It's behind a pay wall, but it is worth considering the gist of this WSJ article. "Ralph Nader, the scourge of American business and onetime presidential candidate, has found his next corporate demon: Cisco Systems Inc. Mr. Nader isn't calling for a router recall or claiming the company's networks are unsafe at any speed. Instead, he wants the tech company to pay a bigger dividend to boost its shares."
As a small investor, Mr. Nader is upset that corporate profits are accumulated in cash rather than paid in dividends for retirees like himself. With cronies on the board, he feels the purported democracy of corporations has been replaced by a self-serving oligarcy. He would be wrong if he were simply shortsighted, preferring money now to investment in the future. But that cash just sitting there might also be used for excess executive pay. So where are the institutional investors, handling other people's money, on this one?
It is also worth noting that in my 2004 overview of the government of NY State in the wake of my Don Quixote campaign, I compared it with corporate governance. "The situation is apparently similar to corporate governance. Top executives and directors may be enriching themselves, diluting ownership with stock issues and options, and bankrupting the company, but electoral rules make it impossible to vote them out. It is easier just to sell the stock. Similarly, for many New Yorkers, especially those Upstate, it is easier to move out than to try to change things. That's what many people tell me – the only options are to take what you get, or to move to New Jersey."
If people stop fighting these battles, we'll stay on the express track to institutional collapse, public and private. But if most people can't be bothered, then those who try are fighting in vain and wasting their time, and the time of anyone who helps them. If Cisco rots away or even goes bust, another firm will arise to replace it. But in government that isn't so easy.