Cargill and Farmers Health

[lakenheath]

I see your point Parsely and it has some merit. I know that multi-naitonals are a huge part of our economy. I just think that with more awareness that the common person could keep corporations more accountable.

Rather than acting like drones, blank minded customers and consumers, we should be more informed.

I like when people are quick to criticize policy and challenge the big boys. Playing the role of devil's advocate isn't all that bad of a thing.

There is nothing wrong with a little bit of suspicion.

[Vader]

Nothing wrong with multi-nationals as long as you understand what drives them. Their fiduciary duty is to their shareholders - pure and simple. If they see that protecting customers is in the best interest of shareholders then they will do that. If they see that shareholders interests are best served by reducing their service to customers then they will do that also.

Someone compared corporations to tigers. It is in a tigers nature to eat things. For that reason they must be caged if they are to cohabit with human beings.

We can live alongside multi-nationals as long as there are rules in place. Right now the rules are a bit weak.

Rod Flaman

[lakenheath]

You're damn right the rules are weak. Just like there is no specific rules against corporations funding political capaigns (political bribery). It creates a bastardized version of capitalism. Which is many times worse than socialism. It destroys all corporate accountability.

[charliep]

Just curious as to which rules are weak. Many would argue that regulation in Canada is excessive already.

[Vader]

Competition law. Just look at the AU divestiture. It's been going on for so long and AU is trying to get the order thrown out.

[chaffmeister]

To imply that Competition Law in Canada is weak because AU is trying to get thrown out its order to sell a terminal is simply misguided. No law should be considered weak simply because it is enabling. Competition Law in Canada has a provision that enables parties in AU’s situation to be heard. In this situation AU feels that the grain handling environment has changed since the order was made and that the divestiture would never have been ordered under the current situation. Whether you agree with their argument or not they have that option and that is ultimately fair, logical and reasonable. Without this provision, there would be good reason to squawk; the alternative would be an intractable government and bureaucracy.