It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to post by ViperChili
then were did those starving millions come from ?
what are there bodies made from dirt, air, prayers
no their bodies and all human bodies are made out of FOOD!
but some prefer to throw away/destroy food if there is no profit to made.
go to the back of the class
Originally posted by ViperChili
reply to post by MegaMind
Why don't you start your own business where you are concerned about "moral fiber" moreso than profits.
Lets see how long you last.
Last time I checked, moral fiber and ethics didn't pay the bills.
Does your landlord or mortgage company accept moral fiber or kind words in lieu of cash?
Or do you pay them in puppies and ice cream cones? Maybe vials of valuable unicorn piss?
Originally posted by rubbertramp
i think the word 'corporation' should just be removed from this argument.
this is really about stealing from those who did better than others concerning income.
in other words, if a person is struggling and poorer than the o.p., then they have a right to steal from the author of the o.p.
Originally posted by ViperChili
reply to post by MegaMind
Why don't you start your own business where you are concerned about "moral fiber" moreso than profits.
Lets see how long you last.
Last time I checked, moral fiber and ethics didn't pay the bills.
You can't even use apostrophes, here's a big boy hint on life, buddy, learn how to write properly
I'm far more intelligent
Take your inability to read to another thread, partner.
Originally posted by ViperChili
reply to post by Chewingonmushrooms
Morals are entirely subjective.
My morals state that I do what I can to support my family so that my son doesn't have to struggle in life like I did.
My morals do not include you, or anyone I do not care about.
Originally posted by rubbertramp i think the word 'corporation' should just be removed from this argument. this is really about stealing from those who did better than others concerning income. in other words, if a person is struggling and poorer than the o.p., then they have a right to steal from the author of the o.p. And do tell how do they "do better"? You want to remove corporation from the argument, but corporation IS the argument. A person that "does better" within the system reinforces the system and by extension becomes part of the problem. It becomes a question of ideology based on different sets of morals. On one hand the corporation is lauded for being (or becoming) successful regardless of the means it took to get there. On the other hand corporations are demonized exactly because of the means use to become successful. In the situation of stealing, both parties would be guilty, except one is coming from an individual and the other is coming from a group of individuals. Corporations by nature must sustain continuous growth in order to meet their quarterly profits, so by extension must find ways to cut corners. If that means outsourcing so be it. If that means destroying the land to acquire materials so be it. If that means interfering with the public's ability to shape their furture to interference with elections and legislation so be it. If that means laying off workers so be it.
Originally posted by ViperChili
reply to post by MegaMind
By doing that, you built a customer relationship, thereby insuring future business. That is a good business decision.