Scoble: what price profit?

Scoble: "When doing business in various countries and, even, various states here in the US, we must comply with the local laws if we want to do business there. And, as a shareholder in Microsoft, I think it would be a bad decision to decide not to do business in China."

Where does it stop, Robert?

If a government requires you to collect personal details, and to submit the names of anyone using "forbidden speech" to a government agency, do you comply?

If you know the government agency will arrest these people and, in all probability, torture them or send them to slave labour camps, do you comply?

Business ethics, like all ethics, are a matter of tradeoffs. Can I do more good by working within the system than outside it? How do I balance my own good against the loss of others? (And yes, we are entitled to rate our own good above others; otherwise we'd all have to kill ourselves to distribute our organs amongst the more needy.) I don't know enough about the Microsoft story to know where it falls on the line. (Roger Simon's article claims Microsoft are actually going further than Chinese law requires. I've no idea if that's true.)

But, Robert, as this is your "personal" view, how far would you be prepared to go to maintain the value of your stocks? Would you be keen for a company you held stock in, as part of "[complying] with local laws," to assist in surveillance? To provide information that would lead to torture or imprisonment without trial? Where do your personal ethics tell you it's not worth it?

[Note: my adoptive country is cravenly seeking a free trade deal with China. I'm not comfortable with this. Where do my personal ethics tell me it's not worth it?]