>

Late Stage Capitalism, baby!
It’s just the aristocracy again, but for You this time?
wonder how they transfer money to pay for goods, send profit to HQ etc. Or are there so many loopholes still that sanctions dont really bite? >

In truth it's more the opposite. The war started and effective sanctions landed so hard and so fast that companies had no way to divest their assets and relocate. Abandoning their operations is basically the only way for most of them to leave, which would immediately trip off fraud and mismanagement claims (for publicly traded companies at least, or really want company with loans).
The article itself is kind of BS in that is using the most absolutist standard possible. Like a company that's closed their shop and still paying employees a stipend is still "doing business in Russia". When in truth most of them have shut down a lot, they just haven't turned the keys over to the new owner yet. Not like most of them can even find buyers to begin with.
There's a lot of complicating factors that IMO sensationalist articles deliberately avoid discussing. Because they want reactions like your own, where people think it's business as usual over there. It's not. Just kind of hard to tell the bank you have to stop paying your mortgage because you donated your collateral to charity and stopped working. >

But isn't that in so many words just proving the point? Like getting out would have been poor monetary decision (mismanagement) so that they're just staying in to keep making the most money? I get what your saying but I think the point is that if they said for moral and political reasons they would get out, they should get out regardless of taking the fiscal hit. Besides, I don't think the sec is going to grill any execs for getting out of Russia because of the war, that would look horrible. They don't even enforce their own policy int he states. >

As far as it goes with assets, at some point it is no longer the fiscal hit - you have compliance issues with audits on the value of the company. Asset management is complex - abandoning an asset has it's own host of issues far beyond fiscal, and that is just all on paper. And even if they did just do that, the paperwork and audits and other things to communicate and document that with investors or the bank and other institutions takes a lot of time under regular operations, never mind something that is as unusual as this. I'm not the deepest into financial asset management, only a couple of years in. But I've been learning that the whole "lets just get the deal done" is far more complicated than that. 
I'm not disagreeing that they should move out, absolutely and completely on moral and political motives, but these things take time, and it's only coming up to a year right now of this war. Relatively speaking, that's a short amount of time. There's just a lot of work that goes into these decisions, and some companies can do it quickly, some can do it shortly, and I suspect, many companies are learning how to handle it because they've never needed to do something like this before. But that said, we should be critical of companies that are in there, and keep monitoring their activities and hold them accountable - just need to take nuanced views on the why. >

Thank you for the great explanation! I was wondering how exactly a company might sell off its assets and shut down in a country where you can't easily get your money out of due to financial restrictions put on russia because of the invasion. 
Do you know of a way the president or SEC could put in place regulation exceptions for the situation in russia to make the process easier? Or if something similar has been done before? >

If no sanctions were put against Russia,most western companies who left would still be operating in Russia now. Those companies who closed their businesses left because they supply chain was disrupted by sanctions. Companies don't care about how many children are shelled. They care about profits. >

Corporations are not people.  
A corporation is a legal fiction that enables durable contracts that are not void upon death of the contracting party. 
That's it.  
Corporations only have one priority, "Maximize shareholder wealth". 
This is why Citizens United is bullshit. If a Corporation cannot be put in prison or electrocuted in Old Sparky at Huntzville, Texas, it is NOT a person.  
Corporations are amoral, profit-seeking mechanisms. No corporation would pull out of Russia as long as its shareholders could see returns for doing business there.  
And for those who haven't been paying attention, the 'investment class' is a bunch of amoral parasites as well.  
This is why Corporations must be forced to 'do the right thing' by making it a losing proposition for their shareholders to continue doing business in Russia. Therefore, sanctions.  
And Corporations (aka their managers and shareholders) will FIGHT sanctions, laws, taxes designed to obstruct their making profit-driven decisions that are evil. So that means we-the-people must insist our elected representatives fight back and make them happen. >

We really need to bring back criminal liability for corporate executives and board of directors. >

No chance that was ever implemented for even 10 seconds >

Bring back as in before corporations were a thing all business were proprietorships where the owners were legally responsible for their actions. Why not keep corporations but remove the limit to liability of it's owners/decision makers >

Something something RISK!! something something RED TAPE!! something something FREEDOM!! >

Well, I mean it would only be fair, right? After all, all those JOB CREATORS have to take all that RISK, which is why they get paid so much, right? >

