WEEK 7: BANKS AND CHARITIES
Canadian banks are Canada's largest corporate taxpayers and largest corporate donors. According to the Canadian Bankers Association, in 2007, seven of Canada's Schedule 1 banks donated $197 million to charities in Canada and around the world. These contributions support education, youth, and health care. The banks also support amateur athletes, the arts and community events. For example, the Bank of Montreal is the principal sponsor of Skate Canada and is a founding sponsor of the Kids Help Phone.
Because banks are the largest taxpayers in Canada, their profits help build roads, schools, hospitals and many other governmental activities. In addition, banks are also committed to helping the environment.
Resources
www.cba.ca/banks-rally-to-support-red-cross-new-brunswick-flood-relief
Do you think that companies should give money to charities? Why or Why Not?
Do you think that companies should be obliged to be front-runners in helping the environment? Why or Why Not?
Postd on behalf of Caroline:
ReplyDeleteThis Ethical question is talking about whether a lemon-flavoured drink laced with nicotine is legal to sell. In my opinion, it should not be legal to sell this drink for any one.
For one, this 8 oz soda contains the same amount of nicotine as two cigarettes, also nicotine is a highly addictive drug. It means if the people, especially the child or teenagers taste this drink, and love it, they may drink this soda for long term, but the thing that let people addictive is nicotine in soda, and we all know nicotine is bad for our health, but some people do not realize that the soda contains nicotine.
For another, the company promote their drinks to the smokers who find themselves in places where smoking is prohibited, that is the wrong behavior too! The smokers could not smoke in the public places, we need to stop them, and I hold that smoking is prohibited in public places not only to protect the environment, but also to let smokers quit smoking. The company do not care the people's health, they only care their profit. If people is addicted to their soda, they will buy a lot of their drinks, so that company could make lots of profit.
Although nicotine in soda is better than smoking in public places, also the lack of second-hand smoke from these drinks will make nicotine use safer for others. However, there is still have nicotine in it, whether it's a cigarette or a drink, it still bad for people health.
In summary, any drinks or foods which contains the substances that are bad for people health should illegal to sale, even these things classified as a dietary substance.
wrong one?
DeleteI think companies should give money to charities. Companies are groups of people, they need to support charities like other people do. Some people may not have enough money for charities, but most companies do. The people with enough money should also do the same thing. If the company is big enough, it can also choose not giving money to charities, make a new charity belongs to the company. That will encourage people build more charities to help different people need help better. Or just give money to charities, if the companies can not help people themselves, they need to support others doing that. Everyone have their right to make decisions. However, nobody has their right to be a bad person. So everyone should at least use their own ability to help others.
ReplyDeleteCompanies should be obliged to be front-runners in helping the environment. Most of the pollution in environment is caused by companies directly or not directly. Factories make smokes pollutes the air makes effluent pollutes the water and lots of other waste pollutes the ground. The products of companies like air conditioners, different kinds of vehicles...will release harmful air and pollute the air. Some other products made by plastics, heavy metal and so on that is hard to be disposed will harm the environment for hundreds of years. Without some of the companies, the environment will not have most of the problems it has now. So, of course, companies should be obliged to be front-runners in helping the environment.
I agree that it's good to make companies do charity acts, but I don't think it should be forced, Also, I think it's good idea to make sure companies care about the environment.
DeleteIt's great benevolences for Canadian banks to do charity acts for people in their community. Societies will be a better place with companies' charity acts. However, I don't think companies "have to" give more money for charity acts. In beneficial view point, it’s just companies’ “choice”. If they do things for community, they will have positive public image, and else they won’t have that much positive image. But, in ethical view point, they should give more money to communities that they earn money from.
ReplyDeleteIt’s different for cases. For companies who have made huge pollutions, or have potential to do, they have to be obliged by the law to take care of the environment, and they need to be limited in amount for developing environment that should be protected. For others, it’s moral to care about environmental issues, but it’s up to them.
I also think that companies should give to charities voluntarily. It’s their choice to have a positive public image or just not promote themselves for causes. I don’t agree with your point that only companies who have made huge pollutions should be obliged to help the environment. Every office is using energy therefore every office produces pollutions. Every business’ goal should be eliminate their damage on earth as much as possible.
DeleteI agree with you regarding what you said, that companies shouldn't be forced to give money to charities but, it can provide the company with a more positive image towards people.
