Need To Be Strong

"Who's primary purpose is to prevent the strong from oppressing the weak..."


You know, I just realized something. This does not mean "in court". Because what happens in court stays in court. I was trying to wrap my mind around the fact that the government sometimes decides to support MNCs and sell canadian assets to foreign companies, and that these companies enter in direct competition with local small business owners who then either sell off their businesses to chains or fight the fight and take what they can. A friend of mine made a similar research project on factory farming, which effectively out-classes traditional farms in terms of production quantity, lowering their demand and resulting in many to sell their lands. She then provided us with a humoorus but instructive video called the Meatrix. (Her father was a traditional farmer, and proud of it.) As I understand it there is a growing market for quality, which will result, if the trend persists, in factory farms raising their standards to better compete with the free run type farms. The interesting thing about this though is that factory farms only exist because of a demand for cheaper meat. Meat is expensive, let's face it, but if you have two identical slices of steak sitting side by side in the supermarket, and one is worth 12$ while the other is worth 4, you have the option of re-examining your priorities. No, more is not always better. 

Back to the topic,  I realized that what the sentence means is not "support the weak in court" because either party are not referred to as such and the truthfulness of accusations is decided by the court. You could say that what the court decides becomes the truth... Until put into question. So weakness or strength has no merit before the court, though a finacially strong company can pressure a weaker individual regardless of righteousness either by employing an expensive lawyer - the pricier the better, yes? - or they can use threats or bribes to avoid notice. On the other hand, corporations can abuse workers, pay them too little, see "nike" for an past example. The soccer balls are another example, as they sell soccer balls that say "this ball was not made in Pakistan or some such country by children working for shit wages" which suggest that many of those that don't do in fact have children in XYZ country making those...
_____________
Enviropig™  Because pigs are products, they are now being trademarked. Of course the enviro- prefix is just a beautifying add-on, because biopig somehow doesn't sound quite right. Mutapig sounds similarly unappealing. There is nothing environmentally friendly about a pig. Ooh  in protest, I'd start a line of enviroshirts. Envirolaptops. Envirocats. (comes with envirocat catlitter. For more information on how to train your Envirocat, visit our tutorial website at www.envirocat/howto.com)

The word granola brings to mind weed smoking hippies with macrame shirts parading about Gaia and making the planet green... Green is not a sustainable business model! Nobody that cares about quality is willing to buy green products