Embed Notice

@Hyolobrika@social.fbxl.net I'm not sure what you were getting at with your bees/honey comment.Consider the ethics of owning something like stocks in tobacco producers or other addictive products.is it okay to have power over and/or extract wealth from something that doesn't employ you, or operate near you, or that you don't depend on in any way The whole point of being a publicly traded company is that you can be externally financed. In theory, if there are no problems everybody wins. In my opinion most of the problems with corporations stem from a lack of enforcement of fraud and other crimes, or negative externalities that may well be considered crimes in their own right.

So I would double down and say that there's no moral issue so long as the product or service being offered itself isn't (or isn't likely to be) net negative. I believe what you're hinting at is that if one is detached from the outcome, it may be hard (or inconvenient) for them to discover problems.

I agree, which is why I think passive investing is a cancer that creates way more problems than it solves. I just wouldn't go as far as to say that being detached from something itself makes financing it immoral.

(inb4 finance is usury and therefore immoral, I need a research grant to figure that one out 😅)