<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is the Environment the New Corporate Responsibility?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.triplepundit.com/2008/10/is-the-environment-the-new-corporate-responsibility/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.triplepundit.com/2008/10/is-the-environment-the-new-corporate-responsibility/</link>
	<description>Business, Better. Since 2005</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:39:03 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Kent Ragen</title>
		<link>http://www.triplepundit.com/2008/10/is-the-environment-the-new-corporate-responsibility/comment-page-1/#comment-11607</link>
		<dc:creator>Kent Ragen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 18:55:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.triplepundit.com/wordpress/2008/10/is-the-environment-the-new-corporate-responsibility/#comment-11607</guid>
		<description>@ Rob B
I agree with much of what you have written. But corporate America drives profits by listening to their customers. And if customers/consumers care enough about the environment for the government to act, then they care enough about it for the companies (who drive profit by serving them) to act. Granted, there are many singularly unprofitable environmental initiatives that companies cannot be expected to lead. But there are also plenty of opportunities for companies to *both* profit and serve the environmental interests of their customers. Once companies understand the misalignment between green intentions and green actions among their customer base they will be in a good position to develop programs that are both good for the environment and for the bottom line.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Rob B<br />
I agree with much of what you have written. But corporate America drives profits by listening to their customers. And if customers/consumers care enough about the environment for the government to act, then they care enough about it for the companies (who drive profit by serving them) to act. Granted, there are many singularly unprofitable environmental initiatives that companies cannot be expected to lead. But there are also plenty of opportunities for companies to *both* profit and serve the environmental interests of their customers. Once companies understand the misalignment between green intentions and green actions among their customer base they will be in a good position to develop programs that are both good for the environment and for the bottom line.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob B</title>
		<link>http://www.triplepundit.com/2008/10/is-the-environment-the-new-corporate-responsibility/comment-page-1/#comment-11606</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 11:53:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.triplepundit.com/wordpress/2008/10/is-the-environment-the-new-corporate-responsibility/#comment-11606</guid>
		<description>This is a great question that we should all think about all the time. The answer is us, through our government. I agree that corporations are uniquely positioned but expecting them to sacrifice profits (which is after all, their only purpose) when competitors do not is unrealistic. The good ones with management that cares, must sink to the level of the least, the most externalizing, profit seeking of all, or management will be looking for new jobs when Wall Street demands short term profits.
Corporations will externalize everything they can. That&#039;s the system government has given them. We need to place monetary values on air, water, CO2 emissions- everything that they use and don&#039;t pay for. The balance sheets will show these as expenses.
The dull hammer of government??? Today the administration with the lowest confidence ratings in history is buying equity positions in nine mega banks. Small non-voting positions (preferred stock). Some call it a nationalization, which is a bit silly. But the markets are liking it. Badly managed government is a tool of the free market fundamentalists to convince us that government is bad. Big government is necessary to manage a big economy. Too many of us have been convinced that there&#039;s no difference between big government and bad government. Remember &quot;Heck of a job Brownie&quot;? FEMA was an excellent organization in the 90&#039;s. His incompetence and inexperience convinced millions of us that the problem was government, when the real problem was incompetence and dogmatism of the people in the government.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a great question that we should all think about all the time. The answer is us, through our government. I agree that corporations are uniquely positioned but expecting them to sacrifice profits (which is after all, their only purpose) when competitors do not is unrealistic. The good ones with management that cares, must sink to the level of the least, the most externalizing, profit seeking of all, or management will be looking for new jobs when Wall Street demands short term profits.<br />
Corporations will externalize everything they can. That&#8217;s the system government has given them. We need to place monetary values on air, water, CO2 emissions- everything that they use and don&#8217;t pay for. The balance sheets will show these as expenses.<br />
The dull hammer of government??? Today the administration with the lowest confidence ratings in history is buying equity positions in nine mega banks. Small non-voting positions (preferred stock). Some call it a nationalization, which is a bit silly. But the markets are liking it. Badly managed government is a tool of the free market fundamentalists to convince us that government is bad. Big government is necessary to manage a big economy. Too many of us have been convinced that there&#8217;s no difference between big government and bad government. Remember &#8220;Heck of a job Brownie&#8221;? FEMA was an excellent organization in the 90&#8217;s. His incompetence and inexperience convinced millions of us that the problem was government, when the real problem was incompetence and dogmatism of the people in the government.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FN</title>
		<link>http://www.triplepundit.com/2008/10/is-the-environment-the-new-corporate-responsibility/comment-page-1/#comment-11605</link>
		<dc:creator>FN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 11:00:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.triplepundit.com/wordpress/2008/10/is-the-environment-the-new-corporate-responsibility/#comment-11605</guid>
		<description>Well put.  I agree that companies will play a disproportionately large role in environmental sustainability.  The only open question is whether it will be largely voluntary or by fiat.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well put.  I agree that companies will play a disproportionately large role in environmental sustainability.  The only open question is whether it will be largely voluntary or by fiat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
