Do you support big businesses?

[Comprehend]

Inventions are as likely to occur on a small scale as on a big scale.

I didn't say anything about inventing those things. That has nothing to do with my post.

It was the assembly line method of production that made these inventions cheap enough for most people to afford. "Big business" was not a necessary requirement.

nope. as far as cars go, the assembly line method made them a little cheaper, but economies of scale made them affordable to the masses. who owned cars in the 40's and who owns cars today? How many cars did and does each family own?
Same with computers, Dell is much cheaper than a small computer store and if it weren't for big businesses, only the very rich would be able to afford them. Industiral machinery is responsible for most of the rest of the savings, without the machinery, everything would have to be hand crafted and would end up going to kings. Which of the things I listed do you not think is made cheaper by big business?

And in fact, it was when "big business" began using the assembly line method that we got the robber barons of the early 20th century, and blood ran in the streets of America. It was "big business" that forced workers to unite into labor unions to fight them for decent working conditions and a living wage. The big businesses themselves, and the robber barons that owned them, would have been perfectly happy working children to their deaths for peanuts, for the sake of maximizing profits. And they have not changed even to this day. They would still work children to their deaths for profit if they could get away with it. It's why so many of them are closing their shops in America and moving to third-world countries, where they an get away with it.

this entire section has nothing to do with my post. it is an emotional plea for your view...

 

[Comprehend]

The difference between commerce and exploitation is that with commerce, the deals benefit everyone concerned. While with exploitation, one side benefits at the expense of the other. When businesses are run purely for the sake of profit, exploitation will be "just good business". And that's exactly how businesses in America think and behave. And the bigger they are, the more profit driven they are, and the more exploitive they become.

Businesses live off the community in which they exist, yet in America, they presume that they owe absolutely nothing to that community. And so they exploit their communities for their own profit. Which makes them parasitical.

There is no compulsory employment in this country. Obviously the deals benefit everyone concerned or they wouldn't work there. please, you are living in a Marxist fantasy world.

If the community did not benefit then the company would recieve no money but if people are shopping there, they are benefitting, they are getting something they want in return for money. Also, the business pays taxes, this also helps the community.

do you know of a business that at least some people do not shop at or use their products or enjoy the taxes paid by them? If people shop there, they are benefitting, if people work there, they are benefitting, if the company pays taxes, the people are benefitting.

 

[Aqualung]

Hm...maybe you're right. Does that actually happen, though? Do the big businesses actually stop growing in order to save money?

Yes. All businesses stop growing once they can't make money. That's why you don't see car lots that span ten blocks. Because nobody would buy ten blocks worth of cars.

What inspired my post is the way that resources are typically treated in this economy. Thye become nothing but an end to a means. Resources equal a way to gain profit.

We exist within a closed system: the planet Earth. Many resources are renewable, but only if given the time and means to do so. When increased profit becomes the goal of a business, ecological stability takes a backseat.

Will the point at which a business stops expanding also be the breaking point of a healthy ecology?

I'm not really following. Can you provide an example? (I'm definitely more of a concrete thinker in this regard)

 

[Guitar's Cry]

There is no compulsory employment in this country. Obviously the deals benefit everyone concerned or they wouldn't work there. please, you are living in a Marxist fantasy world.

I don't think that the post was neccesarily talking about employment. But, there is a certain amount of compulsory employment in this country. There must be so that folks can live. They benefit through monetary reimbursement, but is that employment really their choice? For some yes, but not for everyone.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Yes. All businesses stop growing once they can't make money. That's why you don't see car lots that span ten blocks. Because nobody would buy ten blocks worth of cars.

Interesting analogy. But is that due to monetary concerns or aesthetic appeal? Also, growth need not be located at one place. It could be globally or monetary.



I'm not really following. Can you provide an example? (I'm definitely more of a concrete thinker in this regard)[/quote]

Hmm...

Fossil fuels are the best example I can think of. It is a natural resource that is--for our purposes--non-renewable. In order to support growing businesses (especially the oil industry), it is overused. One day it will run out. Our overuse of it creates an unhealthy ecosystem through the emission of known pollutants into the environment. While both its non-renewablility and its dangerous emissions are well-known, big business still supports it because it is a profit-maker. Despite better technologies, we still overuse fossil fuels.

