Blaming the West: a Question

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote] pookie wrote:
Well Nike can afford to pay Michael Jordan 65 millions to advertise their shoes. Try explaining to your kid that he can’t get Nike’s like all his friends because the company’s unethical. Or that you won’t be going to McDonald’s when he’s seen the ads 200 times and want that crappy toy. [/quote]

No one said life was going to be easy. People can be role models even when they don’t mean too. There are teenagers in the gym who ask my questions on lifting. I remember when I was that age and I asked the big guys in the gym about their lifts.

[quote] pookie wrote:

I’ll disagree with you here. Their only obligation to the customer is that without any, they’ll go broke; so it pays to keep them. [/quote]

I think you actually agreed with me here. They keep customers by meeting their needs. If a company is not meeting my needs why would I go to them?

[quote] pookie wrote:
And they have to abide by local laws concerning product safety and other similar contraints. That’s it. Try dealing with a monopoly a few times and see how much they care for their costumers when they’re the only game in town. [/quote]

I agree with the monopoly part, which is why I support small businesses. But ‘that’s it’ is not it by a mile. If a company wants to be successful they must constantly listen to their customers and anticipate what they need. They also must follow what the media is saying about them, especially in todays information driven market and amateur news blogs. I’ve taught and lectured on quality customer service for over 15 years, and how just disrespecting one customer can backfire and cause a PR problem that may or may not be real.

[quote] pookie wrote:
And for employees, the same goes. Get the most work out at the least cost. Fight unions; hire illegal immigrants that won’t pester you about their rights and will work for pathetic wages. It’s not all companies, of course, but many of those that require unskilled labor will get it as cheaply as possible with no regards to the persons themselves. [/quote]

This is reminding me about another thread I had on the same topic awhile back. Yes, get the most work out at the least cost but that cost can contain 401k contributions, tuition assistance, medical insurance, day care, etc…It can cost thousands to hire, train, and mold employees into leaders for the company. Good ethical companies will make this investment. Those that fill their need for unskilled labor this way are making an unethical and illegal choice. Is it easier? Sure. It might be easier to shop lift my groceries rather than pay for it. However if I get caught I go to jail.

[quote] pookie wrote:

Businesses are there to make money. We can all (well, most of us) accept that. But unless some very clear lines are laid out, too many businesses will get greedy and do anything they can in the name of short term profit. Many laws are already in place, but often with penalties or fines that are so toothless, that they become the equivalents of “permits” to pollute or overconsume, etc. [/quote]

Yes. Business ethics, that’s what I’m writing about. Toothless is subjective here. There are heavy fines in the millions given out, and jail time to some like the recent Enron trials.

62

IagoMB:

I think we’re pretty much in agreement over the principles. We seem to disagree on whether enough is being done to curb unethical businesses.

While I agree that it’d be best if most corporations would correct themselves; I feel that too many will wait until a big stick is hanging over their heads to make any changes.

And yes, there have been heavy fines and jail time in the case of Enron; but that was an extreme case. The penalties don’t help all the employees who lost their life savings in that scandal… The corruption went pretty far, as even their auditing firm was in on it.

I also agree that smaller enterprises are generally more receptive and helpful to their costumers; I generally try to patronize small, local family shops when possible.

63

[quote]pookie wrote:
IagoMB:

I think we’re pretty much in agreement over the principles. We seem to disagree on whether enough is being done to curb unethical businesses.

While I agree that it’d be best if most corporations would correct themselves; I feel that too many will wait until a big stick is hanging over their heads to make any changes.

And yes, there have been heavy fines and jail time in the case of Enron; but that was an extreme case. The penalties don’t help all the employees who lost their life savings in that scandal… The corruption went pretty far, as even their auditing firm was in on it.

I also agree that smaller enterprises are generally more receptive and helpful to their costumers; I generally try to patronize small, local family shops when possible.[/quote]

I agree. I think we both want the same solution but are aproaching it from two differernt ways. I’ve always backed change from the inside since it leads to real lasting change.

I’ll buy you one of those warm beers you wrote about in the worst beer thread.

64

pookie,

I have to admit, there may be more to you than the typical “America is bad because they make me look so insignificant” quebecois.

However, without a list of the sources you consider more or less unimpeachable, I just don’t have the strength to re-argue the many reasons to invade Iraq.

I’ve been through this too many times to have another Anti-American blame the source for the information when I start changing their perceptions.

Good luck with everything,

JeffR

65

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
How many of these would-be terrorists were not moved to join the cause because of the war in Afghanistan but were moved to join the cause only after the war in Iraq?
[/quote]

It’s pretty tough to say. As others have pointed out, the Islamic old boys’ network is a large influence in these fanatical movements (much like the lunatic Right in the USA). But there are numerous other influences. Perceived and actual injustices from the West are also a factor (especially since the overthrow of the Mossadegh Government in Iran in the 1950s).

As far as the “Operation Infinite Hubris^H^H^H^H^H^HJustice”, I doubt that it created, so much as roused, existing middle-eastern fanatics. Of course, it’s diffucult to say who are the fanatics and who are the freedom fighters, but that’s a whole other discussion.

-Glee

66

[quote]JeffR wrote:
pookie,

I have to admit, there may be more to you than the typical “America is bad because they make me look so insignificant” quebecois.[/quote]

No, no, it’s “America is bad because they treat all other nations as insignificant.”

I don’t believe I consider any source unimpeachable. Like I said, I much prefer to read many different perspectives so as to get as many details and views as possible to make up my own mind. Journalism has taken a turn for the worst these past years, IMHO.

What sources do you consider unimpeachable?

Please don’t confuse disagreement over your current administration’s policies with simple anti-americanism.