"Croatoan" <christiansaccount@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:1194123616.258945.91760@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Nov 1, 2:13 am, ibshambat2...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>> There are many people on both the left and the right who claim that
>> capitalism and humanitarianism are incompatible with each other.
>
> And if you really want to see how humanitarian capitalists are, just
> read this one sentence.
>
>> Among other things, the company
>> looked at low-income consumers as a vast and unexploited commercial
>> opportunity
>
> They are "unexploited". Which means they want to "exploit" them.
i think rupert murdoch was way ahead here when he invested in satelite tv
for the indian market...if you only get a penny a week from the poor, and
there are so many of them...
i am not disagreeing with your sentiments, but the word 'exploitation'
imo, is losing and likely to lose entirely, its perjorative meaning, and
become rehabilitated, in the way that meanings of words change over time,
unless there is a change of direction ... 'exploiting' for the purpose
of profit is acceptable, commendable even, maybe ultimately, _required_ in
the value system of capitalism as it is writ today...and used in a similar
sense to 'utilizing' or 'employing'. i guess it is possible that adverse
connotations would disappear, if the language of capitalism is dominant
beyond a point...the term 'human resources' in which 'human' is a mere
adjective for distinguishing between types of resources, no longer raises
any eye-brows...
'exploiting' a gap in the market is entrepeurism, isn't it? people win
awards and get the backs slapped for it...
possum
>
> Wake up.
>
|
