Exactly, Free Market, where the only law is "Survival of the Fittest". Not the regulated market we have today where there exist anti-monopoly laws.
Yes. And thus, as you have ably pointed out, Free Market economics are not capitalism and thus, not relevant.
Didn't you just mentioned Free Market?
Hey, you brought it up. Don't go pinning your choice in topics on me, MAAAN.
Anyway, those things are keeping the companies in check, that does not mean the companies are not "heartless machine that exists only to squeeze the money out of people."
What I was trying to say was that a company
can't afford to just go and maximize their profits as high as possible (squeezing all of the money out of you) because that would entail overstepping certain legal, moral boundaries. Corporations have another factor to keep in mind, and that is Public Relations.
When you start to gain brand recognition, people are going to attach all kinds of things to your brand based on what they hear. Take the example of Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is infamous for its paper-thin profit margins and outsourcing cheaper foreign labor in order to undercut other businesses by giving the lowest price possible. Now, when people hear the Wal-Mart brand, they think of low prices, big stores and the negative stigma of its shady business tactics. They also attach to it the negative stigma of being operated and frequented by the "trash" of society (not to imply that everyone who shops or works there is garbage, but when one walks into a Wal-Mart...). These negative stigmas all affect Wal-Mart's business in that it makes it a less desirable place to shop.
If a company is not in good standing with its public because they've read that they beat their factory workers to death or because they exploit child labor and undercut local manufacturers or because they release pollutants into a city's drinking water, they're going to find that their profits are going down, not up.
If a corporation fails to take the comfort and security of its customers and laborers seriously in order to make a few more bucks, they're going to be finding themselves losing a lot more.
The Goverment provides those sames things to poor people who has no money to pay for them, they have an obligation to do so. The corporations demand money for them, they have no obligation whatsoever, you push them too hard, they file bankrupcy and leave with their money.
And where do those things come from? From welfare and food stamps, which comes out of your tax money, which is likely provided to you by a corporation, so, in effect, those poor people are receiving their necessities and livelihood from a corporation indirectly.
But remember, just because a brat is behaving well now, does not mean that he has stopped being a brat. You just need to see him when his mother is not looking.
Well YOU remember that just because peanut butter and jelly go together well on toast doesn't mean you should bring a picnic lunch of nother but PB&J on toast. See, I can make non-sequitorial metaphors too.
Submit..... more paperwork, hence Red Tape.
That's some red tape but it really wouldn't be the huge hassle you're no doubt imagining it to be.
Keep Advisor.....another person's firm needed, more bureaucracy.
Well we'd already have NASA staff assisting them in the first place, right? Hardly a hindrance.
