Some people believe that corporations have a responsibility to promote the well-being of the societies and environments in which they operate. Others believe that the only responsibility of corporations, provided they operate within the law, is to make as much money as possible.
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.
When determining whether corporations should be responsible to act in a way beneficial to society, there are many factors to consider. This is a conflicted issue for me, because while I like most would agree that it would be nice if corporations worked towards the good of society, I do however do not believe it is their responsibility. This is because in essence determining what actions are and are not permissible from a 'well-being' perspective is not really within the purview of a corporate board. Corporations have responsibility to one group of people and one group of people alone, their shareholders. Magnates are not able, nor should they be expected to be able to decide questions like what is the 'greatest good' for society. The people should be making these decisions, and they do this though the creation of laws. Board members merely are expected to 'operate within the law', and thus the framework outlined by the masses.
A company should be expected of one and only one thing along and that is to return a profit to their shareholders. When people invest into corporations they do so with the expectation of a return, most people do not look into whether the company is acting justly, nor do they really care. Sure people may decide not to buy from a place that continually does bad things. In the end though as long as that place offers the best product/service for the cheapest price people for the most part inevitably vote with their wallet in their favor. Convenience wins in the end, money wins in the end. For instance people continue to buy Nestle chocolate despite accusations against them for exploiting slave labour. Nestle makes good chocolate though, and despite their awful moral failing people continue to buy their products. If the hoi polloi can not control themselves enough to not buy products from corporations out of convenience, I so no reason why we should expect corporations whose bottom line is determined by their actions to be any different.
Moreover if the masses wish to force corporations to act in the well being of society they have a method to do so. Corporations as the question clearly points out are expected to operate within the law. The government should be the determiner in what actions are allowed and not allowed for the benefit of society. The government does this by artificially inducing inconvenince as discussed, by creating laws. These laws hurt companies that violate them severely, whether it is by exorbitant fines or by simply arresting those who violate the law. This forces companies to operate in the way that society deems they ought to. For instance a company will not violate environmental laws if they expect the fees for doing so will greatly outweigh any potential savings. This re-balancing of the risk, reward in the benefit of society works in a way to benefit society that companies simply could not be expected to do without.
This also leads into a more philosphoical question; who decides what the greatest action for the 'well-being' of society even is? If we have learned anything in the last 150 years, the most optimal way of determining the greatest well being is and will always remain democratically. Leaders of boards should not be intrusted with the authority of deciding what ought to be done for society. Society ought to decide for it's self. For instance a coporate owner might decide that cutting down the rainforest for the production of food is the best for a society, even potentially going against public opinion. Sure the developer may believe he is doing the right thing by helping the countries economy, but his actions would have massive repercussions for the environment. It simply isn't fair nor wise to expect corporate leaders to act within your or anothers understanding of the optimal wellness for society.
In short, while it would be better if companies always acted responsibly for society, it should not be expected of them. This is because they simply should not be the deciders in what is right and wrong. The deciders should the masses and it is the responsibility of the masses to legislate what they believe to be optimal for society. Corporations in the end are comprised of people, and thus flawed like people. We do not expect anyone to be perfect, instead we expect them to act within set guidelines of 'not too bad'. Corporation's have their own equivalent social imperative, the law.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Moreover,
...y their actions to be any different. Moreover if the masses wish to force corporation...
^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 679, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'countries'' or 'country's'?
Suggestion: countries'; country's
...is doing the right thing by helping the countries economy, but his actions would have mas...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 771, Rule ID: PRP_RB_NO_VB[1]
Message: Are you missing a verb?
...e repercussions for the environment. It simply isnt fair nor wise to expect corporate leade...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 778, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...cussions for the environment. It simply isnt fair nor wise to expect corporate leade...
^^^^
Line 8, column 589, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... equivalent social imperative, the law.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, may, moreover, really, so, thus, well, while, for instance, in short
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 44.0 19.5258426966 225% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 25.0 12.4196629213 201% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 61.0 33.0505617978 185% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 101.0 58.6224719101 172% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3667.0 2235.4752809 164% => OK
No of words: 749.0 442.535393258 169% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.8958611482 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.23143043219 4.55969084622 115% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79774360721 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 303.0 215.323595506 141% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.404539385848 0.4932671777 82% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1153.8 704.065955056 164% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 6.24550561798 208% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.77640449438 394% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 36.0 20.2370786517 178% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.5021337649 60.3974514979 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.861111111 118.986275619 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8055555556 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.72222222222 5.21951772744 52% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 25.0 10.2758426966 243% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.252867954723 0.243740707755 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0754104782502 0.0831039109588 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0511999397435 0.0758088955206 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.170666838197 0.150359130593 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0595230086034 0.0667264976115 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.1392134831 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.8420337079 122% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 12.1639044944 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.52 8.38706741573 90% => OK
difficult_words: 137.0 100.480337079 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 11.8971910112 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.