7 ms·
Out of interest - if a cigarette company started selling lung cancer treatment, would you still hold this stance? I would hazard to say that the analogy I've c
by yomly 10y ago
Out of interest - if a cigarette company started selling lung cancer treatment, would you still hold this stance?
I would hazard to say that the analogy I've chosen aligns more closely with the stance of the article and the posters taking a condemnatory tone than your Yamaha analogy does.
- yomly 10y agoDon't really understand the downvotes here can people explain why they are downvoting? The parent opinion is that Nestle is a large corporation and they are diversifying their revenue streams as every profit-seeking company is entitled to. The other opinion elsewhere on this thread is that sugar is the enemy and therefore Nestle should be held accountable for first causing a problem then charging people for offering the solution. It's probably going to be hard to reconcile either opinion given the subject of sugar in diets is already quite divisive, but is an attempt to illustrate the anti-sugar camp's perspective through an extreme but easily understood example not constructive?
- rhizome 10y agoas every profit-seeking company is entitled to. To be sure, this isn't a natural right. The entitlement is entirely a creation of policy and legislation, both of which can be modified or rescinded.
- yomly 10y agoTrue, completely agree, but we currently live in a world where the majority of corporations will make profit up until the boundaries of legality.