this post was submitted on 02 May 2024
137 points (97.9% liked)

Canada

10206 readers
412 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kiosade@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Downvoting you because this is factually incorrect. They WANT the profit, but it’s not illegal to not make a certain amount of profit, that’s silly.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Kiosade@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Every time this view point is parroted, they either imply or outright state the company will be sued/break the law because they didn’t do their best to make money. Notice how they used words like “need”, “swearing an oath”, etc. I’ve seen it time and time again on here and on Reddit, it’s tiresome at this point. The companies are just greedy, and know they can pretty much get away with stuff like this, end of story.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The shareholders will oust the CEO who doesn't meet that need. No legal action required.

Maybe other people inaccurately say it is a law, but this is not an example of that. Especially since you said "FACTUALLY INCORRECT".

No, no incorrect facts were stated.