Orson Scott Card is a curious cat. He seems quite intelligent and open-minded until we get to his homophobia. It would be irresponsible not to speculate…
If you want to see philosophers duke it out, read Orson Scott Card’s Alvin Maker series alongside Robert Anton Wilson’s Illuminatus! trilogy.
Legally, CEOs have a duty of loyalty — they are legally liable if they are working on behalf of their company's competitor to sabotage their company. They also have a duty of care — they can't just withdraw the company's cash and light it on fire.
There's no law saying that a CEO must "maximize shareholder profit." None. It's not a law. It doesn't even make sense. Non-profits have CEOS and they don't maximize profit. How would you even legally prove a CEO failed to do that? Should Tim Cook be sued because he didn't buy NFTs when they were on the ascent to maximize short-term profit?
As a practical matter, if a board doesn't like the direction a CEO is taking or the CEO's efficacy, then they can take steps to remove the CEO. But there's essentially zero legal recourse for shareholders.
This myth comes from a paper from Milton Freedman (or one of his acolytes) that argued a CEO should be paid principally in stock to align the CEO's interests with shareholders. But studies by actual economists show that leads to looting the company. E.g., fire all the employees, stock goes up, CEO cashes out before the shit hits the fan.
Haven’t read Orion. Arborification?
Orson Scott Card is a curious cat. He seems quite intelligent and open-minded until we get to his homophobia. It would be irresponsible not to speculate…
If you want to see philosophers duke it out, read Orson Scott Card’s Alvin Maker series alongside Robert Anton Wilson’s Illuminatus! trilogy.