<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Warren&#8217;s corporate governance scheme, cont&#8217;d	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2018/08/warrens-corporate-governance-scheme-contd/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2018/08/warrens-corporate-governance-scheme-contd/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2018 02:05:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: cc		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2018/08/warrens-corporate-governance-scheme-contd/comment-page-1/#comment-349422</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[cc]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2018 15:24:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.overlawyered.com/?p=72507#comment-349422</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The concept of &quot;stakeholders&quot; is a blatant effort to politicize businesses and alter their purpose.  It would allow a handful of vocal advocates to force a business to take on tasks not related to profitability.  And who would decide which stakeholders get to have such a big impact? There are already a vast number of nonprofits doing &quot;good deeds&quot; as well as government programs.  Burdening corporations with non-business duties (using only organic or recycled inputs, serving special populations, creating unprofitable products) will just drive them out of business.  Her aversion to &quot;shareholders&quot; is so strange--these are the owners and many shareholders are actually pension funds or 401k accounts.
Corporations are already striving to serve people by trying to do things faster and cheaper as well as by introducing new and improved products on a daily basis.  Does Warren think a government meddled company could make an iPhone?  hah]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The concept of &#8220;stakeholders&#8221; is a blatant effort to politicize businesses and alter their purpose.  It would allow a handful of vocal advocates to force a business to take on tasks not related to profitability.  And who would decide which stakeholders get to have such a big impact? There are already a vast number of nonprofits doing &#8220;good deeds&#8221; as well as government programs.  Burdening corporations with non-business duties (using only organic or recycled inputs, serving special populations, creating unprofitable products) will just drive them out of business.  Her aversion to &#8220;shareholders&#8221; is so strange&#8211;these are the owners and many shareholders are actually pension funds or 401k accounts.<br />
Corporations are already striving to serve people by trying to do things faster and cheaper as well as by introducing new and improved products on a daily basis.  Does Warren think a government meddled company could make an iPhone?  hah</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