Ah yes, the awful risk of having to sell their labor for a wage, just like the rest of us. >

The horror!! >

Expecting for-profit companies to voluntarily leave Russia is beyond stupid.
At the beginning of the war the US and EU should have banned trade with Russia but with a temporary excemption on natural gas because many EU countries were still dependent on Russian natural gas.
By now the only option is to ban all trade between the West and Russia. The uncomfortable truth is that "selective targeted sanctions" don't work. Only a complete stop on all trade between the West and Russia will significantly hurt the Russian economy. >

In fact many Western companies did voluntarily leave.  Praise those who did, shame those who didn't. >

Did they leave the US during American wars? :) >

Ooohhh edgy. >

Not really - if it's a matter of principles, as the OP is trying to portray, they would. >

I feel like you have the idea that if Americans do something wrong in the past that gives Russia the ability to do whatever they want now. Is that right? >

No, but having a consistent moral code means condemning both. Turns out invading countries and killing innocent people is bad! And it's an uncomfortable truth for some that America, like it or not, has a much longer and bloodier history of invading sovereign nations than most countries. >


No, but having a consistent moral code means condemning both. Turns out invading countries and killing innocent people is bad! And it's an uncomfortable truth for some that America, like it or not, has a much longer and bloodier history of invading sovereign nations than most countries.

The lack of critical thinking in display here is astounding. America is less than 300 years old but you genuinely believe this? Britain, France, Germany, any number of European countries obviously have longer and bloodier histories of invasion. This is pure recency bias. And this is why whataboutism is utterly useless because this is equally as irrelevant to what Russia is doing RIGHT NOW. >

Edgy teens really don't give a shit about reality, and if they're European they don't like to admit to their colonial past and the havoc their nations have caused. >

Not just not leaving, but also digging in...
Carl's Jr, Sbarro, Tom Ford, Valve, TGI Friday's... wait, Sbarro still exists? >

Every time Valve is brought up, I'd like to remind that Steam is basically a launcher at this point. Meanwhile Epic Games Store continues to operate as usual and accepts payments in rubles from Russian credit cards. >

Greed much? >

My company still runs a manufacturing branch within Russia. Of the “high ups” I’ve met I can tell you there’s absolutely no way in hell they’d shut anything down. For some there’s dollar signs and nothing else whatsoever.
Some companies get so big that the people who are in charge can pretend morals don’t matter anymore - like it’s a machine that runs on its own. >

But if they follow their morals their shareholders will not be happy!! Will anybody think of the shareholders? >

Everyone always talks about keeping the shareholders happy, but no one ever stops to think that the shareholders may actually be sad >

But but the fiduciary responsibility!
This is the issue for sure. They aren't "keeping shareholders happy" they are "increasing the value of shares".
Shares are a ploy by capitalism to reduce people to numbers. They mimic democracy in a way that makes them seem like votes, so people miss the dehumanization thinking they have a say. 
But the fundamental reduction to numbers removes human will from the equation so leadership doesn't actually have to consider human pain.
They just excuse all of their behavior by saying, "I have embiggened these numbers, your thinking will smallerize them. Good day." >

The word "ploy" here strikes me as out of place, or metaphorical. Capitalism isn't a being with intentions, look to gain (how?) by reducing people to numbers. That's a sort of Homunculus argument. >

Perhaps an argument could be made that those who benefit the most from capitalism, wield it, implement it and otherwise wish for its continued success as a dominant system\philosophy could fit as the intentions? >

Maybe only the greedy ones, which makes greed conceptually separate from capitalism. I looked at course content from a couple of people's business degrees a while back, and there were parts about companies taking care to behave ethically as a strategy for profit, because they want to be well-liked and a consumer backlash is a risk. There was also a part about tax regulations being tighter than in the past, with more tracing to catch money being shifted around to evade tax. So as well as the trope of greedy capitalism you can have unexciting goody-goody capitalism where those in a position to make decisions choose to play by the rules and beyond that try to take everyone's concerns into account and be generally upstanding citizens, and these people aren't necessarily the losers. >

You have some very inaccurate views of capitalism, which seem to have come from a time that you where taught by capitalism what capitalism is-- which, I mean, you have to understand that you weren't getting truth in that setting, right? >

