• Norgur@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    Exactly. Don’t blame fucking companies for doing what companies were always about to do. Blame the government for letting them. If you get mauled by a lion, you won’t blame the lion, you (or your heirs) will blame the zoo for saving money on the fence. Why is it different with companies?

    • AFallingAnvil@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      So because the zoo fucked up I shouldn’t be upset with the lion for mauling people? You can be upset at two things simultaneously, and you sure as shit don’t need to support making life harder for the people already being mauled. That’s some “Boys will be boys” defense right there.

      • Norgur@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        there is no defense in there. I never defended the company. I just called your stance that companies ought to do social welfare unreasonable. I very much like everyone to do social welfare stuff, but to blame companies when they refuse to do what the fucking government should is just a pretty twisted stance, innit?

        • AFallingAnvil@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          There’s a difference between providing social welfare and not actively worsening the experience for paying customers to spite the vulnerable.