DeleteI agree that it's different for different companies. However, I think all most of the companies make pollution and they should be responsible for the pollution they make.
DeleteI strongly agree with you, the companies have responsibility to take care of the environment if the company have made huge pollutions. Also, it’s essential to limit in amount for developing environment that should be protected.
DeleteDo you think that companies should give money to charities? Why or Why Not?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion companies have the right to do whatever they wish with their money, and whether they decide to spend it on charities or not. However, I believe that spending money charitably will actually increase a company's profits in the long run. When a company publicly donates to a charity its a powerful form of marketing, and helps the business garner good publicity and social status. When a company uses some of its profits for charity, it gives consumers another reason to choose their product over the competition. Businesses such as Tim hortons capitalize on this marketing strategy, by using profits to allow poor families to play hockey in Canada.
I believe that large businesses that have a significant impact on the environment should be conscious of their environmental impacts, but isn’t obliged to go out of their way for the environment. Much like my first point, I think that if the company helping the environment is able to publicize their actions they could actually make a profit in the long run by getting a good reputation in the public's eyes. In my opinion companies should be held accountable for infractions against the environment, but in the end their environmental contributions is up to them.
I learned a lot from your example of Tim Hortons helps poor children to play hockey in Canada. It is a successful business charity because the cause they support runs in the company’s community and value. I agree with you that companies who violate the environmental law should be held accountable. How ever, the numbers in the policies are the lowest standard. We should do more to improve our environment.
DeleteI think your right, companies shouldn't be obligated to help the environment but, they should be forced to help the environment if they have a huge impact on it. I think that companies who impact the environment should be obligated to help the environment to balance the effect that they have done.
DeleteI agree with you that it should be forced for companies to do charity acts. However, the government should force companies who make pollution to care about the environment.
DeleteI agree that companies have the choice to do whatever they want with their money. I can also agree that a public donation to a charitable cause will give a company a better reputation, higher social status, and will attract more customers which may result in profit
DeleteI agree that spending money charitably is helpful for a business. Not only is it giving money to a good cause, but it also increases the likelihood of someone choosing that business over another, which is very good in the long run.
DeletePosted on behalf of Sihan:
DeleteI agree with you. How much profit the company gets can be the factors considered. Generally they are encouraged to do so because they are repaying the society and it actually makes the business better. It does great marketing at the same time but still I think this is necessary if they are able to do so.
I strongly agree with you, companies have the right to do whatever they want with their money; they shouldn't be obligate. But they should offer help for those who need it, we all people here and if we have the money to do it; then why are we waiting for?
DeleteI think companies should invest money in charities.BecauseAs individuals, giving back to our communities makes us feel good, causes us to be more socially aware, and helps us bond with our colleagues as we team up to help those in need. In the quest for a great work-life balance, it is important to many A-list candidates to be employed by a company that gives to charity for these very reasons.
ReplyDeleteSome companies have been known to give their employees matching bonuses, meaning, when the employee receives a bonus for exceeding his or her sales quota, a donation of the same amount goes to a charity of the employee's choice. This gives workers an added incentive to achieve higher results for the company.
Another reason will beSponsoring a charity event that falls in line with your business is a great way to do some good while getting your name out in your community. You'll want to select a charity that aligns well with your business to make the greatest impact. For example, if you are a company that makes cars, you may want to sponsor a charity that supports the reduce affect of global warming.
By sponsoring a worthy charity, you're presenting your company in a positive light by demonstrating to the members of your community that you care about them.
But at the end of the day is always for a good cause.
I agree with you, when companies sponsor a charity it really does get their name out in the community and also gives them a good reputation.
DeleteI strongly agree with you, companies should give money to charity so they ca earn publicity and create a new image in the community.
DeleteI believe that it's a noble thing if companies would donate some of their money to charities but, I think companies should have the choices to do whatever they want with their profits as long as it is legal. In my opinion, as long as these businesses pay their taxes, they shouldn't be told how to manage their resources. On the other hand, if a company gave some of their annual profit to charities, it would be beneficial for them because they would be a more popular company and subsequently earn more profit. According to the Inc.,( 8 Dec. 2014), companies who donate to charities can attract more people to their company, it can also increase the companies' network opportunities and generate positivity toward the company.
ReplyDeleteIn regard to the obligations towards the environment, I think that depends on the situation, companies that have a large impact on the environment should be obliged to contribute by having a percentage of their profit towards environmental projects to balance the negative effects they pose. On the other hand, companies who have minimal effects on the environment should have fewer donations towards environmental projects, nevertheless, these businesses should be encouraged to support environmental causes.