Fact 1, capitalism requires perpetual growth into the future. Every fiscal quarter needs to show growth otherwise your company is not considered healthy.
Fact 2, there is a finite number of human beings this planet can feed and support. Estimates are in the 9-10 billion range iiuc.
Fact 3 emerges from those two facts. No company's market share can perpetually grow ad infinitum. Capitalism as an economic system is fundamentally unsustainable over longer periods of time. Without regulation, given enough time capitalism necessarily creates monopolies and monopsonies in any industry.
*Added note: ppl constantly confuse free markets with capitalism. They are not the same thing. There are very strong arguments that capitalism in fact stifles free markets. >

We need laws and sanctions.
Never rely on corporate good will. >

We already have sanctions in place. I remember in Feb and March 2022 the great western leaders saying these will be the most brutal and crippling sanctions ever. A year later, what has been achieved? >

We had some sanctions, yes.  But what about more sanctions? >

I don’t think he knows about more sanctions, Pip >

Post who those companies are, who owns them and let people decide if they still want to support those companies. Bet some will try to defend them. >

leave-russia.org >

Money knows no race, compassion or sympathy. All money cares for is money, and if there is money to be made, it will be made. It’s just the reality of the world. >


It’s just the reality of the world.

That's what the sociopaths like to tell you.     
The truth is very different, but that's not what major corporations want you to think. >

However, major corporations tend to behave like sociopaths. >

Because corporations are people, money is speech and corporations have no feelings. They exist to make money. >

I think I’d give a pass to drug manufacturers and infant care such as those who make formula. A 4 month old has zero say or control of the war so denying them necessary medication or formula would be pretty fucked up. >


A 4 month old has zero say or control of the war so denying them necessary medication or formula would be pretty fucked up.

Fuck Nestle, the 4 month old would be better off without Nestle in their country. 
For decades, they would push anti-breastfeeding propoganda into uneducated communities. New mothers would think formula is the only way to feed their babies and starve the other children to afford the expensive formula. 
Then when their milk isnt used, they stop producing and are bound to keep purchasing the un-needed formula. 
Even the ostensibly benign (nay, benevolent) division at Nestle such as "Infant Care department" is rotten to the core.  
Straight up /r/FuckNestle >

Okay but it's true there are infants that need formula. 
It's also true that there has been a recent shortage. >

CCH isn’t Coke, it’s a separately listed bottling company with its own management team, though it is about 20% owned by the Coca Cola company.
Coca Cola brands are not being sold in Russia anymore. CCH are bottling and selling other shit like local Russian drinks. >

Capitalists gonna capitalism.
Who's gonna go hold em accountable? The world can't control a farty old dictator, we certainly don't seem to be willing to stop companies. >

Yeah… greed is far more powerful than morality. Otherwise we wouldn’t be in this situation at all.
If you ever needed proof that humans are inherently shitty, there it is. >

To be fair, running a business is for the sole purpose of making a profit. Would you make business changes for morals if it meant your business could go under? >

Capitalism at its finest. Even many American companies supported hitler during ww2. I’m not surprised by this article at all. >

Why would they? they want money... >

Quite. The only way to deal with this properly is for people to boycott those companies still involved in Russia. That would need some major media coverage but I can't see them properly complying somehow.
Perhaps something could be done online in such a way as to bring a lot of attention to the issue. Make it go viral. >

like Burger King, for example.  fuck burger king
many that closed, just made a shell company to sell it under and they changed the name to the russian version just suing the Cyrillic alphabet (sometimes even just using the normal name again, but receiving the goods via the renamed shell).  it's bullshit >

Companies don’t care, they just want money. This shouldn’t be surprising to anyone. >

Didn't we sanction a Chinese firm few days ago for still doing business in Russia? Why can't we simply sanction all of these companies??? Their actions are keeping the Russian economy alive which prolongs the invasion. >

Shocking I say! You mean to tell me corporations don’t just tell us what we think we want to hear when we actually don’t give a shit and neither do they?? Gasp. >

Because money must never stop moving. Until money is doing down nothing will ever change. That is how it always is. No matter how many children or adults die, until that death causes arrows to start pointing down, nothing will change. >

Which companies left china because the  Uyghur genocide ? >

Dude, that's so 2020. 
It's not a current thing anymore. >

I just can't wait until it's KONY time again.  Isn't it usually about 20 years before things come back into fashion? >

