Corporate Greed: Cheaper to Pay Off Than Prevent Disaster
The Financial Times, ever the astute observer of capital's cunning, reveals that corporate lawyers are advising boards it's 'cheaper to purchase forgiveness' from disgruntled investors than to, you know, not screw up in the first place. This financial innovation isn't new; it's simply a formalized version of accountability theater. One might wonder if this framework extends to other sectors, say,
military contractors like Lockheed Martin or Raytheon, whose stocks routinely surge on the back of conflict, even as their products inflict widespread devastation (Reuters, Q4 2023 earnings reports). Is it cheaper for them to pay off a few 'angry' human rights groups than to halt the supply chain of destruction? This 'profitable trade' fundamentally redefines 'risk management' as 'consequence
management,' where the cost of doing wrong is merely another line item in the budget. It begs the question: How many 'investors' could be paid off to overlook actual war crimes? For the military-industrial complex and its political enablers, the answer appears to be: a remarkably affordable sum. After all, the defense budget continues to climb, with the U.S. House passing the FY2024 NDAA,
authorizing $886 billion (Congress.gov, H.R.2670), while domestic programs starve. Prioritizing shareholder 'anger' over public dissent is a time-tested strategy for those who profit from chaos.