I agree. Companies aren't obliged to donate to charity, although it is a benevolent thing to do. I also agree with your point with companies who impact the environment more should donate more, than companies that make minimal impacts.
DeleteI agree with what you say. Companies should have the choice over what the do with their profits and if they want to give back to the community or keep it and put it back into the business they can do that. I also agree that companies who have a great impact on the environment should feel obliged to help restore and fix the environment.
DeleteI totally agree, it's a great thing if companies donate to charity but they should have a choice if they want to do it or not.
DeleteI agree with you, the companies get positive impacts by donating to charities. As you said, the company would be more popular and can make more profits, additionally, they also can get tax benefits.
Deleteposted on behalf of Sihan:
DeleteI agree that. In another word the companies are responsible to the environment, but at least they should take care of their own environment issues. Furthermore they can hold those environmental activity to teach people more about the environment but it isn't necessary for all the companies.
I think companies should give money to charities, but they don’t have to. Like banks, some of the most profitable businesses are already the largest taxpayers in Canada. The money is used to support government programs like education, health care already. However, if a company is determined to get involved in charity activities, only donating money is not enough. Doing goods for its community should be in the core of what every company does. Despite the initiatives, there are a couple benefits if the company do so. Research shows that millennial have driven the social responsibility movement. The millennial represents $2.45 trillion in spending power, 70 percent of them reporting that they’ll spend more with brands that support causes. “Giving back” can actually increase sales and “earning back”. Engaging employees in community service build on their team skills and connect them to worthy endeavours that resonate with what they do at work. Surveys suggest align employees with the company’s donation has the result of higher working commitment and productivity. It is also important for companies to invest in organizations within their community that are related to the brand name. It means better advertisement and customers’ appreciation and gratitude create business opportunities. Big companies also have influences over small companies when serving charitable purpose.
ReplyDeleteEnvironment is a non-negotiable issue. And business is one of the leading cost of environmental degradation. According to the U.S Environmental Protection Agency, industrial and commercial energy use accounts for nearly 30 percent of total U.S greenhouse gas emissions. I believe all companies are obliged to be front-runners in helping the environment. Their help can be in three ways. First, reduce its own impact on the environment. Finding a greener alternative for their electricity source, stationary, equipment, product transportation and industrial process. For some businesses, reduce its burning of fossil fuels to power boilers and produce steam and using of gasoline to power vehicles. Second, join environment charities for additional help. Third, use its promotion strategies to raise environmental awareness among citizens to all protect our homeland. Being the front-runners is essentially a business’ responsibility.
I agree with you that the environment is a non-negotiable issue and it does have a significant impact on the climate. But I don't think that everyone should be forced to be front-runners in helping the environment because some businesses are not doing any harm to the environment, in my opinion, the companies who are affecting the environment should be the ones to help it.
DeleteCompanies are not obliged to give to charity. Unless their company revolves around a certain charitable cause, I don't find charity necessary for a company to do. I find no reason for a big companies to do something charitable except for the fact that the public expects the major companies to do so, due to people thinking that it’s a rich person's duty to solve every problem on Earth. Also, if a recognizable franchise where to donate large amounts of money or support a good cause, it can potentially improve or even fix the company’s reputation.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, I think that the consumers should play a big role in which company they choose to buy their products from, when it comes to environmental issues. If consumers boycott a company that is known for high levels of greenhouse gas emission in their manufacturing process, the company would either make efforts to reduce gas emission and help the environment or go bankrupt. Either way it impacts how much pollution is going to impact Earth. Companies shouldn’t be obliged to helping the environment, but if consumers want companies to do so, than I feel that the best way is to increase consumer demand on more environmental friendly products and companies.
I disagree with your opinion on companies charitable efforts. Giving back should never be thought of as a bad thing. We can not ignore the fact that the successful companies are profitable because of their consumers; therefore, I think that companies should be giving back a portion of their profits to support a charitable organization. A good example would be the Ronald McDonald House in Toronto that allows families to stay close to their sick children for free.
DeleteI don't agree that there are no reasons for big companies to do something charitable. If they have enough money and are making extra profit, they should donate instead of being selfish and keeping all of the money for themselves. Especially because there are so many problems that need to be fixed and the big companies aren't doing as much as they could and should.
