistic world people who are consumers think that they have power to decide what products to purchase; people who are stockholders are only interested in the profit; people who run corporations make that profit regardless of the price others have to pay; and people who live in developing countries work for 3c per hour making brand name cloths which then are sold for $20, $60, $100, $200, $500, making at the same time the corporation's profit skyrocketing. It is widely known that there are sweatshops in developing countries, where people are treated like slaves but practically they are not slaves because they always can walk off the job. It is known that in such countries there is exploitation of child labor, but practically what can a citizen of other country do to help if they have enough their own problems. It is also known that work conditions in such 'factories' are horrible, but what one can do if those companies offer lower prices. Is it fair towards society as a whole that some people are exploited so others can make skyrocketing profits? Is it fair that your TV was partially made by a 6-year-old child? Is it fair that the product you bought harms or even kills you or one of your family member? Is it fair if this does not happen to you but to some other people in some other countries? Is it fair that infants are given harmful baby-formula prohibited in developed countries? ...read more.


The calculation was as follows: 500fatalities x 200,000 per fatality / 41,000,000 = $2.4 per automobile. To make the car safer, it would cost company $8.59 per car. Therefore, it was cheaper not to improve vehicles because GM would save $6.19 per car in production. Armstrong and her children, that had second- and third degree burns resulting from a rear-end accident in 1993 due to the fire caused by unsafe positioning of the gas tank in GM Malibu, were awarded $1.2 billion.(pg63) Two significant orders for GE to pay was �2 billion for asbestos cleanup and related pollution, and $95 million in damages for contamination from dumping of industrial chemicals. (pg75-78) The total GE had to pay for contamination of the environment alone, between 1990 and 2001 was approximatelly $3 000 106 million (over $3 billion); total for violations of safety rules at nuclear fuel plant, for design flow in nuclear plants, for illegal sal of fighter jets, and for overcharging on defense contracts was $300 million. GE was also ordered 14 times to clean up contamination of drinking water (ground water, river, water supply) and soil. The assumptin is that General Electric makes huge amounts of profit, because GE is able to exist on the market even though it was ordered to pay over $3 billion puls the cost of cleaning up contamination. The broader assumption, based on GE example, is that corporations make huge amounts of profit at the cost of environment and human lives and they continue to do so even though they are ordered to pay millions or billions of dollars in fines. Given the information regarding corporations' actions and the impact they have on developing countries, on societies, on environment we all live in, and on individuals, who should care the most and why should we care at all. ...read more.


I am asking how social construction can be helpful in changing the way the corporations are operating, if some people created those harmful corporations how other people can change the way they work.People created corporations and people let them do harm but how those people can now stop corporations in doing harm. 2. My second question is somehow connected to the first one. My point is that if corporations should have only legal obligations towards their stockholders what happens if those stockholders are harmed by the corporation. Shouldn't the corporations include moral obligations towards their stockholders? We all know that corporations have a legal obligation towards stockholders to make profit but how we should reason if that stockholder buys defected product produced by this company and harms himslef. For instance, the case of Armstrong whose car exploted becase of deliberatly unsafe positioning of the gas tank, what happens if Armstrong was also a stockholder of GM or maybe a manager at one of the GM's plants? How it would work then? If we argue that moral obligations and legal obligations are equally important towards stockholders, the answer would be easier regarding whether the corporations should be morally responsible towards the societies. My point is that if corporations should be morally responsible towards their stockholders they would not launch unsafe products because there would be a possibility that one of the stockholders could buy it. Therefore, if corporations would keep in mind their stockholders safety they would not pollute the environment as much, or they would not sell unsafe products. Furthermore, other people would be safe, because all corporations have stockholders, and if those corporations would have a moral obligations not to harm their stockholders they would not harm other people either, simply by not letting unsafe products go on the market or by not polluting the environment the stockholders live in. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Structures, Objectives & External Influences section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Structures, Objectives & External Influences essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Marketing Management - Swisher Mower and Machine Company.

    5 star(s)

    With slice decline of sales in 1991, projections for 1995 and 1996 point toward further increases in unit volume. Industry statistics show that over half of manufacturer shipments of these products occur in the four-month period from January to April.

  2. Rolls Royce Business Analysis

    turbofan, and vertical takeoff engine.2 In 1976 the company penetrated the commercial market of the United States, gaining a presence when it acquired one of its competitors Bristol Siddley, and with it came the contract for the Anglo-French Concorde. Civil Aerospace In December 2000, civil aerospace sales amounted to £3,150 million, gaining an underlying profit of £332 million.

  1. Btec National Business Level 3 Year 1 - Exploring Business Activity

    To receive tax revenue from profitable firms To direct the operations of the business for the benefit of the community/nation To assist the business in accordance with local and national policy Competitors Defeat rival businesses To compete by all lawful means To differentiate its products from those of other business

  2. Leadership: Power, Influence & Persuasion.

    While Jay needs to immediately deal with the current situation by either taking a stern action or diffusing the brawl he needs to have fast-thinking on Concord Machines future and deliverables he seeks from his executive team on the same.

  1. The Legal Eagles

    This is somebody who is self-employed and who usually starts a business with capital from their savings or by borrowing from friends or a bank. Capital is the money which every business needs to enable it to set up and operate, for example to buy premises, equipment, stock and pay wages.

  2. Peacocks - case study

    Peacocks has a formal ownership agreement just in case some shareholders want to sell off their shares to someone else. Liability Peacocks has limited liability, which means that if there are any debts, the shareholders' belongings will not be touched.

  1. As a student at Challney High School for Boys, my task is to decide ...

    The public limited company thus has a wider scope and the businesses shares are available to anyone, this means it has much more working capital to start off with and so the company is likely to run smoothly with the large cash input. Advantages 1) Shareholders have limited liability status.

  2. Explain the legal and ethical issues in relation to the use of business information

    This for example could occur at a retail such as Sainsbury?s and one of the employees accessed confidential information like the customer buying trends and their details and sell it to a competitor or a marketing company. of this may be that if a rival company says something unethical in

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work