> Where do you draw the line between "retaliation" and "refusing a bad deal"? If operating in a country that protects unions is a bad deal, they should move th

> Where do you draw the line between "retaliation" and "refusing a bad deal"? If operating in a country that protects unions is a bad deal, they should move their operations somewhere else. What's that? They still want the money the consumers in those countries bring in? Well then, the deal doesn't seem so bad after all then. Edit: To elaborate, companies seem to want it both ways. They want a large consumer base with a lot of disposable income that will buy their stuff, but they also want to treat their own employees like shit and pay them the minimum they can get away with. This can't work forever. If you push to shrink/eliminate the middle class, eventually there will be no one left to buy your overpriced "beverages" and you'll go out of business. Unfortunately modern business practice is to limit your thinking to the next quarter.