DeleteLarge businesses are growing more and more, and they make more and more money. Some companies decided to donate some part of their money to some charity organizations, but the question is, should they do so? For this problem, I would say that I don’t think that giving money to charity is a good idea, and I’ll explain what I’m thinking in the following passages.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, can donating to a charity organization really makes your company a good company in people’s eyes? Some companies donate to charity because they want their company to leave a good impression in their customers’ mind. It’s good to have this kind of idea, because this symbolized that this company cares about their customers. Really, which company doesn’t want to have a good impression? The truth is, most customers don’t even care about if a company donates to charity or not, maybe they just saw it on TV and they only know about it. A truly good company should use their money to focus on user experiences and making more high-quality products, only good products can make the customers like their company.
Second, you always need to have some money enough to restart your company, in order to prevent an economical declination. A good business man need to have a lot of methods to prevent the company from closing, because chances are only given to those who had prepared, so having a lot of money back in the safe is really a good idea. There’s another kind of situation that may happen, you are so rich and you don’t want your company anymore. If you are in this situation, your money can use for travelling, buying more stuff, collecting, and the most important thing, giving to your parents, because only your parents have raised you, and without them, you cannot make these money that you have today.
For conclusion, I’m not saying that you should never give your money to charity, but only if you really want to do so. The choices are controlled by yourselves, these are only my opinions.
Do you think that companies should give money to charities? Why or Why Not?
ReplyDeleteThere isn’t a ‘should’ or ’should not’ for the first ethical question. Not all the companies can give away money to the charity. It’s all based on how much the company earned. Whether they donate or not it depends on the companies’ want. This actually will improve the reputation of the company and bring more businesses. In my opinion, when a company gets popular enough and earns enough money, they should repay the society by sponsoring to the charity because that’s where they get profit from. From another point of view, when they are attractive enough, this will show that the company is positive and create a perfect impression to the public.
Do you think that companies should be obliged to be front-runners in helping the environment? Why or Why Not?
They don’t necessarily to be the front-runners in helping the environment but at least they need to be responsible to the environmental issues in their business. I believed that helping the environment should be led by those environmental non-profit organizations. What all the companies need to do is to care about the impacts they made carefully first, then to advocate doing things for the environment.
I agree with what you have to say. New and small businesses need all the money they can get to help expand their business but bigger, more established businesses can afford to give back to the community and show some love to the consumers that generate most of their profit.
DeleteI agree with everything you have to say, not only should big companies that cause a lot of pollution have to clean up their mess, but also the companies that do not harm the environment should no fell the need to clean up the mess of the companies with more money than them and are causing the problem.
DeleteI think that companies should give money and contribute to charities but it shouldn't be mandatory. Giving to charities gives back to the community that they operate in which can increase their status and presence in the community. It looks good on the company while also supporting a good cause. I think if the business has a valid reason they shouldn't have to donate to charities because if they are a small business that doesn't have a lot of money at the time and needs everything they can get it could hurt the company by being forced to donate. If it is a bigger, more established business they should be pushed more to donate and give back to the community because they would be able to afford it.
ReplyDeleteI think that companies should feel obliged to be a front runner in the environment for a number of reasons. Most times a business has more money and resources then just one person. They normally have a greater influence on the community then just one person. This means they can co-host events with charities, donate larger amounts of money, and raise awareness for the charities for the environment and their causes. They can also change some of their business practices to be more environmentally friendly similar to Ben and Jerry's. When you look at some of the world's leading businesses, they all advocate for the environment and their practices are constantly changing to become more environmentally friendly. An example of this would be companies such as Google or Apple. Google is one of the worlds leaders when it comes to the environment. They own green power plants across the world and have enough green power to power the entire company. Apple is constantly looking for new ways to recycle old iPhones and use parts for future technology. Even small businesses in small towns do their best to protect the environment and encourage individuals to do the same.
I agree that donating to charitys shouldn’t be mandatory because of the reason that smaller companies might not financially be able to. I also agree that companies should donate because it Looks good for the company, and sets an example for other businesses, which encourages them to help the environment.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI strongly believe that businesses should
ReplyDeletefinancially support charities. Personally, I think that there are two major reasons why companies support charities, one being a direct cause and one being an indirect cause. The direct cause is when companies donate to charities they receive a tax break. Many big companies donate for this purpose because it allows them to pay less when it comes to their company taxes. The indirect cause is when businesses attempt to build a better reputation or image by donating to charity. For instance, if I were to decide where to go for lunch, between Burger King and Harvey's, I would choose Burger King. I would purchase from Burger King because they have their own charitable organization called "The Have It Your Way Foundation"; therefore, by spending my money at Burger King rather than Harvey's, I am supporting how they donate College/ University scholarships to restaurant employees, children of employees, and high school seniors. Due to the fact that Burger King has their own charitable organization, I think greater of their fast food chain. This example is equivalent to the ten banks coming together in support of the New Brunswick flood through the Canadian Red Cross, May 2018.
I believe that companies should be front-runners in helping the environment to a certain extent. Large corporations should set a positive example for others, but I do not think that small businesses should have the same expectations and responsibilities. However, "No company is an island, immune to the system that keeps society functioning." (WEconomy) This quotation states how every business has a role in it's own environment/ community. For instance, if a popular corporation like Starbucks decided to no longer distribute plastic straws, than competing companies would likely follow by example. Also, by investing in paper straws, Starbucks would be gaining respect for taking environmental action. Therefore, companies should lead by example to help better the environment and to encourage their consumers to follow their initiative.
Do you think that companies should give money to charities? Why or Why Not?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, companies have the right to decide how they want to use the money. Donations allow companies to take active interests in their own communities and can also lead to a big increase in employee morale. If a company chooses to make give money to charities, the workplace culture can improve with increased employee involvement towards the company and charities.
Giving money to charities also put the company's name out there, especially if you sponsor some an event and also gives a good reputation to the company. Charitable contributions have numerous benefits, but the most important one is obvious: you should give back to your community.
Charities help better the community, and the public will notice if a company is making a real effort to improve your community. A company giving money to charities could really help improve the education system, parks, and school.
I agree companies should have the choice if they want to donate, also because some companies can't afford to give big amounts of cash to charities.
DeleteI completely agree that the number one reason for businesses to give back should be because you should give back to your own community. Businesses would not succeed without the support from their community and therefore they should be thankful and want to give back.
DeleteI think companies should definitely give money to charity. Not only would this help the charities but it would also help the image of the company because people would prefer buying from a company that cares about problems in the world rather than a company that doesn’t
ReplyDeleteI do not think companies should be obliged to be front-runners with helping the environment because, newer or smaller businesses might not have enough money to give to a charity and be able to pay all their employees, suppliers and taxes, which would result in the business closing down even though they were contributing to a good cause. Even with bigger company’s I believe they should focus on what they need to stay opened and then give what they can to charity, and like I said before it would really help their image if they helped the environment. That is why I think it shouldn’t be an obligation to help the environment, but businesses should do all they can to be front runners for these good causes.
I think it's great that companies give money to charity, I believe that most companies should give some money to charity because it's always nice to help the less fortunate, no one can imagine what they are going through, if it's cancer or homelessness, etc. no one wants to be going through that so giving just a bit of money so less cases like these are had is always a good thing. The only case that a company should not give money to charity is when they are in a bad situation or they are bankrupt.
ReplyDeleteI would find it very surprising if companies were the front runners to helping the environment because, even though I think they should be one of the font runners, many companies are based doing things that are extremely harmful for the environment, for example the tar sands in Alberta, they are a massive company making tones of money but they are a extreme harm for the environment. And because they are so many companies that live off, in other words, harming the environment, I don't think companies will be the front runners in helping the environment because so many companies will be starting to be extremely hypocritical which could cause them to get closed down.
I agree with you that most companies are selfish and don't end up helping the environment for the sake of their own company and their profit. But I don't think that if companies started helping with the environment, like the tar sands for example, they wouldn't close down. I think they would end up getting a better reputation with the customers because they would see that they are doing things for the environment and not only against it.
DeleteI agree with you, it would be surprising if companies were to help the environment as they are sending a lot of pollution to the air from their companies.
ReplyDeleteI think that companies should give money to charities, especially the ones that make lots of extra profit. For example the Canadian Banks are doing so much with their extra profit instead of keeping it for themselves and being selfish. They donated almost 200 million dollars to charities not only to Canada, but around the world as well. But I think that companies should still have the choice to donate or not to because not all companies have the proper funds to donate to places and if everyone had to, there wouldn’t be as many businesses in the world right now. Also when companies donate to charities, people recognize them more and might go shop at their stores instead of going to one where they don’t donate to charities. Donating even a small amount every month can affect a charities goal by so much in the long run and could do so much for the world.
ReplyDeleteI think for companies that are using things in the environment and taking the resources they should have to help the environment equally as well. If a water company, for example, was taking more and more fresh water and not doing anything to help the environment equally and stopping the negative effects the water would eventually run out, not only affecting them but also affecting everyone else who was drinking and using the fresh water that was then stolen from them. For companies that aren’t harming the environment, I don’t think they should be obliged to be front-runners in helping the environment but if they did it would get them a better reputation with anyone who actually cares about the environment.
In my opinion, I don’t think the companies should give money to charities. Donating to charities is good for the community, but the companies have choice to do it or not. Though donating is companies’ choice, there are some positive impact with donating to charities. If the companies make huge profits, when they donate partial of their profits to charities, they get tax benefits from the government. Also, the companies will have good image in public. It means that donating is not just giving money, it also has positive impacts to companies.
ReplyDeleteSome companies should be obliged to be front-runner in helping the environment such as the company which generated huge increase in pollution. They have responsibilities in helping the environment. They need to take care of the environment that they polluted from the harmful substances while they were producing their products.
I agree, it would be nice if companies did donate to charity, however they should now feel obligated to. I also agree that not all companies should fell the need to help the environment, only the ones that pollute it the most.
DeletePosted on behalf of Caroline:
ReplyDeleteCaroline.Liao
15 Jul (10 days ago)
to me
In my opinion, some large-scale companies and businesses should give a part of money to charities definitely. As they make lots of profit each year, so that in my view, they should do something to social & world. They can donate money to charity for children to build an teaching building in remote areas, to donate a library for primary school, to provide better livings for national protected animals, and so on. However, some new and small companies may not have enough ability or extra money giving to charity, so whether they are willing to donate is voluntary.
Environmental protection of enterprises is one of the social responsibilities. There is an example: At the beginning of this century, industrial developed countries only paid attention to developing the economy, ignoring environmental protection, and sacrificing the environment to make economic development. When pollution forms public nuisance and causes widespread opposition from the masses and affects the smooth development of the economy, it is forced to harness and pay an expensive price. It is called the development road of "first pollution and then harnessing". This way of development not only slows the development of national economy, but also destroys the material foundation of national economic development.
On the other hand, if human beings do not act according to the laws of environmental science, wantonly destroy the ecological environment, they will inevitably be retaliated by the environment. Statistics show that: in 1950, the forest coverage rate in Yunnan was 50%, which was nine years in a big flood and drought. Due to the destruction of deforestation, the forest coverage rate was only 24.9% in 1980, affecting the adjustment of the climate. In the 1950~1980 years, 11 disasters had occurred, and the agricultural production had been seriously broken.
This information let me know, companies should not only concern to develop the economy, they should more care about the environment. Not only for other people, it’s also for themselves. As far as I am concerned, companies should be obliged to be front-runners in helping the environment, like factory should control the amount of pollution when they produce the things.
Do you think that companies should give money to charities? Why or Why Not?
ReplyDeleteThe way this question is worded, I think yes. However I do not think that companies should feel like they must give to charities. If companies want to give to charities, go for it, nothing is stopping them. However I do not think that companies should have to give their money to charities, it is their money and they should do what they want with it, whether it be giving back to the community or investing in new equipment to speed up production.
Do you think that companies should be obliged to be front-runners in helping the environment? Why or Why Not?
Once again, i do not think that companies should feel obliged to help the environment, however I do think that companies should at least try to keep their CO2 emissions as low as possible, as this could also end up helping the company get some popularity with their environmentally safe products.
Do you think that companies should give money to charities? Why or Why Not?
ReplyDeleteYes, companies should give money to charities. With giving money to charity companies do not only get an award for generous, they earn publicity and have a place in the community. With giving money to charity the company would earn a different image in the society. An image that shows that money is not important for the company, being able to help or make the community stronger and unite; is all that matters.
Do you think that companies should be obliged to be front-runners in helping the environment? Why or Why Not?
No, companies should not be obligate to help the environment. There is a lot of criticism against the companies that are destroying the environment, for example. Causing pollution, contamination and deforestation all for money. But they are just doing there job. Anyways Canada is the only country that has the best companies who cares a lot for the environment. Cutting down trees and planting more. Companies offering to do community services like picking up the trash. The country of Canada should not be worried for these issues that a lot of countries have,. This country is so lucky.