4 ms·
>The reason is: if this reflects on "making more money" they will do it and fight to make it look right until they are challenge on court, as a result probably
by josu 11y ago
>The reason is: if this reflects on "making more money" they will do it and fight to make it look right until they are challenge on court, as a result probably the fines will be lower than the earnings related to how they did it.
The reason behind this reason is that as long as consumers keep demanding cheaper products, companies will continue looking for ways to lower their costs. Just take a look at poultry farms, they are living hells, but people don't seem to mind it as long as they can buy 6 chicken nuggets for 99 cents.
We can't have the cake and eat it too, we have to decide whether we want companies to be responsible or if we want to pay less for the products and services we consume.
- r00fus 11y ago> The reason behind this reason is that as long as consumers keep demanding cheaper products, companies will continue looking for ways to lower their costs. I'd have no problem with actually competing price vs. quality but the problem is with legislative/judicial challenges to things like environmental laws and consumer protection. We simply don't punish enough those who willingly shit on the commons to make a buck (and consumers are often in the dark about the quality of their goods), and so those who have large investments in these vehicles use some that money to influence/corrupt the regulatory and legislative bodies to prevent their cash flow from being stopped. Just wait till TPP is signed and ratified...