Renewable resources are also overused. Trees are overharvested in many places despite attempts to regrow them. The fishing industry overharvests fish. Fertile farmlands are overfarmed by industry that uses harsh chemicals.

 

[Aqualung]

Interesting analogy. But is that due to monetary concerns or aesthetic appeal? Also, growth need not be located at one place. It could be globally or monetary.

Think of this: Why would ANYBODY get bigger? Bigness has lots of potential bad side efects, like the fossil fuels you mention later. So, the only reason somebody would is because the benefits outway the costs. We live in a society where benefits = money. So, if getting bigger does not get me more money, WHY would I get bigger at all? It's like this: Spending one hour a day playing my guitar will make me okay. Sending two hours will make me great. Spending three hours will make me the next Eric Clapton/Eddie Van Halen/whoever you view as a guitar god. Spending four hours a day will make my fingers bleed. Spending five hours a day will necessitate amputation of my fingers. So, why would I go past three hours a day? This is similar to the concept of economies of scale and diseconomies of scale. After a certain point, growing will make you less efficient, which will lower profit. So, after that point, why grow?

Hmm...

Fossil fuels are the best example I can think of. It is a natural resource that is--for our purposes--non-renewable. In order to support growing businesses (especially the oil industry), it is overused. One day it will run out. Our overuse of it creates an unhealthy ecosystem through the emission of known pollutants into the environment. While both its non-renewablility and its dangerous emissions are well-known, big business still supports it because it is a profit-maker. Despite better technologies, we still overuse fossil fuels.

Yes, that's true. But, it's not the only resource. So, fuel is not finite. Fossil fuel is, but not fuel. There is renewable energy, but people haven't seen how it's more beneficial to use it. This is just general stupidity, not an actual finite pool of resources.

But, I do see your point that economic stability takes a back seat, which is an unfortunate consequence of greed. I think at some point, though, businesses and consumers will realise what is happening and there will be attempts to rectify the situation, but I don't think it will rectify through small businesses. Since small businesses are less effective (they haven't fully harnessed their economies of scale) they actually use MORE resources per unit output than a big business would.

 

[PureX]

That has nothing to do with my post...this entire section has nothing to do with my post.

How convenient for you that all objections and reasoning to the contrary have "nothing to do with" your post.

 

[PureX]

There is no compulsory employment in this country. Obviously the deals benefit everyone concerned or they wouldn't work there.

People who work for starving wages, or who work unreasonably long hours or in unhealthy conditions don't do it because these things are agreeable to them, they do it because they have to. This is what exploitation is ... it's exploiting the disadvantages of others, to the advantage of the exploiter. It has nothing to do with whether or not the person being exploited "agrees" to it. They have no choice but to "agree to it". Which is not really an agreement at all.

Also, the business pays taxes, this also helps the community.

They are forced to pay taxes, and even then they will find ways to cheat and pay no taxes at all if they can get away with it. Because they are parasites. They are concerned completely and only with their own profits. The well-being of their neighbors, of their employees, of their patrons, and of community as a whole mean absolutely nothing to them.

do you know of a business that at least some people do not shop at or use their products or enjoy the taxes paid by them? If people shop there, they are benefitting, if people work there, they are benefitting, if the company pays taxes, the people are benefitting.

People often support and protect their abusers. That doesn't make the abuse OK. Exploiting people's greed, buy selling them a product that's a few cents cheaper because their neighbor is getting paid less that he should is still exploitation. It's exploiting the ignorance and greed of the public, in the service of the greed of the corporation. Two wrongs still don't make either the public's or the corporation's greed right.

 

[Quiddity]

No, the bigger the business the less likely it is to be concerned about an individual's welfare, or even the community's welfare. Commerce, like government, works best when it's kept small and personal. When we have to look each other in the eye as we trade our goods and services, we're far more likely to understand that the purpose of commerce is to benefit everyone involved. And is NOT to get as much profit out of the deal for ourselves, as possible.

.
This rings so true to me having worked for all different size companies. Smaller companies and some medium size companies are much warmer and personal. Large companies, I feel like a number.

Having said that, work is work. Most all smaller sized companies have more problems. Managing all the different responsibilities in personal warm fuzzy enviroment is brutal! The emotions and dirty politics that goes on makes me want to pick the larger companies at times.

