• @mriormro
      link
      English
      191 year ago

      Apple is a corporation with a market cap that rivals the GDP of France and a net income that rivals the GDP of Qatar. That much capital consolidated within a singular private entity doesn’t just make them any other company. Their profit seeking is wildly, wildly different than a vast majority of any other company today.

        • Franklin
          link
          English
          2
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          This is just the “both sides of the same” argument with different dressing.

          It’s as false here as it is there. So you’re going to tell me a company like fairphone is as unethical as Apple or Samsung?

          Yes of course they work with two completely different yields but that’s really the point The only way you can get to that yield is to be unethical so choose smaller brands choose ones that make decisions you agree with and help them grow.

          There is no completely ethical capitalism but there definitely are choices that get us somewhere better.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -21 year ago

            So you’re going to tell me a company like fairphone is as unethical as Apple or Samsung?

            Absolutely. There is no ethical consumption under capitalism and even fair phone is profit driven. Even NPOs are profit driven. No one works for a loss in western society. No one. So literally every company will do everything it does for the sake of profitability. Even fairphone.

            You have to realize that fairphone’s whole model is a marketing gimmick. Does it happen to align with some good values? Sure, but it’s still a gimmick to separate you from your money at the end of the day.

            • Franklin
              link
              English
              3
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              This is just false. Fairphone had audits that prove it’s an improvement in both sustainability and worker conditions.

              Of course consumerism always negatively impacts the environment but to make it all equivalent is to forsake all nuance. It’s not at all to the same magnitude.

              I don’t believe capitalism is the answer to the world’s problems but to not celebrate a positive initiative is throwing the baby out with bath water.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -21 year ago

                Fairphone had audits that prove it’s an improvement in both sustainability and worker conditions.

                key word there is ‘improvement’. it’s still a for profit company and they will ultimately make whatever decisions are in the best interest of the company to make a profit.

                they are undoubtedly better, but their baseline is still the same, to make money.

                there is no nuance, at all, to the fact that there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. it’s pretty black and white. there are ways to be less unethical (e.g., fairphone), but not to be ethical.

                • Franklin
                  link
                  English
                  31 year ago

                  That’s just it though. One does more damage than the other unless you alone are single-handedly going to overthrow capitalism within the next week (which you know more power to you) this is still harm reduction and I’m happy for it.

                  Otherwise you just bitching about best case scenarios and living in a world that exists only in your head

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    -31 year ago

                    You’re discussing nuance for a company you like when what I being discussed I the baseline problematic nature of commerce.

                    Is fair phone a better alternative? Yes, and I’ve said as much.

                    Is it ultimately different from apple in its goal to be profitable? No.

                    Both things exist and that’s ok.

        • @mriormro
          link
          English
          11 year ago

          The size, profits, and overall global reach of a company heavily impacts how that company further impacts the world. Do you honestly think that, I don’t know, American Girl dolls have had the same negative impact on the world as the East India Company?