From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,INVALID_MSGID, LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10261c,90121986704b5776 X-Google-Attributes: gid10261c,public X-Google-Thread: 10c950,90121986704b5776 X-Google-Attributes: gid10c950,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: fdb77,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public From: billg@jk.pst.com Subject: Re: Your english sucks, mine is better. Date: 1997/11/29 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 293772685 References: <65ab3u$v07$1@news.nyu.edu> <3479B4F1.D575BEFC@SomewhereElse.com> <01bcf94a$43fbc1c0$LocalHost@default> <65dsjd$6gq@netra.montana.edu> <65patf$fma@netra.montana.edu> Organization: IDT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.lang.pascal.ansi-iso,comp.lang.pascal.misc Date: 1997-11-29T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <65patf$fma@netra.montana.edu>, ljelmore@montana.campus.mci.net says... > billg@jk.pst.com wrote in message ... > >There's nowhere near the amount of consumer protection that indicates > >ethical behaviour is the value. The laws favor the capitalist over the > >consumer. > > Tell that to the companies sued over product liability and who lose millions > on ridiculous lawsuits. Like the lady who sued McDonald's because they > didn't have a warning label on their coffee cup from the drive-thru warning > that the coffee is hot and that it's dangerous to drive and try to drink hot > coffee at the same time. Well, duuhhhhh... She got millions for her > _stupidity_ when she sued (_after_ McDonald's had already paid all her > medical bills, etc.). There's a Superman costume that was out for this > Halloween where the manufacturers felt compelled to put a warning label on > the cape: "Warning: Wearing this cape does not enable the wearer to fly," > because, sure as sh**, some kid would jump off the garage roof with it on, > the kid's moronic and/or greedy parents would sue, and likely as not, win > 2.4 million dollars in punitive damages. All said, I think those judgements occur because it is realized that the business owners in general attain much of their money via the labor of others and should forfeit (give it to its rightful owners) some of it. > > Besides, this kind of crap (false advertising, etc) has gone on ever since > any kind of trade went on, long before capitalism ever existed. Just because > capitalism hasn't eliminated it, the whole problem is capitalism's fault? > Get real. It's a problem of human nature, not capitalism. I don't know of > _any_ other system that has done any better, so why aren't you criticizing > them, too? You remind me of the "useful idiots" that were outraged by each > and every abuse in South Africa, and yet turned a blind eye to far worse > outrages in black-ruled African countries... Well, at least I'm useful. :) I don't have enough information on the the other systems and I don't have to live with them directly either. Capitalistic behaviour is exploitive- -and the more you are willing to (are able to) exploit (and extort) the more "successful" you will become. The model is best exampled by the scenario where eastern slave-labor produces products for a garment company who then sells them at unheard of markups for the owner's benefit. The mainstream (capitalistic company) is more subtle but those characteristics are always there. The IT agency model is based on the same exploitive principles, and that one really hits home. billg