When viewing this – and it is subtitled so you have to read it – a couple of things to remember.
Six minutes for a very stark message about what “free market” means – truly means.
I have no idea if the subtitles are correct – I can only assume that
Nestle was at one point a financial supporter and participant of ALEC – we can not confirm present day – because ALEC keeps their member list secret.
ALEC believes and preaches a free market philosophy – which includes the privatization of everything – everything, do not kid yourself folks.
This video is an example (if the close captioning is correct) of the extremist views held by corporations who hold a free market philosophy.
Access to water is not your right
believing you have a right to water – is an extreme belief
Water is a raw material and a “foodstuff” that should be privatized and commercialized.
This video is an example of the extremist free market philosophy probably held by many of the corporations that belong to the American Legislative Exchange Council – your death means nothing compared to corporate profits. If this guy believes it – other corporations believe this for their raw materials also.
This is the first time I really truly understand what free market means to these people.
Free market means – it is okay for people to DIE as long as corporations can maintain high levels of revenues.
More importantly, we need to make a point of boycotting Nestle’s water products post haste.
Nestle’s Water division is enormous.
Check out this partial brand list:
Nestle Pure Life
Maybe if they didn’t make money on water – they would not view water as such a commodity.
Financial inequities are inherent to any market system. Due to disparities in wealth or access, some individuals are placed in more fortunate positions. Over time, instead of countering these disparities, the market nurtures them. Unlike other commodities, like wheat or oil, water is essential for survival, and it does not have any substitutes. Limited or nonexistent access to grain or oil, while potentially devastating, is not life threatening. The traditional economic principles applied to other commodities are not applicable to water. Those unable to afford the market’s price for water would be left to die.