Russia having Burger King doesn't bother me, people going in to the damn place is what's getting under my skin. >

How many companies have exited the US after US attacked Iraq in 2003 or after US attacked and invaded Syria in 2015, occupation that continues to the date? >

Can we have a list of companies that have remained trading in Russia? >

There is a link right above you here >

Sanction the individuals working for them and running the companies and any company/people buying. >

News flash!: Companies care more about money than how you feel on social media! Wow no wayyy!! >

Since when does big business have a conscience? If there is money to be made, expect profit-oriented companies to be there. >

No shit. It's almost like capitalism only cares about profits and wars create a lot of profits. >

Saw a DHL truck in my neighborhood yesterday that said "proudly serving Russia since 1968" on the side of it. >

They are there to make money. If they can’t make money, for reasons, then they pull out of that market. Simple. >

Boycott them all. >

profit over humans >

If corporations are people according to the U.S. government, they should be accused of aiding in war crimes too. >

It is all fake because companies know the news cycle will only last for three days at most. >

Whaaaat? You mean western News coverage of Russia is all propaganda to make you believe that Russia is constantly on the brink of total collapse? You don't say? >

You can always count on capitalists to make the most profitable move. >

This can be very easily solved by implementing a levy tax on any Western companies still present in Russia (i.e. on their parent companies) The tax amount is equal to the revenue received from their Russian subsidiaries. If only there was a political will to do it. >

Let’s make it happen… petition? Write to congressmen? >

Duh...it's all media smoke and mirrors, no mass exodus, not only that but probably goods between USA and Russia are still exchanged, just through different routes. Whoever thinks that companies will stop making money cause of this war is too easily fooled. >

The article states they tracked “2,405 subsidiaries owned by 1,404 EU and G-7 companies that were active in Russia at the time of the first military incursion into Ukraine.”
How can you have 1,404 MAJOR corporations??  A major corporation is something along the lines of Starbucks, McDonald’s, Mariott, Nestle, IKEA, Nike, H&M, American Express, all of which are out of Russia btw. It’s not surprising the article doesn’t mention these corporations by name because it wouldn’t be hard to call them out. A lot of these “major” corporations aren’t major corporations. >

I mean sure, I guess they won’t, but it is going to increasingly become difficult getting their profits out of the country. >

Corporations, messaging is the only thing that matters. >

wait....there are people who actually honestly believed that major corporations had Ukraine's interests in mind?  
The only thing that matters in this world is how many zeros are after the first number.  Beyond that, you're expected to just deal with missiles in your bedroom window. >

All I can picture are these company CEOs telling their paid-for Congressmen and Biden how it's going to be, and all of them saying "yes sir".  I think at this point the foxes are running the henhouse. >

The majority are not American companies. There is a link a few comments above you here. Most Americans wouldn’t even know the names. But some are American. >

“Oh you expect us to actually do what we said we’d do?” >

Money and greed >

Someone list all the companies that have not pulled out of Russia so the world can boycott them,power to the people.. >

Guy right above you here posted a comprehensive link. I’m sending it to everybody I know. >

crime lords in russia learned that the best way to achieve corruption at the level of global corporations was violence. the invasion of ukraine is just another manifestation of the immorality of fiduciary primacy. >

Fucking cowards. >

Money > human lives >

Money over everything... >

Profits over morals for a company now and forever >

Sometimes, governments need to make the moral decisions for us and sanction the hell of of and company that does business and tax any profits and offer them to Ukraine for rebuilding, just thinking out loud imho >

Wait, are you meaning to say that the CEOs and politicians didn't care about anyone but themselves again? >

and the EU is still buying oil & gas from Russia, Indian oilg/gas purchases are up by 33X >

Profits over people. 
Can’t have multiple quarters in the red. >

Nah, integrity isn't cool.
A billion dollars is cool. >

Its because the rich are scum. >

Yes, but that’s because ‘people’ are greedy, and the lucky out of that pool will end up rich. >

Literal blood money. >

Money
It's a gas
Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash
New car, caviar, four star, daydream
Think I'll buy me a football team >

Well you see, there's this thing that companies really love and will accept anything in order to continue getting more of it. Money. >

List please. >

Listen y’all… they virtue signaled! That’s you need… real virtue costs money and profit >

Lmfao shocking…do mfers NOT know how PR works? Corporations (not all) only see opportunities…Money over Mankind for them >