 

[PureX]

.
This rings so true to me having worked for all different size companies. Smaller companies and some medium size companies are much warmer and personal. Large companies, I feel like a number.

Having said that, work is work. Most all smaller sized companies have more problems. Managing all the different responsibilities in personal warm fuzzy environment is brutal! The emotions and dirty politics that goes on makes me want to pick the larger companies at times.

I actually really like working for small companies, even with the personality quirks. Maybe even because of them, to some degree.

Ultimately all of human society and culture is just people being people, with each other. I much prefer to look at it this way, I guess because I really and genuinely like people, even as weird and nasty as they can sometimes be.

I don't like working for big companies because the in big organizations the "rules" always overwhelm the common sense and creativity of inter-personal interactions. But I have to say that the size of the company is secondary to the intention. When I work for people who genuinely want to produce a quality product at a reasonable price, that is useful and beneficial to society as a whole, then I want to participate in the worthy goal. Whereas if I am working for a company that just wants to make money, and views every decision with profit as it's motive, then I find it drudgery just to show up each day. And everyone else who works there feels the same, because all they do is punch the clock and wait for the paycheck.

Greed destroys everything it touches. Especially the human spirit.

 

[Mathematician]

I don't support business any more than I do greed, but, considering our current level of human thought is lacking, I think both are essential to our current society.

 

[bflydad]

I'm confused about the thread. What does everyone mean when they say big business? Most of what I'm reading relates to retail. I don't know too many people who build their own car from scratch or buy from a local small-business manufacturer. The same is true for computers. How many people purchase music online versus buying CDs manufactured by big business (is there an alternative for DVDs)? The same for most book publishers (and who picks fiction based on the publisher?). There are no small producers of automobile fuel so virtually everyone driving cars is promoting big business. Phone companies, cable companies, yada yada yada.

The only exceptions that I can think of are retail, home decor, and restaurants. And these, I support as much as possible.

 

[Quiddity]

I actually really like working for small companies, even with the personality quirks. Maybe even because of them, to some degree.

Ultimately all of human society and culture is just people being people, with each other. I much prefer to look at it this way, I guess because I really and genuinely like people, even as weird and nasty as they can sometimes be.

I don't like working for big companies because the in big organizations the "rules" always overwhelm the common sense and creativity of inter-personal interactions. But I have to say that the size of the company is secondary to the intention. When I work for people who genuinely want to produce a quality product at a reasonable price, that is useful and beneficial to society as a whole, then I want to participate in the worthy goal. Whereas if I am working for a company that just wants to make money, and views every decision with profit as it's motive, then I find it drudgery just to show up each day. And everyone else who works there feels the same, because all they do is punch the clock and wait for the paycheck.

Greed destroys everything it touches. Especially the human spirit.

Yes it does. I pretty much feel the same way with regard to intention. But you know, sometimes the bad intentions of the corporatist have better results then if they weren’t around. I’d much rather have their greedy ways if it keeps food on the table, keeps families together, and over all the good out weighs the bad. Sometimes it’s not about how I feel, but rather what it does to the greater good.

 

[Comprehend]

How convenient for you that all objections and reasoning to the contrary have "nothing to do with" your post.

how unfortunate for you that you couldn't address my post. You will have to forgive me if I don't go chasing after all the windmills you point out... try sticking to the topic and my posts when you are addressing me and I will respond.

 

[Comprehend]

People who work for starving wages, or who work unreasonably long hours or in unhealthy conditions don't do it because these things are agreeable to them, they do it because they have to. This is what exploitation is ... it's exploiting the disadvantages of others, to the advantage of the exploiter. It has nothing to do with whether or not the person being exploited "agrees" to it. They have no choice but to "agree to it". Which is not really an agreement at all.

which is a long winded way to say that it is compulsory... This is like reading Marx's communist manifesto.... I have read it before, you can spare me the class warfare nonsense.

Show me the people in this country who are forced to work for starving wages, unreasonably long hours or un unhealthy conditions...

They are forced to pay taxes, and even then they will find ways to cheat and pay no taxes at all if they can get away with it.

you just described almost every adult in the United states. LOL.

