Congratulations Bolivia!!

[Aleksey_aka_al]

How is McDonalds environmentally noxious?

They turn people into waste...

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

If they had to be stewards of the Earth in their farming & animal rearing practices they're burgers would cost more than $1. They're responsible for a large amount of waste and deforestation (to rear animals or grow grain crops to feed them), supposedly they're trying to spin themselves as "green" but this seems more PR than anything.

It's absolutely a feel-good effort. All corporate "give-back" campaigns are. It's designed to mentally offset the "guilt" of consumerism by letting you have your cake and eat it, too. They're giving back with one hand what they took with the other (the environment, in this case). Because it would be far too much for them to actually practice what they preach, or for the "great men" of our generation like Gates or Jobs to donate their own fortunes towards the goals they ostensibly care so much about; no, like good capitalists they must find a way to make money even while practicing "charity."

 

[Traitorfish]

In other news the Kroc family (the family which founded the McDonald's empire) was extremely generous with charities. When Joann Kroc died (the founder's wife) she gave hundreds of millions of dollars to local charities and universities here in San Diego. Hell, she almost single handedly paid for the new KPBS (the local NPR affiliate) through her charitable giving.

Would you like to hear about how many hospitals the Bourbons founded?

 

[Rulle_Kebab]

WRONG. Is it McDonald's fault people are obese? Or is it people actually stuffing themselves and then not doing even ten minutes' worth of exercise

Well it is not ONLY Mcdonalds, it the whole fast food "culture".
I think that if you want to serve food for people you have certain responabilities. Restaurants are closed down if people get served food that makes them sick, if there is rats or the like, right?
Besides that the fast food restaurants often "push" bigger meals to people than they really need.
And obesity I think can be directly linked to peoples eating habbits and those habbits are screwed by commercials, trends and pressure. Try convincing your children not to have their birthday at Mcd, try convincing them that a breast of a real chicken is better and healthier than a fried up chicken nugget...

Anyways, since people are aparently so stupid (the ones eating all that fast food) that they cant see the connection, well, then Mcdonalds(or whatever restaurant) shouldn't be allowed to serve them just like a restaurant serving infested foods should be closed.

Maybe Mcdonalds with a ten minute treadmill exercise gift in the happy meals instead of a toy to intice kids and annoy parents would be a good idea heheh

 

[amadeus]

Besides that the fast food restaurants often "push" bigger meals to people than they really need.

You mean McDonald's is trying to sell something to me?

I've got to go warn the townspeople!

 

[downtown]

Besides that the fast food restaurants often "push" bigger meals to people than they really need.

And who determines what I really need? Should we shut down any restaurant that offers me dessert after my meal?

 

[innonimatu]

I don't like McD's more then most people, I'm probably more anti-fastfood than your average guy, but it's ******** for a dirt poor country like Bolivia to be chasing away any foreign investment. They're so dirt poor and backwards in Bolivia they should be on their knees begging anyone with money to invest there and improve the local economy.

A foreign fast-food company would not be a productive investment but a drain as it extracted and expatriated profits. Plus fast food is totally unnecessary. Good for Bolivia for getting rid of them.

Oh, and it they were really a "dirt poor country" such a company would not even try to get there in the first place. Corporate leeches know better to choose their targets. Just look at that map of their expansion.

 

[amadeus]

A foreign fast-food company would not be a productive investment but a drain as it extracted and expatriated profits.

This is a fallacious argument. When a foreign company invests in a foreign country, the locals of that country buy goods in their local currency. When Bolivians buy hamburgers at McDonald's, McDonald's in Bolivia receives bolivianos.

What does McDonald's do with these bolivianos? They pay their local staff, pay the local food suppliers (if they buy from them, but that's irrelevant), and pay the truck drivers. What's left over, of course, is profit. But what then happens to those profits, made in bolivianos? They can either spend them or burn them. If McDonald's burned its profits, I'm sure Bolivians would be overjoyed—it's much cheaper to print paper with numbers on it than it is to make and trade real goods. So that leaves only one option: spend them. In the end, the profits come back to Bolivia and Bolivians are made richer.