Wait, you telling me corporations lie and put profit over ethics? >

😆 stop believing rich corrupt assholes >

Damn, only 9% have left? I understand it takes time to ramp down but that’s terrible. Happy to be working at one of the 9%. >

Lol it's useless. My industry imported up to 50% of a key product from Russia and Belarus. Sanctions are for small business and individuals, and those who can't lobby the government to adjust foreign policy.
Sanctions are a funny thing. I even checked and there is no personal sanction preventing me from importing products from a state-owned defence manufacturer in Russia. They told me there is just no available method of payment or shipping unless you're a business and then something can probably be arranged. I'm sure Bank of China will facilitate a debit account for international payments too but it depends on Russian businesses to open an account as well - most won't. >

But they'll still pass down inflated prices as if they lost Russian business.
I hate everything. >

Who would have thought capitalists would be capitalist? I'm shocked I tell you shocked >

What is performative social responsibility, Alex. >

Literally no one is surprised. >

We need laws and sanctions.
Never rely on corporate good will. >


Of the EU and G-7 companies remaining in Russia, the research found that 19.5% were German, 12.4% were American owned, and 7% were Japanese multinationals. 

What a bunch of cunts. >

For shame on those companies. Their profits is blood money! >

Who are they so I can boycott them? >

Yeah, a list would be nice. I understand that there are companies that I am incapable of boycotting since they are suppliers to suppliers to basically every brand, but there must be some that are exposed to the consumer. >

Simple solution. Declare Russia a state sponsor of terrorism and make it illegal for Western based companies to do business with Russia. >

Boycot them as much as you can. Thats a simple way to make a statement. >

My goodness than you. I’ve scrolled and scrolled to finally find a comment suggesting not only the recourse but our duty.
They are greedy, we get it. But we act needy and aren’t doing our part either in not only educating ourselves in who to boycott (the media’s role and our attention span is another topic) but in actively trying to navigate the complex offerings with good in mind.
Not meaning to sound like I’m slagging your request for names, but as a whole we aren’t doing enough. You, me, and others need to do more than ask on Reddit threads below posted articles. >

They won't withdraw, when they had the opportunity to do it right at the beginning. It is just about the greed. >

Thanks for that - finally a list that doesn't base itself off CELI's outdated info. >

There really needs to be a public, loud, large-scale boycott. Name and shame! >

Love of money is greater than the love of doing the right thing. >

It's almost as if big corp marketing likes to play up to the latest fad but really it's all a BS money grab... That reminds me... Need to post a pic with my rainbow flag soon >

Corporations do not care about the amount of blood spilled, they only want money >

"Innocent people being slaughtered...children being raped right in front of their parents...who cares as long as the money's good?"-
-Corporations >

Corporations shouldn't be in charge of deciding what is moral. >

"have yet to" >

For the lazy reader which US consumer companies are still there so we can choose to not use? >

Is anybody surprised by this companies are not going to give up customers just cause what their government is doing hits you in the feels >

Lets name them. These companies are taking advantage of laying low and not attracting attention, as that leads to pressure to leave.
So lets get them exposed. All of them. >

In all fairness, there are a few things you need to consider. 
a) There are things people need to live and it would be cruel to withhold them from the public (i.e. food, medicine, cleaning agents etc.).
b) There is stuff that has no military purpose and if the company stopped selling or producing in Russia, you're causing more damage to your company then to Russia.
Would you want to waste money on some random companies not selling their shit in Russia anymore? Because whether you pay the company for not doing so, pay by caring for the people getting fired (or never emloyed) because you, or pay by missing out on taxes you lose because of oportunity cost, you are very likely gonna pay for it in some way.
Can't really blame companies for not wanting to miss out because of some dictator randomly deciding it's time for war. >

Just make the terrorist russia a terrorist state. >

Hard hitting stuff, businesses still doing business stuff, has anyone told them Putin is like Hitler, but worse? >

"Excuse me, but have you seen what SNL is saying about him?" >

They are funding a terrorist country...
Freeze that companies assets until they comply. >

Not yet, or won't or already did but they exporte to China, that will export them to Russia, like these dutch chips. >

Ritter Sport >

Comcast, Philip Morris and Coca-Cola. >

It's not good for the stock value sadly. Only care about profit.