• Carighan Maconar
    link
    fedilink
    English
    171 year ago

    I’ll be honest, I do believe that CEOs should be personally held repsonsible for the shit their companies pull, in general. And after-the-fact, too. If you led a company and later it gets fined for something it did while you were CEO, that’s on you. Say 50% of fines have to be paid by the C-suites personally.

    But independent of that, in a report such as this, it of course makes little sense because the title wants to strongly suggest they create more carbon emissions as consumers (say via owning yachts and shit) than the poorest 66%. And that’s a very false equivalence. Now you could argue they’re responsible for more carbon emissions, and I would maybe agree with that, yes. They make the decisions that enable this carbon usage, and they could, if they wanted to, cut large swathes of it albeit probably not lasting.

    But yeah, agreed, pretty shit headline.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 year ago

      The point of a Limited Company is that people who own and work for the company are not held responsible for the actions of the company. Exceptions apply, of course. This is done to protect people from the failures of the business. If the company you work for goes bankrupt for whatever reason, you don’t want to owe millions to the creditors of the company out of your pocket.

      • R0cket_M00se
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31 year ago

        Limited Liability Company just means there aren’t any shareholders. Only the owner can be held to account and/or will lose money if the business goes under.

        Every trucker that owns their own vehicle/routes is running an LLC and it isn’t so they can be protected from the failure of their business, it’s because they’re the only ones who will be impacted if the company goes under.

        Source: I was an Owner-Operator and had to learn this terminology when setting up my LLC.