![Laws for the poor [1079x601 - 683KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/7w88of.png){kind=link}
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?
If McDonald's was only focused on selling food, I wouldn't argue with you. But they use a deceptive marketing tactic which includes bombarding advertisements all across the media platforms and selling items that are chock full of chemicals that you probably can't even pronounce right. Is it really selling people what they want when they have already decided for the people to want their items? And what about all the disgusting toxic chemicals inserted into their items that metastasize into cancer or various other health concerns? Is it the freedom to choose as long as you don't have people questioning what's going in the food? If McDonald's wasn't amoral, why couldn't they advertise their food as what they are: the chemical monstrosity that was created in a lab?
(post is archived)