 

[Rulle_Kebab]

You mean McDonald's is trying to sell something to me?

I've got to go warn the townspeople!

But a regular meal that would satishfy your hunger and needs for 4 Dollars og get a SUPER SIZED meal enough to feed three people for 4.5 Dollars... that is a problem in my mind. Leads to excessive eating and obesity...

And who determines what I really need? Should we shut down any restaurant that offers me dessert after my meal?

Noone "needs" a dessert after a meal. If you feel you need that, I think you have an eating disorder. But ofcourse everything can be enjoyed with some modesty.

Problem is that restaurants like Mcd does not promote that, they sell more for less and entice people to overeat and look around you... Wherever these restaurants are thriving people are fat.

 

[Traitorfish]

This is a fallacious argument. When a foreign company invests in a foreign country, the locals of that country buy goods in their local currency. When Bolivians buy hamburgers at McDonald's, McDonald's in Bolivia receives bolivianos.

What does McDonald's do with these bolivianos? They pay their local staff, pay the local food suppliers (if they buy from them, but that's irrelevant), and pay the truck drivers. What's left over, of course, is profit. But what then happens to those profits, made in bolivianos? They can either spend them or burn them. If McDonald's burned its profits, I'm sure Bolivians would be overjoyed—it's much cheaper to print paper with numbers on it than it is to make and trade real goods. So that leaves only one option: spend them. In the end, the profits come back to Bolivia and Bolivians are made richer.

Assuming that McDonalds is the only Western company in the country.

 

[amadeus]

Assuming that McDonalds is the only Western company in the country.

Why do you think it would be contingent upon how many foreign companies were operating there?

 

[Traitorfish]

Why do you think it would be contingent upon how many foreign companies were operating there?

Because a lot of foreign companies passing bolivianos back and forth between each other doesn't "make Bolivians richer", it just makes them dependent on foreign capital that they can't control. The only justification for that is arguing that only foreign capital can generate prosperity in the first, and assuming that foreign investors expect want some return on their investments, then you're back to square one in explaining why this wouldn't create a situation in which Bolivia ultimately loses out.

 

[Old Hippy]

apparently it seems that foreign private enterprise is better than existing locale private entrepreneurs for a country....

 

[amadeus]

Because a lot of foreign companies passing bolivianos back and forth between each other doesn't "make Bolivians richer", it just makes them dependent on foreign capital that they can't control.

That doesn't matter. Foreign companies in Bolivia, trading amongst each other, will still spend bolivianos hiring local labor. When more foreign entities compete for labor in Bolivia, the price of labor (wages) will rise.

The only justification for that is arguing that only foreign capital can generate prosperity in the first, and assuming that foreign investors expect want some return on their investments, then you're back to square one in explaining why this wouldn't create a situation in which Bolivia ultimately loses out.

You are still left with the same problem from earlier: McDonald's stockholders in America probably aren't going to want to be paid in bolivianos.

apparently it seems that foreign private enterprise is better than existing locale private entrepreneurs for a country....

A simple reductio ad absurdum shows how fallacious the protectionist line is. If it's damaging for profits to leave a country, why is it not equally dangerous for profits to "leave" a town or a province?

 

[Old Hippy]

A simple reductio ad absurdum shows how fallacious the protectionist line is. If it's damaging for profits to leave a country, why is it not equally dangerous for profits to "leave" a town or a province?

you have not really thought about how the fast food industry works in Bolivia have you...

your average entrepreneur spends his money in his locale, buying locale produce and supporting his family... and when he buys a mobile phone or TV from an overseas source ... well its not the business profit... its his... as the profit has already been taken out of the enterprise... in fact ALL the profits of the enterprise are distributed locally

 

[Traitorfish]

That doesn't matter. Foreign companies in Bolivia, trading amongst each other, will still spend bolivianos hiring local labor. When more foreign entities compete for labor in Bolivia, the price of labor (wages) will rise.

