Re: ATM The New S&T

["Fred Maxwell - No spam e-mail accepted." <fmaxwell@erols.com>]

JeGill wrote:
> No, business ethics say that S & T has an obligation to their
> stockholders and investors.  If they feel that their business
> interests are better served by going in a different direction, it would be
> morally wrong for them to follow  path they feel wouldn't allow growth and
> continued success.  

Investors just *loan* money -- usually for short periods of time.  You
claim that Sky & Telescope owes these people more than they owe loyal
readers who have bought their products for years?  It's that kind of
money-worshipping excuse for ethics that has led to layoffs at
*profitable* companies that destroy the lives of tens of thousands of
families every year.  Such layoffs supposedly "allow growth and
continued success."  That's your idea of business ethics -- anything so
that a handful of rich investors can get richer?  

An ethical company is not one that views its employees and customers as
tools to help line the pockets of a few wealthy investors.  I hope that
Sky & Telescope's idea of ethics is more like mine than yours.  

Regards,
  Fred Maxwell

P.S.  Thank you for reminding me why I am a Democrat.