Morals in the Age of Capitalism

What do companies owe the public? A lot.

By: Joshua Kloss

Those who are most in the position to help others should do just that. In fact, one of the richest men in American history remarked that “wealth is not to feed our egos, but to feed the hungry and to help people help themselves.”

To help people help themselves.

That quote is from Andrew Carnegie, a steel tycoon whose business flourished during the early twentieth century. Considering that one of the richest men in the history of the United States uttered those words, I ask if the idea of helping others to help themselves should be so foreign, so uncomfortable, for the richest country in the world. It shouldn’t be. The wealth of corporations should be employed to help others.

Obviously, we cannot force businesses to fulfill these moral obligations. But when we need assistance, we turn to corporations to fulfill this social responsibility because we assume that they can do it. However, some businesses’ profit margins don’t allow for that flexibility with their funds. So why should we ask these duties of corporations in the first place?

Many people think that the government holds the onus to do good. However, it’s not possible in this day and age, given how the government operates. After all, the contemporary political system is not the mechanism for supporting public good that it was once intended to be, but rather has become a game between candidates to secure the most votes possible. So, we turn to corporations for help.

In 2014, 18 companies owned about a third of the wealth in the United States. That number has continued to grow. These companies earn an unfathomable amount of money; take Jeff Bezos, the CEO of Amazon, who makes enough money to save the 41 million people at risk of starvation, according to David Beasley, the head of the World Food Programme. The bottom line is really easy to grasp: we shouldn’t have people worrying about how they’ll pay their rent, how they’ll obtain their next meal, or where they are going to sleep, at least not in one of the richest countries in the world. These problems need to be fixed, and the insane amount of money that is hoarded by corporate executives is a quick source of funding for these issues to begin to be addressed, if not solved altogether. But their ability to do good is not the only reason that corporations need to do good.

Another compelling point is that corporations have a rather rewarding incentive to fulfill these needs. So when a corporation “gives back,” they benefit from it, too. After all, good ethics results in good business.

Truly, businesses that do good, do good (in terms of business). Would you, as a consumer, feel better purchasing shampoo from a brand that does not test on animals, or a brand of equivalent quality and price, but that has been exposed for testing its shampoo on cute baby bunnies? If you are the type of person that I hope you are, you’d buy from the first brand. And it makes sense: if you are going to spend the money, you might as well feel good about it. After all, shopping is commonly viewed as therapeutic; retail therapy is alarmingly (but not surprisingly) common in the United States. And you probably feel good supporting local businesses because you know that they need the money more and/or are less malicious than huge corporate conglomerates. If you perceive a business as good, you’re likely to support them and, thus, to buy from them. 

According to a study conducted by Horizon Media, 81% of millennials say that they expect companies that show corporate citizenship. And in the 2015 Nielson Global Corporate Sustainability report, 66% of global consumers claim they’re willing to spend more in order to support a brand that is deemed sustainable.

Put plainly, consumers want “good companies.” When businesses support philanthropic causes, customers notice, and it increases their company engagement. With their deeds of service, companies establish a mission, a deeper purpose, which entices customers to support them. This allows them to attract more customers, more business, more profit.

Doing good does businesses good, as well as helping those who need it the most. Obviously, nobody can make corporations be charitable. And they don’t have to be, in our economy and legal system. But when you look at the unnecessary suffering of countless Americans, the wealth of corporate America becomes disgusting and gluttonous.

The question shouldn’t be whether companies should do good, as companies are the most in position to do so and reap benefits from it. I think the real concern is when we will see that good take place.