Perfectly Legal, But Wrong

When “perfectly legal” is a lame excuse for doing the wrong thing

Business Ethics

Revolving Doors and Serious Bank Failures

Revolving Doors and Serious Bank Failures

Some myths die hard.  Or, don’t die at all.  One is the myth of the self-regulating market; rational bankers would not (surely not!) take such risks with their own and their depositors’ money that their institutions would be bankrupt (or need a government...

Vultures and Zombie Debts

Do you know what a “zombie debt” is?  Well, let’s say you have a debt, and it doesn’t get fully paid.  It started out as $1565.39 years and years ago, and you paid it down some, but only until you lost your job and had unexpected medical expenses.  The...

Kasky vs. Nike and the quarrelsome question of corporate free speech

Kasky vs. Nike and the quarrelsome question of corporate free speech

The year of 2001 probably was not Nike, Inc., finest moments given that misleading statements that it made to the press and to the public about its operations in Southeast Asia labor activist opened a whole can of worms about whether the First Amendment applies to corporations making false or misleading statements.
After the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the decision, numerous business interests aligned with Nike’s appeal. Twenty-eight organizations and the U.S. government filed briefs as “friends of the court” to argue that Nike’s statements should be fully protected by the First Amendment.