English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

With business larger then ever citizens, in many areas have very little choice of who they are going to work for. Does big business have a responsibilty to provide employees with retirement plans, medical insurance, and other benefits?
Many large business dominate an area and take wealth but give back much less to the community. What is the business responsibility towards a community?
Should legislation ensure that Large business take a more active role in social programs? i.e. Housing, welfare, etc.
If the government mandates that a business take a more active role in local social issues, are we a capitalist state, or somthing other then that?

2006-07-23 15:26:15 · 9 answers · asked by James H 3 in Business & Finance Other - Business & Finance

9 answers

no. we are not a socialist country yet. a for-profit business is just that FOR PROFIT. however, each individual human has the option to help others out. people in our country need to quit looking to corporations and even the government to help them. look to your community, become part of your community, help someone in need first.
while it has become standard practice to offer medical insurance and even retirement benefits, it should not be required by the goverment. the workers can go elsewhere if they don't like a benefits package that an employer offers - or doesn't.

2006-07-23 15:33:35 · answer #1 · answered by erikajune6 2 · 3 1

Nope, businesses, large or small, beyond paying the agreed upon wage in full and on time, have no obligation what ever to their employees. Even fringe benefits such and retirement plans and profit sharing can be curtailed. Group medical insurance has become so expensive as to have virtually priced itself out of the market, running employees portions of the premiums so high that most companies that still offer a program do so by way of tax deductible payroll withholding.

Now, the truth is that a great many companies, large and small, offer just such benefits as are mentioned above, if for no other reason than to curb turnover. As to housing and welfare, corporations do contribute handsomely, either in the form of taxes or through contributions they make to reduce their tax obligations.

The government will never, nor should it, mandate anything such as price controls, social programs that would ad to overhead, or welfare programs that are the business of the government. Any step in that direction flies in the face of the free enterprise system that our very economy is based upon.

2006-07-23 15:51:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

In my opinion, big busness has a moral obligation to provide benefits for their emplyees: three reasons. A) they can easily afford to do so. Big businesses rake in HUGE profits. B) With any business, their number one commitment is to bettering their community. C) Many of the people that work there do so because of their situation- the big business is their only chance for employment. Often they are already going through hard living conditions.

I would support legislation requiring big businesses to provide benefits for their employees, as long as the legislation isn't too excessive. Something like a set of minimum standards (sort of like minimum wage) would be a good idea, in my opinion.

2006-07-23 15:34:34 · answer #3 · answered by Michael G 2 · 0 0

They have a moral responsbility considering it's the employees who keep in direct contact with the customers and not only bring it but help maintain current business for the company itself.

However overpaid corporate big wigs are just that and out of touch with the people who make their business what it is, not the other way around. But these same people will do anything to keep their 'corporate escort whore' funds from being depleted, thus resulting in the layoff of employees, cutting of benny's...etc

2006-07-23 15:32:56 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It is the governments job to take care of it's citizens. It does this via taxes. Though larger companies do make more money, they also pay more in taxes. If you want to go after someone to improve health care or retirement programs...go after the the government...that has fleeced Social Security and Medicare.

2006-07-23 15:31:32 · answer #5 · answered by anysomeone 3 · 0 0

Yes,they do have a "Social" responsiblity to take care of their employees. But,with retirement plans,medical insurance,presciptions,and dental,it would cut into their precious profit margin.

2006-07-23 15:32:48 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes, b/c they make enough money to take care of their employees and the CEOs and the biz it's self ten times over!
OF course they should take care of their employees, they are their BLOOD to the life line of the costomers!
:p

2006-07-23 15:30:47 · answer #7 · answered by Am 4 · 0 0

sounds like socialism to me

2006-07-23 15:32:32 · answer #8 · answered by geotom 3 · 0 0

Well, of course they do.

2006-07-23 15:29:42 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers