The best
Business Ethics eBooks:
Reddit reviews
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
The best of Business Ethics eBooks by number of unique Reddit comments:
Top Reddit reviews mentioning Business Ethics eBooks:
I like this stock! I love her book!
Go buy her book, make it rocket up the Amazon bookseller chart: https://www.amazon.com/Naked-Short-Greedy-Streets-Failure-ebook/dp/B08XXXRH7T/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Trimbath&qid=1619112118&sr=8-1
This is not an affiliate link, just a plea for recognition of her great research
Integrity - Do what you say you will do. Avoid what you said you wouldn't do. Seek to know the truth, and once you know it, seek to share it if it's relevant. When all else fails, I want you to do the right thing.
Pride in your work - Whatever it is you're doing, I want you to want to be the best in the world at it.
Competence - I want you to be able to execute the tasks that you're given correctly, and if you can't do that, I want you to ask for help and then get better until you can execute all the tasks that you're given correctly. Once you can do everything right, I want you to strive to be the best. See # 2.
Compassion - I want you to be interested in clearing obstacles for coworkers, for clients, and for me. I want you to be able to recognize that you're working with fellow human beings who have their own needs and desires, and I want you to have an abundance mindset; recognize there's enough success for everyone if we all pull together.
Listening ability. I want you to be able to understand both the literal and emotional content of what other people are saying, and I want you to understand before you act or speak. You can't solve a problem if you don't know what the problem is.
Books I can recommend:
<em>The Speed of Trust</em> by Covey
and
OK I've came back with the ~~Deep Discount~~ ~~Dollar Dollar~~ ~~Debbie Does~~ let's just call it DD.
> What does DRS for GME, also known the ticker symbol for GameStop mean to me as an individual investor?
See below.
> Can it do things like preventing my own investments being used against me by being loaned out to gigantic funds to manipulate the value of the company on a whim?
Yes.
> Can it secure my investments by having the stock in my name giving me control over it instead of handing over control to a brokerage?
Yes.
> DRS does stand for Direct Registration System right?
Yes.
> I’ve heard great things about DRSing $GME.
Yes.
Dr. Susanne Trimbath? This one?
https://twitter.com/susannetrimbath
I think she sells a great book here:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08XXXRH7T
I believe her most famous work is called "Naked, Short and Greedy: Wall Street's Failure to Deliver" by Dr. Susanne Trimbath. There must be a reason Dr. Trimbath has a 5 star book on amazon.com, probably because it is so good that it earned five stars out of five stars.
This is a good book: https://www.amazon.com/Lying-Sam-Harris-ebook/dp/B00G1SRB6Q
I don't like liars / lying either. We can always respond to people without lying even if it is to say "I'm not comfortable with this discussion" or "I'd rather not say"
I can not claim credit for the thought.
You might want to read this book I would say "like this book", but it won't leave you feeling happy about our society's future.
You got a lot of great technical suggestions, however, most people forget the "human" (and political) aspects of the role. "Unwritten laws of Engineering" has a ton of very relevant advice, and some less relevant advice that nobody should be doing anymore (the book was initially written in 1930s).
Do you have evidence of this not happening with Meta? 😃
Just kidding, of course not, since it’s how they operate. You’d need the blessing of the Families to launch a new company that wouldn’t be shorted from the get go. Hey you beautiful stranger reading this, grab a copy and go ham on it: https://www.amazon.com/Naked-Short-Greedy-Streets-Failure-ebook/dp/B08XXXRH7T
Or you can check out any number of Wes Christian / Susanne Trimbath interviews out there on YouTube.
The long of the short story just is - if you’re going long on a good company and don’t intend to day trade it or sell in a heartbeat for quick profits, I see very little reason in keeping your shares at the DTCC. Why stay in an abusive relationship in the first place when you can choose between an abusive and a normal one? DRS’ing is also kryptonite for the naked shorters.
But hey, that’s all I got time for today. Good convo, although I’m sure you realize it’s meant for anyone reading this thread, not you per se. 🙂 I don’t know you and definitely know better than to hate the player who might be in dire straits and gigs can be hard to come by, so no judgement from here. Send them these screengrabs with my love. ❤️👌🏻
Read Sam’s book.
In Lying, best-selling author and neuroscientist Sam Harris argues that we can radically simplify our lives and improve society by merely telling the truth in situations where others often lie. He focuses on "white" liesthose lies we tell for the purpose of sparing people discomfortfor these are the lies that most often tempt us. And they tend to be the only lies that good people tell while imagining that they are being good in the process.
per se*
- Outcomes based. Were the business outcomes met by the solution decided by the team.
