Skip to main content

McDon't (not deux)

Marc writes that the Bush II regime wants to take the (intentionally) largely unskilled fast food and reclassify it as a manufacturing job (NYT, free reg required).
Classifications matter, the report says, because among other things, they can affect which businesses receive tax relief. "Suppose it was decided to offer tax relief to manufacturing firms," the report said. "Because the manufacturing category is not well defined, firms would have an incentive to characterize themselves as in manufacturing. Administering the tax relief could be difficult, and the tax relief may not extend to the firms for which it was enacted."
Having read Schlosser's Fast Food Nation, this is doubly troubling. Once for Marc's stated concern, which is that the current US regime wants bigger numbers in more desirable jobs, and are basically sodomizing the numbers to do so. The other concern would be that it gives any more advantage to an already overindulged corporation structure: that of the fast food franchise. (e.g. These corporations enjoy a sizeable tax credit for "training" their employees, despite the fact that workers do not learn skills at at a burger joint that carry into future employment, and the fact that all McD's machinery is designed for as-close-to-zero learning curve as possible, and despite their remarkable employee turnover rate.) It makes me want to run in the street and shout "Soylent Green is your economic future!" (via Misanthropicity)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Tony diTerlizzi and classic D&D monsters

The sixth entry of his series on drawings of classic D&D monsters is up. He's one of my favorite fantasy artists. His work tends toward the charming and cozy, rather than others' focus on machismo or melodrama.

sad fate

“Our legendary personalities are evergreen ‘brands’ with the benefit of worldwide recognition,” reads a message on the Richman agency’s website. Guardian UK Article *vomits* Where is the line drawn between “public figure” and “celebrity”? How can a dead person have an agent, particulary where there are no specific works concerned other than a sense of character? It’s one thing to insist that Duck Soup is a work that should be protected (which any more simply means controlled by whomever has the most buX0rs), but shouldn’t personalities and such pass into the public domain as well? ( boingboing : Bill Gates 0wns Einstein, Groucho , Freud, Asimov, Fuller, et al )