![Laws for the poor [1079x601 - 683KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/7w88of.png){kind=link}
It’s not a question of morals.
That's what I pointed out as the problem.
How is that the problem? Those who most enrich others through provision of goods and/or services will be the most successful in a capitalist system. Those who most enrich others may be extremely moral people, may be amoral people, or may be anywhere in between. It’s not a question of morals because morals do not enter the equation, so your assertion that those “with no moral values will be most successful” has no basis in fact.
McDonald's started off as a business model to provide food fast and cheap for the people. Now, it's arguably one of the biggest good chains in the entire world. Sure, it provides goods and services people want, but at what cost? I'm sure the executives of the chain are fully aware of the consequences of feeding these people an extreme amount of sugar, corn syrup, and preservatives, but they don't care. Can you give me an example of a food chain that is healthily prepared, but as big as McDonalds? You can't, because as I said, amoral and purely profit driven model will win out in the end.
Morality cuts into profit.
I don’t see that as amoral by McDonald’s at all. There isn’t a food chain that offers healthy food the same size as McDonald’s cos people don’t want that as much as McDonald’s. If McDonald’s decided to only offer healthily prepared food tomorrow do you think they would have the same market share in 10 years time, or might Burger King and KFC etc. see their market share grow? It’s not immoral to give people what they want, it’s up to individuals themselves what to do with their freedom to choose. And isn’t the maccers double cheeseburger the most accessible source of nutrition in history or something like that?
(post is archived)