Compare and contrast?

Question

VIEW ONE: Shareholders bear the risks and should have the final say on how public companies are run.

VIEW TWO: Modern competitive conditions require a 'stakeholder' approach to running public companies.

VIEW THREE: The only way business and communities can develop together is if businesses are owned and run by the communities they are in.

Answer 1

1 = yes, that's known as Capitalism, and (so far) it's the best thing we have.

2 = yes (the 'stakeholders' == shareholders .. i.e. the Company Directors should all have significant shareholdings in the Company)

3 = only on a (very) small scale .. for example, a local "Farmers shop" might work .. (right up to the point where a multi-national giant with massive economies of scale and buying power eg. Asda, opened an 'out of town' super store down the road and offer similar goods at half the price...)

Otherwise, no, don't be stupid = it sounds good but does not actually work (it was tried in the (former) Soviet Union) ..

No 'local' community could raise sufficient capital to supply themselves with even the very basics of modern life (eg. Hospital, Power Station. Water Works, Oil Refinery ..) ... they would be back to the horse & cart (sorry, no car factory), no roads . .. no TV or radio stations .. no mobile phones ... no newspapers, no books ...

It's just possible a local community could fund a school (but I wonder who would build it .. after all, where do you think bricks come from ?) ... we would be back, in fact, to the 'dark ages' ..