: : Think about this: the only unskilled jobs in the ENTIRE AREA are at McDonalds. If that is the case(which is nearly impossible), the Mcdonalds store will not be able to stay in business anyway.
: I honestly don't know what you meant by that. Are you saying McD's is skilled labor?
No, I'm saying it is unskilled labor. What I meant is that if the meens of generating income for the lower class of a certain area is working at McDonalds, McDonalds wouldn't have enough revenue to make it in that area, thus eliminating the theory that the only place for people to work is McDonalds.
: : : And McDonalds pays those providers to do it.
: : I'm well aware of what happens in the meat industry. The problem is that there are to many levels to avoid what happens. You have the farmers, who sell cattle to the slaughterhouses, who sell the meat to the processers, who sell the meat to fast food companies. I'm disgusted by what goes into a burger, and I would never eat one. However, with so many cattle going into a single meat patty, it is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid some meat that comes from tortured animals, animals on destroyed rainforest land, etc.
: It IS possible, if you don't buy meat from suppliers affiliated in any way with the rainforest guys. But this is not the case, in fact McDonalds purposely chooses this meat because it's the cheapest. Profit above principle.
Uh, rather than writing the same thing twice, see my reply to your post in the McDonalds forum.
: : : All things considered, yes it is.
: : So what wouldn't be a token amount?
: A couple million dollars is a lot of money, but not to McDonalds. A sum of money that was not small compared to McDonalds profits, wouldn't be a token amount.
They are one of the largest contributors to a charity, they spend large amounts of money to benefit that charity, so why is that wrong? If I give only 1% of my income to a charity, does that make me appear worse to you?
: : : Frankly, I am tired of capitalist attempts to justify exploitation, environmental damage, etc., through diffusion of responsibility. Anything, ANYTHING, can be justified in this manner, even the slaughter of millions of Jews.
: : How does one justify that? BTW, that was fascism, not capitalism.
: I justify it below. I know you read it, because you responded to it. I am well aware that Nazi Germany wasn't capitalist. I never said they were. I was critiquing the system of diffusion of responsibility there, not capitalism.
Where below? What was the name of the message?
: : : From McDonald's point of view (and apparently yours too, not to imply that you share a brain), they do no wrong, they simply pay suppliers, advertise, employ, sell crap, etc.
: : I concur.
You want me to think that they're not doing wrong?
: : :From the suppliers point of view, they do no wrong, only what they are paid.
: : As I have said before, there is no way to solve this problem. Perhaps if we could privatize the regulation so there would be no conflict of interest.
: How does one privatize regulation? That is one of the more ridiculous notions I have ever heard. It sounds like you want corporations to run the world. How else would a regulation become "private?" BTW there would probably still be a lot of "conflict of interest," but whose interests they were wouldn't matter anymore.
The USDA is the regulation of the beef industry in this country, oui? They are also the asigned advocates of the agricultural comunity, which includes the beef industry. Something about conflict of interest...?
By privatization one doesn't always mean sell to a corporation. Consumer groups would do a much better job of regulating the industry, as they have no conflicts of interest.
: : :Poeple who buy the food do no wrong, they only buy a product made available to them, thereby supporting a massive oppresive multi-national (and they do it after having seen hundreds of hours of McD's ads).
: : How are they "oppresive"? To the extent of my knowledge they haven't killed anyone. What's wrong with them advertising? I can tell you that when i go there it has nothing to do with seeing ads, I just like the fries:-).
: You don't have to kill anyone to be oppressive (but it helps). Forcing your workers to work for 15 hours, to fiddle with their time cards, taking advantage of their desperation, etc. might be called oppressive."
I'm sure that it is not in company protocol to do that stuff. Some managers are assholes, to say the least. Unless reported, nobody in the company can do anything about those managers. Almost all companies have something like this on their record, even ones that operate solely in the US.
: : :The workers do no wrong, there just working a job, something everyone's expected to do, at least during Republican administrations.
: : You don't think everyone should have to work?! Society would fall apart, under any system.
: Sorry about that, I was just making fun of Democrats, I thought you could relate. I do think everyone should work, for the state.
