Trump makes a good nuanced point here that reminds me of The Art of War. The highest forms victory include capturing the enemy with minimal conflict and losses—a checkmate. Instead of razing Busch and other companies like them, our future would be better if they are rebuked for their wokeness and poor products. Then the companies can course correct with the motivation to provide better products, to contribute to local development, and to support good causes like providing employment for veterans. Turning an enemy into an ally is better than turning an enemy into ashes.
Instead of razing Busch and other companies like them, our future would be better if they are rebuked for their wokeness and poor products.
This assumes there is any benefit to society, or more importantly, to the individuals that make up society, in keeping these companies around. What benefit does Bud Light, or any other company of note, bring to the individuals on this planet?
I suggest there are exactly zero benefits, and numerous detriments. They are run by the exclusive Elite Oligarchs that run the whole world behind the scenes, subverting our Inalienable Rights. There is not one single thing that this Oligarchy, or their products, give to humanity that enhances it. Indeed, their entire system is designed from the ground up specifically to create a false reality in order to keep us enslaved while encouraging us to believe that we are free. So why should we encourage them to "course correct?"
I say burn it, and watch it burn with glee. Burn it all to the ground and dance on the ashes.
Rather than going out of our way to give these fuckers a second chance (fool me once...), let's build our own economy. A decentralized economy that has at its core an appreciation of the individual, and a built in respect for our inalienable Rights.
There is an economic benefit to the people they employ, the farms they buy their grain from and folks downstream who distribute and sell their product. I agree with many of your points, but I do want to be mindful of secondary effects.
That assumes that those secondary effects are beneficial to the individuals. They seem beneficial, and indeed by a certain perspective they are, but I suggest it's all relative. The same can be said for any economy. For example, slaves that work benefit from receiving food from their slave masters. Slaves that are sick or hurt may not receive that food (call it "unemployment" for slavery). That doesn't make the payment system inherent to slavery "beneficial," it just makes it beneficial relative to something worse.
Without these companies that I suggest create a slave state, you could have a completely different economy, one without the Aristocratic Oligarchy that has ruled the world for millennia. If you read my report, you will find the opener for a larger argument I am creating to support all of my statements.
All these comparative economies and systems ignore the fact that IN THE SYSTEM AS IT EXISTS it is beneficial. You can debate other systems and perspectives, but in the one we currently inhabit it is beneficial to have a job, to be able to sell a product and to be able to move that product where it can be sold. We can't argue for the larger argument and ignore the realities on the ground.
Trump makes a good nuanced point here that reminds me of The Art of War. The highest forms victory include capturing the enemy with minimal conflict and losses—a checkmate. Instead of razing Busch and other companies like them, our future would be better if they are rebuked for their wokeness and poor products. Then the companies can course correct with the motivation to provide better products, to contribute to local development, and to support good causes like providing employment for veterans. Turning an enemy into an ally is better than turning an enemy into ashes.
Still waiting for Anheuser-Busch to apologize and ask forgiveness. Nothing less will do.
He always gives people a chance to do the right thing. Love this man.
It always reinforces my belief that the Lord has his arm around Donald John Trumps shoulders.
Did the CEO/CFO/CMO (C-Suite and BOD) resign?
Did AB apologize, and "beg" forgiveness?
Did they promise to never go woke again?
Doesn't matter, I don't drink that piss anyway, but hey, good questions.
This assumes there is any benefit to society, or more importantly, to the individuals that make up society, in keeping these companies around. What benefit does Bud Light, or any other company of note, bring to the individuals on this planet?
I suggest there are exactly zero benefits, and numerous detriments. They are run by the exclusive Elite Oligarchs that run the whole world behind the scenes, subverting our Inalienable Rights. There is not one single thing that this Oligarchy, or their products, give to humanity that enhances it. Indeed, their entire system is designed from the ground up specifically to create a false reality in order to keep us enslaved while encouraging us to believe that we are free. So why should we encourage them to "course correct?"
I say burn it, and watch it burn with glee. Burn it all to the ground and dance on the ashes.
Rather than going out of our way to give these fuckers a second chance (fool me once...), let's build our own economy. A decentralized economy that has at its core an appreciation of the individual, and a built in respect for our inalienable Rights.
It’s hard to find any merit in high-carb alcoholic drinks made by a foreign-owned conglomerate.
There is an economic benefit to the people they employ, the farms they buy their grain from and folks downstream who distribute and sell their product. I agree with many of your points, but I do want to be mindful of secondary effects.
That assumes that those secondary effects are beneficial to the individuals. They seem beneficial, and indeed by a certain perspective they are, but I suggest it's all relative. The same can be said for any economy. For example, slaves that work benefit from receiving food from their slave masters. Slaves that are sick or hurt may not receive that food (call it "unemployment" for slavery). That doesn't make the payment system inherent to slavery "beneficial," it just makes it beneficial relative to something worse.
Without these companies that I suggest create a slave state, you could have a completely different economy, one without the Aristocratic Oligarchy that has ruled the world for millennia. If you read my report, you will find the opener for a larger argument I am creating to support all of my statements.
All these comparative economies and systems ignore the fact that IN THE SYSTEM AS IT EXISTS it is beneficial. You can debate other systems and perspectives, but in the one we currently inhabit it is beneficial to have a job, to be able to sell a product and to be able to move that product where it can be sold. We can't argue for the larger argument and ignore the realities on the ground.