- Scrum/agile
- Once a month? I trust my team members to deliver on time per user story requirements. I don't enjoy micromanaging, and 1-on-1s often turn into that.
Read "The Speed of Trust", one of the best leadership books out there: https://www.amazon.com/SPEED-Trust-Thing-Changes-Everything-ebook/dp/B000MGATWG
As a "manager", your job is not to manage adults. Your job is to empower, enable and facilitate.
There is this great book called "Lords of Finance" that outlines the founding of central banks and how they developed. It also outlines many of the failures central banks have had since their conception. Over printing was a pretty common thing.
Is there really such a thing as a good lie, or white lie? What might radical honesty look like?
Lying, by Sam Harris is a good book on this topic.
>Didn't GOP campaigns commission and/or pay for the Steele memo?
The financing is still murky, but they seem to implicate both parties.
>It wasn't just something that could have been on the market, it was actually purchased on the market. If so, it's a strong example of oppo being a thing of value under the proposed market test.
That is right, but first, it was a purchase. Are market exchanges contributions? I don't think so. But even if it was not purchased, and was contributed, it would broaden the definition of a 'ToV' to a degree where I do think it starts to infringe on freedom of political speech. Hence why it would be absurd to include things of this nature under election finance law.
>Maybe. I take a less conspiratorial view, I think it would just be too expensive and difficult to prosecute.
I don't actually think that there is a conspiracy not to prosecute in order to protect the political class. I think the decision is reached independently that it would not be desirable thing to pursue because of structural reasons. It can be explained through coordination games where 3 conditions are met. One particular combination of strategies will lead to an outcome everyone involved considers best, everyone knows it, and everyone knows that everyone knows it. There is empirical research that coordination without communication can be successful even if the outcome is not considered best by any of the participants.
>Speaking of which, I just picked this up. Haven't read it yet, but I've heard good things: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06XBZFQR2/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
Looks really good, adding it to the list. Thanks for the recommendation.
> I think it would put us into a situation where, for example the Steele memo could be argued to meet the criteria of a ToV. This would be an absurd conclusion.
Didn't GOP campaigns commission and/or pay for the Steele memo? It wasn't just something that could have been on the market, it was actually purchased on the market. If so, it's a strong example of oppo being a thing of value under the proposed market test.
>unfortunately I think it would be to protect the political class as a whole in avoiding precedent.
Maybe. I take a less conspiratorial view, I think it would just be too expensive and difficult to prosecute. Especially since it would only come to court if there were strong evidence of a crime being committed, and by then we'd have seen political consequences such as impeachment. I think most US Attorneys would say, "Look, the guy's been impeached, why spend our enforcement dollars on prosecuting a billionaire's kid?"
Speaking of which, I just picked this up. Haven't read it yet, but I've heard good things: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06XBZFQR2/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
(Edit: raw link, not a referral thing, obvs)
It's hawala plain and simple. How it works is that they will sell this "asset" at a very inflated price, think unicorn level. The "buyer" will pay cash, and the transaction will be legit.
Buy the book https://www.amazon.in/NDTV-Frauds-classic-example-breaking-ebook/dp/B01NC2VHPI
Michael Sandel discusses this in his excellent book What Money Can't Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets. It's a perfectly valid question: is it justifiable for wealthy prisoners or their families to purchase "upgraded" prison accommodations or even separate prison space altogether? Sandel is a communitarian, so if you have a bit of a libertarian bent, you might resent all the "we" and "us" and "our" that gets thrown around.
I'd imagine the answer to your question is twofold:
1.) They're tolerated in that it's not particularly well-known that they exist. Do you really think the same electorate that's obsessed with Bernie Sanders would stand for palatial prisons for the uber-wealthy?
2.) They're likely tolerated because prisons cost money, and since the U.S. incarcerates more people per capita, that represents a considerable expense which is typically born by states and municipal governments. It is especially undesirable for these types of governments to run budget deficits, so there is a completely understandable effort to cut costs by using the considerable power of markets to allocate resources.
The problem isn't that markets aren't doing their jobs in cases like private prisons with upgraded accommodations for the wealthy, or even with prisons only for wealthy people. You can't fault a tool for working. The problem is that many people (me included) find the outcome incredibly distasteful.