I recently had an experience while doing a simple Google search that was so profoundly weird that it stopped me in my tracks.
Understanding this Google se...
What are you, a Communist? How could being for the people ever maximize profits? It’s not “against” the people, it’s extracting value from the people, that’s the holy grail of all corporations: maximizing shareholder value, and customers aren’t shareholders, customers hold the value that’s to be maximally extracted / transferred to the shareholders. It’s all corporations’ fiduciary duty to their shareholders to do this, literally bound by law. /s
In times gone by, brands meant something, customer loyalty was a kind of collective bargaining.
Today, everything is fast-fashion. Companies trade brand names like twin sisters trade clothes. If a brand still holds any kind of value in the marketplace, it’s more likely to be sold and cashed out as a premium label applied to cheaply made shoddy product than it is to be built up with better reputation for the future. Products themselves are carefully designed to self-destruct to create future demand. The market needs to be restructured to put total cost of ownership AND disposal front and center in the purchasing selection process.
On the other hand, it would just be nice if they can avoid starting the Mad Max Apocalypse until after I’m dead, thanks.
It’s “nice” to see others that are also such cynicals in these times. So it’s not just me seeing that. Would give some comfort if it wasn’t so sad to begin with.
Nestle’ sells $100B annually and Dannone almost half of that - that’s a lot of food to go missing off the store shelves - maybe not enough for people to start starving to death, but quite a few would go hungry.
Monstanto’s upstream influence affects the foundational diet of billions of people, kill their operations and lots of people would be starving to death.
Monsanto owns the patent on Roundup, and seed strains that are resistant to roundup. They don’t own the farms or farmers, they just have them in coercive contracts.
You’re assuming that if Monsanto went out of business, all of the farmers would just give up on the possibility of farming. That’s a wild assumption, and It’s insanely inaccurate. My cousin is a very successful small farmer, and he already doesn’t use anything from Monsanto.
If Monsanto disappeared right now, everyone could continue using their seed for free, but they’d likely instead start to grow different things, adding biodiversity to our food sources, and making them more resilient against unforeseen circumstances.
Your argument is either extremely disingenuous or extremely misguided.
Monsanto owns the patent on Roundup, and seed strains that are resistant to roundup.
Bt Corn (Maize), Seminis (Vegetable and Fruit Seeds), Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH / Posilac), De Ruiter Seeds, DeKalb Genetics Corporation…
They don’t own the farms or farmers, they just have them in coercive contracts.
I’m not seeing a big distinction…
If Monsanto products didn’t improve the farms/farmers’ outputs and profits, even after Monsanto takes their slice, then they wouldn’t enter into those contracts. Gank Monsanto out of the system and productivity falls. A drop of 10% to 15% in global agricultural output within a single year would likely trigger immediate, widespread, and severe global famine.
Don’t use shit if you don’t really like shit. Who still uses google for simple search? It had its peak a loooooong time ago.
Virtually everyone, unfortunately
Stupid fucking monopolies…can any of those ever mayhaps be FOR the people, not against them? Is that too much to ask?
What are you, a Communist? How could being for the people ever maximize profits? It’s not “against” the people, it’s extracting value from the people, that’s the holy grail of all corporations: maximizing shareholder value, and customers aren’t shareholders, customers hold the value that’s to be maximally extracted / transferred to the shareholders. It’s all corporations’ fiduciary duty to their shareholders to do this, literally bound by law. /s
It’s possible to rake in shareholder value AND offer a good product people enjoy.
Here are some great examples of that:
In times gone by, brands meant something, customer loyalty was a kind of collective bargaining.
Today, everything is fast-fashion. Companies trade brand names like twin sisters trade clothes. If a brand still holds any kind of value in the marketplace, it’s more likely to be sold and cashed out as a premium label applied to cheaply made shoddy product than it is to be built up with better reputation for the future. Products themselves are carefully designed to self-destruct to create future demand. The market needs to be restructured to put total cost of ownership AND disposal front and center in the purchasing selection process.
On the other hand, it would just be nice if they can avoid starting the Mad Max Apocalypse until after I’m dead, thanks.
It’s “nice” to see others that are also such cynicals in these times. So it’s not just me seeing that. Would give some comfort if it wasn’t so sad to begin with.
SearXNG ftw
indeed, using my own :)
Same
Fuck these corporations, we don’t need them
Try again: Monsanto, Nestle’, Dannone…
What about em?
Nestle’ sells $100B annually and Dannone almost half of that - that’s a lot of food to go missing off the store shelves - maybe not enough for people to start starving to death, but quite a few would go hungry.
Monstanto’s upstream influence affects the foundational diet of billions of people, kill their operations and lots of people would be starving to death.
That’s an insane perspective/assumption
Monsanto owns the patent on Roundup, and seed strains that are resistant to roundup. They don’t own the farms or farmers, they just have them in coercive contracts.
You’re assuming that if Monsanto went out of business, all of the farmers would just give up on the possibility of farming. That’s a wild assumption, and It’s insanely inaccurate. My cousin is a very successful small farmer, and he already doesn’t use anything from Monsanto.
If Monsanto disappeared right now, everyone could continue using their seed for free, but they’d likely instead start to grow different things, adding biodiversity to our food sources, and making them more resilient against unforeseen circumstances.
Your argument is either extremely disingenuous or extremely misguided.
I’m not seeing a big distinction…
If Monsanto products didn’t improve the farms/farmers’ outputs and profits, even after Monsanto takes their slice, then they wouldn’t enter into those contracts. Gank Monsanto out of the system and productivity falls. A drop of 10% to 15% in global agricultural output within a single year would likely trigger immediate, widespread, and severe global famine.