Well, firstly, we're apparently working with a different understanding of the term "richer", which I guess is part of the confusion.
Secondly, that's only true if the Bolivian labour market is closed, as opposed to open to significant immigration from the agrarian population, so the usual rules of supply and demand can't be expected to apply here. I'd be more cautious about that sort of prediction.

You are still left with the same problem from earlier: McDonald's stockholders in America probably aren't going to want to be paid in bolivianos.

You're assuming that all Western operation in Bolivia will necessarily involve flogging consumer goods to Bolivians, which is generally not the case in this sort of country. Raw and manufactured materials are primarily for export, entering the market in the West and so generating profits in Western currency.

A simple reductio ad absurdum shows how fallacious the protectionist line is. If it's damaging for profits to leave a country, why is it not equally dangerous for profits to "leave" a town or a province?

A quick glance at the North of England would suggest that this is entirely the case. All that says is that the problems are deeper than protectionism can address, not that they don't exist.

 

[amadeus]

you have not really thought about how the fast food industry works in Bolivia have you...

your average entrepreneur spends his money in his locale, buying locale produce and supporting his family... and when he buys a mobile phone or TV from an overseas source ... well its not the business profit... its his... as the profit has already been taken out of the enterprise... in fact ALL the profits of the enterprise are distributed locally

How "local" is local enough to satisfy this need, though? If I live in Alsace and have the choice of buying a TV made in Aquitaine or the Saarland in Germany, which is the local market? The Saarland is only a short distance away, but the region is in Germany. Aquitaine, however, is part of France, but a much further distance away.

Several countries have tried taking this buy local mentality to the extreme and nearly every time it was a disaster. Early Francoist Spain, Italy under Mussolini, and now North Korea.

Well, firstly, we're apparently working with a different understanding of the term "richer", which I guess is part of the confusion.

More (potential) consumption per capita.

Secondly, that's only true if the Bolivian labour market is closed, as opposed to open to significant immigration from the agrarian population, so the usual rules of supply and demand can't be expected to apply here. I'd be more cautious about that sort of prediction.

It's still true if the rural population flows into the cities. First, rural labor is scarce so a company wanting to pay low wages can't depend on an urban influx forever. Second, and perhaps more importantly, why are laborers leaving the rural areas for the cities to take up low-paying jobs? The low-paying jobs must have some attraction: either they pay greater than their jobs in the field, or they offer more security, or they offer better working conditions. In that case, there is still an improvement in the standard of living of Bolivians, it just isn't enjoyed by those already enjoying a (relatively) higher standard in the cities.

You're assuming that all Western operation in Bolivia will necessarily involve flogging consumer goods to Bolivians, which is generally not the case in this sort of country. Raw and manufactured materials are primarily for export, entering the market in the West and so generating profits in Western currency.

It doesn't matter. The mineworkers and factory workers will still take their wages and buy goods in their communities.

 

[Old Hippy]

How "local" is local enough to satisfy this need, though? If I live in Alsace and have the choice of buying a TV made in Aquitaine or the Saarland in Germany, which is the local market? The Saarland is only a short distance away, but the region is in Germany. Aquitaine, however, is part of France, but a much further distance away.

Several countries have tried taking this buy local mentality to the extreme and nearly every time it was a disaster. Early Francoist Spain, Italy under Mussolini, and now North Korea.


.

you seem to have missed your own point that i was responding too...

that the profits from an enterprise are distributed locally in the fast food industry in bolivia... you have gone from there, it seems to me, to how people should spend their own money, not really comparable
Considering Macca's closed its Bolivian franchises, perhaps the locales had a better understanding of the market and better business model, for there

and Australia, Europe even the USA encourage people to buy locale... yes I agree its has been disastrous, last time I was in the states 'everyone' seemed to be driving German and Japanese automobiles, even crazier in OZ they encourage you to buy locale and get a ford or GM...

 

[amadeus]

It seems I misunderstood; I thought you were supporting the buy local hysteria.

 

[GamezRule]

Never outlaw Coca-Cola! It's delicious!