Because they are parasites. They are concerned completely and only with their own profits. The well-being of their neighbors, of their employees, of their patrons, and of community as a whole mean absolutely nothing to them.

well, the above would be your personal feelings... you are attempting to lump all coorporations into one group and you have provided zero evidence for your silly assertions. Not really the best argument...

People often support and protect their abusers. That doesn't make the abuse OK. Exploiting people's greed, buy selling them a product that's a few cents cheaper because their neighbor is getting paid less that he should is still exploitation. It's exploiting the ignorance and greed of the public, in the service of the greed of the corporation. Two wrongs still don't make either the public's or the corporation's greed right.

you are seriously claiming that the only people that shop at big businesses are abused sheep who don't know what they are doing? LOL.

again... not a terribly compelling argument. I would suggest you let your ideology branch out a bit from Karl Marx and his class warfare but that is just me...

 

[PureX]

Yes it does. I pretty much feel the same way with regard to intention. But you know, sometimes the bad intentions of the corporatist have better results then if they weren’t around. I’d much rather have their greedy ways if it keeps food on the table, keeps families together, and over all the good out weighs the bad. Sometimes it’s not about how I feel, but rather what it does to the greater good.

But I don't see much greater good coming from big corporations. Mostly all they do is buy up or run off small businesses, and then use their monopolies to exploit everyone for profit. Big business has ruined music radio, and is on the way toward ruining the music scene all together by "manufacturing" canned "stars". Big business has severely damaged the visual arts by stealing every eye-catching image ever produced and using them to tell lies and sell crap. Big business is destroying our government with wholesale bribery that has become so outrageous that they can now write their own legislation and then pay off the politicians to pass it into law in the middle of the night when no one is looking. Big businesses think nothing of producing extremely unhealthy snacks for kids, and then advertising to them during children's programs. And they routinely bribe school boards with computers and whatever to let them sell unhealthy junk food to kids in their schools. They even bribe the schools to let them show commercials to the kids while they're in the classroom.

There really isn't anything that these big corporations won't stoop to for the sake of their own profits, so I have a hard time seeing how they benefit families or anyone else, for that matter. The only reason they get so big is so that they can create monopolies and drive off the competition. Sure, they provide jobs, but ten small businesses would have provided more and better jobs than the one mega-business that drove those ten small businesses off. And healthy competition gets replaced by an unhealthy monopoly.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

which is a long winded way to say that it is compulsory... This is like reading Marx's communist manifesto.... I have read it before, you can spare me the class warfare nonsense.

Class warfare nonsense? How can asserting that there is tension between social and economic classes be nonsense?

Show me the people in this country who are forced to work for starving wages, unreasonably long hours or un unhealthy conditions...

Many are. Those who choose not to--who are happy to live the hobo life--are criticized and condemned as "good for nothing," then marginalized.

Many who are born into the lower classes are condemned to either poverty or working for starving wages.

 

[Mister Emu]

I support their right to exist.

I do not support many practices they employ.

 

[Comprehend]

Class warfare nonsense? How can asserting that there is tension between social and economic classes be nonsense?

When it isn't true. There will always be a small percentage of people who will think anything but generally it is not true. That makes it nonsense. There is certainly no animosity that I see from the upper class toward the lower classes and that is what is being argued. I just don't see a bit of evidence for it.

Many are. Those who choose not to--who are happy to live the hobo life--are criticized and condemned as "good for nothing," then marginalized.

Many who are born into the lower classes are condemned to either poverty or working for starving wages.

That is not true, I am poor. I am not condemned to poverty or working for starving wages. I put a little effort into my life and I am getting an education. My best friend is also dirt poor and he is finishing medical school.

This is America, go get a job and work hard and you can earn practically anything you want. Sit on your butt and complain and you'll get nowhere fast. I have yet to see a newspaper of any size that does not have pages and pages of want ads listing jobs available. If there are no jobs in your town, get on the freaking bus.

nobody in this country is condemned to poverty if they are able to work.

 

[nutshell]

This is America, go get a job and work hard and you can earn practically anything you want. Sit on your butt and complain and you'll get nowhere fast. I have yet to see a newspaper of any size that does not have pages and pages of want ads listing jobs available. If there are no jobs in your town, get on the freaking bus.

nobody in this country is condemned to poverty if they are able to work.

The trouble is, comp, many of the dirt poor are already working one or two jobs. What of them?