Oh, sorry. I feel the same way about Rebulicans as i do about Democrats, at least as far as voting is concerned. I once saw a bumper sticker that said: Vote Democrat. It's easier than working. At the time I was a Republican, but since I have come to accept criticisms of both parties.
If a mass-state owned all businesses, it would be much more powerful than any corporation we'll ever see. There would be no legal competition, thus no innovation, no incentive to get better, etc. Y'know why the government keeps defense companies from merging? If there was no competition, our military would be an obsolete peice o' crap. A monopoly on everything through a government would surely be the end of that country.
: : :In effect, no one person is doing anything wrong, it is THE SYSTEM AS A WHOLE committing the crimes.
: : I think the only ones commiting the crimes are the people that raise the cattle.
: I'm glad that's what you think, but SOMEONE is paying them to commit those crimes, aren't they guilty too? When someone hires a hit-man, are they guilt-free?
Again, this has to do with the meet process.
: : : This is one of the numerous reasons people get so incredibly irate when they hear criticisms of capitalism, or any other system they happen to belong to. They truly are doing no wrong (usually), there are very few "bad guys." Just look at the posts by franchisee owners. While everyone is flaming everyone else, the big picture is lost. It is the WAY the system is set up. Unfortunately, class-stuggle, environmental damage, violence, war, imperialism (tell me that's not still going on, I dare you), oppression of the inherently weak,
: : Who that is oppressed is inherently weak? Come to think of it, who's oppressed?
: People born into poverty in America are inherently weak. They lack access to a decent education, decent health care. They live in a crime ridden cesspool no one bothers to fix. They are disadvantaged in many ways. These people will often take any job they can find (if they don't turn to drugs) even if it's at McD's working at below minimum wage. These people are definitely exploited. This entire system of one's birth influencing their success in life can definately be called oppression.
The fact that people live in hell holes is not the fault of McDonalds. You want to know why all poor neighborhoods are inherently the producers of the poor? It's our system of taxation. Education and utilities come from local taxes, thus the only way to get a good education is to have parents and neighbors with good demographics. If the system was privatized, competition would mean offering better education for lower prices, thus educating people relatively equally.
: : :cruelty, yadayadayada, are inherent to the basic underpinning of capitalism, especially the global capitalism we have today.
: : What you have described is New Deal Socialism/Statism. Switzerland is probably one of the last capitalist countries in the world(though not totally capitalist), and they have pure democracy, no oppression, incredible wealth, a pristine environment, nothing for a military, have never been involved in a war, are on the whole non-violent, has very even distribution of wealth and one of the highest mean LEs in the world. That's not what you described, is it?
: You just blew away every argument of yours I've ever read. If what you've been defending in all your posts is socialism, we should be on the same side. The world is still capitalist, it's just radical liberal capitalism instead of laissez-faire, or liberal capitalism. How can we be socialist and still have private industry? I find it amazing that I am now trying to convince you that the world is capitalist, when all this time you've been defending its "virtues" as capitalism.
Uh, no. I've been defending what's left of capitalism.
: : BTW, capitalism is not global, even if you define capitalism as relaxed socialist statism.
: Okay, it isn't global in the sense that every nation on earth participates. But enough of the big ones participate to make it essentially global. (If you include China, they all do, and one should include China since it looks as though they'll be capitalist soon.) The tiny nations still stuggling against capitalist oppression don't have to be counted, since they wouldn't contribute much anyway.
New Deal socialism is somewhat global, but not capitalism.
: : : BTW, nobody is "used to" living in holes dug from human filth.
: : Huh? Anywhere that that happens is the direct result of imperialism and forced industrialization by the west. Former colonies that are breeding grounds for exploitation. Note that none of the former and current imperialists are/were capitalist.
: The US isn't capitalist?! Nike isn't capitalist?! Even under your "Social-Statist" world order argument, the US was still capitalist 100 years ago, when we did most of our imperialism. Britain's imperialism was done in the name of capitalism, no doubt. It really blows my mind what you are saying here. I can't believe you are denying that the world is capitalist. Present imperialism is definitely being done by capitalist nations or at least corporations, which are by definition capitalist. Forced industrialization? Are you telling me T