[davidgow77]

Thats just the problem here though... people's survival is not under threat, but the survival of the companies they work for is constantly being tested. It results in the company being the raison d'etre for people's actions, whereas I think companies should exist to facilitate what people want to achieve, not what the company, over certain time periods, asserts is necessary for its own survival.


And I still have to disagree with you on the survival arguement. I would happily die defending my principles if they came under threat, and I know alot of other people would. If someone took away my right to freedom of speech, or my right to a fair trial, or my human rights, I would attack the people responsible, and I wouldn't really care if I died in the process. Survival, I just feel, is a concept that attempts to show that we are no different from animals, and I cannot share that view. I'm not saying my life in the great scheme of things is more valuable than a gorillas, but I certainly am saying that we are more intelligent by a considerable stretch, and that this intelligence imbibes in us all reasons for living that transcend and negate mere notions of primitive survival.

DG