I have been thinking about Harvard University’s decision to refuse the demands placed on it by the current US regime.
In that Uni’s case, they have a massive endowment backing them, so they can survive the massive loss of funds.
Most companies and organisations are not in that position, and would have to fight such matters in court and hope to win - knowing that, if they lose, they will be bankrupt, and their employees possibly left with unpaid entitlements.
It therefore seems to me that, in order to be ethical, a new company should:
- at the start state to everyone - including employees - that if there is an external ethical problem, the company will resist pressure, which may mean it goes out of business, and thus employees should aim to build a cash reserve as soon as possible, IF THEY CAN (those on lower pay rates likely won’t be able to do so, but they can minimise debt etc);
- diversify so that no more than, say, 11 - 15% of the company’s resources are exposed to one specific market’s risk. This (which I have thought for years, actually), means that you do not focus on one overseas market, but several overseas and domestic markets - even if that reduces your profit, which may require appropriately thoughtful and cautious directors/shareholders/others with a financial interest ... and accountants, who need to be told to shut up if they start prattling on about greater return if the company has a narrower focus. Realistically, this may conflict with requirements for publicly listed companies, but that, IMO, is an argument for changing the law to allow the safer practice, not for enforcing a stupidly dangerous business strategy. (Accounting practices would also have to reflect the long term approach of the sectors supporting temporary turn downs in one other - maybe over a 20 or 30 year cycle.)
I mentioned employees in that. In my opinion, families need to make similar sorts of plans.
When I started work in the 1980s, the guide was you should have three months income stashed away in case you needed to find another job; these days, the recommendation is a year - which very few people can acheive.
And, given that, families need to plan on having more than a single source of income - which, again, is not always possible (pregnancy, illness/disability/etc), but if you have one one income stream, be as frugal as you can.
If you don't, the income earner could be forced into accepting unethical - or less than ideal - decisions/behaviours, and, if that happens, it doesn’t matter how ethical the rest of the family, is that is just a glitzy, superficial façade built on an unethical foundation, meaning it counts for nothing.
In many spiritual circles, money, or having money, is viewed unfavourable - or even as evil (and certainly the world should NOT have billionaires). However, I have seen what can be done by caring, generous people who DO have money, and by companies with Directors determined to use cash reserves for good (such as hiring extra employees when needed).
The money itself isn’t evil: it is what is done or not done with it that is evil or good (or neutral) ...
This has been discussed in a recent Midday with Rev Don episode - which I am NOT going to try to find.
Another relevant perspective comes from the Activist Witch, who points out that having (social) privilege provides an opportunity to do good.
Anyway, food for thought, perhaps.
If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below, and there’s also other options.
Note that I am cutting back on aspects of my posts - see here.
(Gnwmythr is pronounced new-MYTH-ear)
Remember: we generally need to be more human being rather than human doing, to mind our Mӕgan, and to acknowledge that all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk & accept that all insistence on the use of “trans” as a descriptor comes with commensurate use of “cis” as a descriptor to prevent “othering” (just as binary gendered [men’s and women’s] sporting teams are either both given the gender descriptor, or neither).#PsychicABetterWorld and may all that I do be of value and actively BPM used for and by the nonphysical BPM
Copyright © Kayleen White 2007-2025 NO AI
I do not consent to any machine learning aka Artificial Intelligence
(AI), generative AI, large language model, machine learning, chatbot, or
other automated analysis, generative process, or replication program to
reproduce, mimic, remix, summarise, or otherwise replicate any part of
this post or other posts on this blog via any means. Typo’s
may be inserrted deliberately to demonstrate this is not an AI product.
Otherwise, fair and reasonable use is accepted under Creative
Commons 4.0 on an Attribution-ShareAlike basis https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
.jpg)
