The Most Evil Corporations

Post Reply New Topic

An evil corp is an evil corp and always threatens the rulebooks. BHS, and SportsDirect along with other retail chains have had their employees suffer terribly, at the likes of some evil men, aka, Phillip Green.
Destroying pension contributions after years of hard toil is disgraceful and like throwing the cat out of the bag after acknowledging he was done after four lives lost not nine.
Places like fast food, I can pick a few out. ASK is a terrible sh***y place for service and food. Others, I could probably pass on as well, but I rely on my free unsubscribed meal vouchers when i'm out and about, so take outs are essential.

Well, Philip and Mike Ashley are the personification of evil in themselves.

This is true. Locally, WalMart recently increased their starting wages and it actually had the effect of making other marginal employers raise wages as well.

Thanks, indirectly to WalMart, you can make +$10/hr at any fast food joint around here.

People like to complain about evil corporate behavior, right up until they have to pay the full price of a product made outside the corporate structure. When we make a burger at my restaurant, we buy beef from a small local producer and buns from a local baker, make our own pickles and sauce in house, do everything by hand, and have to charge $11 for our 1/3 lb burger, and people think that's rape and pillage when we're hardly making any money on it. They get even madder that we charge $5 for hand cut fries that we fry twice in pork fat that we render from hogs we butcher in house, then toss with garlic and scallions, and that will easily serve 2.

Perhaps we can raise the minimum wage, offer people free healthcare, and offer people free post-secondary education. That way, people can afford non-corporate food.

We also need to stop giving wealthy corporations money just for being rich ... and we need to outlaw the exploitative types of globalization. That way, small businesses can compete.

So now, I have to pay all of my unskilled labor more money than they're actually worth, and raise my prices even further? Labor is already a huge factor in why I have to charge what I do, what do you think will happen when you make that even more expensive for me? Basically, you're taxing low skilled labor, and that's just going to put small business in an even worse position against larger companies that can afford to outsource and automate.

What about the burden your unskilled, under paid and I'm guessing, uninsured workers place on society?

Why should I pay higher prices for your hamburgers and higher taxes so your workers can get SNAP benefits and medicaid?

You think you deserve to charge high prices AND have your business subsidized by public welfare dollars too?

I think your business might need to go out of business...

I'd like to say we did something even worse than making corporations into people.
By making companies into people, we also in turn made people into companies.
Where a company in capitalism has to do the fiscally sound thing, even if it is evil, a person must do the same. Opting for a less evil action means usually opting for a less exploitative but more expensive action.
In this way, it has become a necessity for every individual to be, to some extent, evil.

Now, being evil is easy for us, as it doesn't mean we have to exploit workers in person, but we do it by proxy, like the clothing brand that doesn't manage it's supply chain.
They, and we, can always say, we didn't know workers were being exploited for our products.

Choosing a fair trade product is, like humane manufacturing standards, a luxury. Peacock feathers to elevate our social level.

Politicians tend to say that things like fairtrade are a consumers choice, and his responsibility -if he wants to take on that respinsibility.
But in capitalism, taking respinsibility is a bad choice.
Hence, I believe, fair trade and humane working conditions can in capitalis only develop as an optional feature, but for it to be the norm, it has to be enforced.

My choice in a free market is always restrained by what I can afford.
Unrestrained free markets make me a collaborator of globalized, disseminated evil.
That, I think, is the real scandal of capitalism.

None of these "evil" corporations force anyone to do business with them. Unlike the government which picks your pockets and shears you bald without your consent. Taxation is Theft. Regulation is Tyranny.

Under a libertarian understanding, actually Lockheed does since it makes most of its money through government contracts. Halliburton's reconstruction contracts in Iraq were also forced on the Iraqi government and people, backed up through force of arms.

Also, climate change impacts everyone. The consequences hurt everyone as a whole, whether you did business with the leading contributors or not.

^^
Halliburton and Lockheed are basically tax funded.

Regarding the others: I can not sensibly act in most parts of the world without using oil, hence, to take part in society, I need Exxon and BP and Shell.
Of course, I have a choice... Sadly, I can't afford a tesla right now. So, my forced choice is being interpreted as me being reluctant to buy an electric car, perpetuating investment into fossil fuels, while what I want is mass production of cheap, low-end electric cars....

Sane goes for wall-mart.

But listen, a Burger for 11 bucks and fries for another 5 sounds perfect. I'll be able to afford that maybe once a week.
That's what we are facing if costs are not externalized through exploitation and environmental damage, i.e. indebting future generations.

Which is the non-evil way.
And yes, people get angry if they can't have burgers everyday. They are ready to be evil for that.
The difference between a man angry because he's not allowed to rape a woman at will is one of quantity of evilness, but both decisions, for rape or for a one dollar burger carry evilness in them.

Green energy R&D subsidies are one way of fostering innovation in these industries, which allows them to be cheaper. Things like this are why I don't identify as a libertarian.


Unfortunately they are, which is part of why people democratically want the state to step in and regulate said damage. You can't expect a company to do anything other than make the most profit possible, and you also can't expect the public to not want to contain something that harms everyone.

Sorry, but that's a pipe dream. "Corporate food", with all it's fillers, chemicals and lack of nutrition, is necessary in a world of 6 billion+ people. If you were to properly nourish every person on earth we'd need a population about half that. Now for the bad news: we keep breeding and living longer, increasing that 6 billion number, and as a result our food will continue to decline in it's nutrient count.

I do agriculture (last farmer's market of the season was this afternoon), and I run into the same thing Dox does: people like hearing about how good their food is, until they see the price tag. There's nothing I can do, I make barely above minimum wage, so there's no more money to take from labor to keep the cost down, likewise, I do hydroponics and make my own nutrients to keep costs down, but nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium aren't going down in cost anytime soon-- all farmers need those supplements, and as they increase production for our increasing population they need more and more.

Solution: slow population growth, which in turn will lower pressure on the food supply. Very simple, elegant, Occam's razor solution. But that won't happen, people will complain about individual rights if they're restricted in breeding (understandable if you've read even a little history), and the sad truth is that all the "economic growth" people love doesn't come from invention or trade, but an ever increasing number of consumers/workers being born and eventually dumped into the system every day. Virtually every nation depends on this growth, as an example, in America it's how social security is funded-- the next generation. So, what's actually going to happen is we're going to keep overpopulating until the most watered down "corporate food" is at such a high premium it's a commodity that wars are fought over again.

Don't worry. You'll get benefits too. Your business won't. You will.
We just need to start taxing the right people. We'll shift the tax burden to the billionaires.

This can only happen if we expose Hillary Clinton as a fraud. Jill Stein is the real deal.

--All the Rothschild family's banking corporations
--The Federal Reserve System (no, it isn't a government agency, and yes, it is privately owned)
--The Goldman Sachs Group Inc. banking corporations
--The Rockefeller banking corporations
--The Bilderberg Group
--All royal families

Which is less than the burden they'd be if they were unemployed completely. The purpose of business is not to provide for the people who work there (I made a whole thread about that if you care to comment), it's to provide a service or product to consumers in a mutually beneficial arrangement that hopefully makes a profit. My shop (I don't actually own it, just to be clear, I use the possessive because I run the kitchen and think of it as mine) is already struggling with a high minimum wage, and as a result we have to hire less people, be pickier about who we hire to make sure we get our money's worth, keep on top of people to avoid wasting time, and pay our skilled employees less because we have to pay so much for our unskilled ones. If my skilled labor is underpaid, and as part of that skilled labor, I'd say we are, it's in large part because our unskilled labor is overpaid; a teenager washing dishes doesn't need to support a family, and there's no reason on earth to force a business to pay as if he were.

Supporting the lower income earners is a burden best taken up by society, not by making it prohibitively expensive to employ low skill labor. Raise the top marginal rates or cut some bureaucracy to pay for it, but this is absolutely not the responsibility of small business.



You're paying a higher price because the ingredients are expensive and a lot of (expensive) labor goes into it; if fuel is all you're looking for, MacDonald's is down the street.



I think I deserve to earn a living from running a business, considering the level of effort and personal risk involved.



My shop would have gone out of business years ago if the owner were not both wealthy and stubborn, but thanks to him being willing to throw money down the pit, Seattleites have access to high quality meats and sandwiches that they otherwise wouldn't.