TIL In the Hot Coffee lawsuit against McDonalds,punitive damages were given due to McDonalds intentionally overheating coffee to save money on refills - eviltoast

During the trial it was revealed that McDonald’s knew that heating their coffee to this temperature would be dangerous, but they did it anyways because it would save them money. When you serve coffee that is too hot to drink, it will take much longer for a person to drink their coffee, which means that McDonald’s will not have to give out as many free refills of coffee. This policy by the fast food chain is the reason the jury awarded $2.7 million dollars in punitive damages in the McDonald’s hot coffee case. Punitive damages are meant to punish the defendant for their inappropriate business practice.

  • fubo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Okay, maybe you really do think kings and warlords were more virtuous than shareholders or CEOs. Alas, it was not that way. They were buttholes too. Buttholery is not controlled by the economic system of the day.

    • Quokka@quokk.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You seem to think that I wouldn’t also reject authoritarianism?

      • fubo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There is no system of governance or economy among humans that you wouldn’t reject, if you reject every one in which wrongdoing takes place or people enrich themselves unjustly.

        That’s my point. “I reject capitalism because people can benefit themselves by doing injustice within it” is dopey, because that predicate is not unique to capitalism; in fact it’s universal. In every system of the world, people can benefit themselves by doing injustice within that system.

        Therefore, the person who reasons this way would reject any conditions under which they might find themselves living.

        Whatever “reject” means here, I’m not entirely sure.

        • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Regulation is still useful. You’re basically arguing for anarchy with your naive take. When a system advances the idea to exploit people, the system is fundamentally flawed. Will all systems have abuse? Sure. But that doesn’t mean “you will dislike all systems, so it’s irrelevant if one is better or worse.”

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          “I reject capitalism because people can benefit themselves by doing injustice within it”

          No, we oppose capitalism because it inherently ENCOURAGES people to benefit themselves by doing injustice. That’s a crucial difference.

          In every system of the world, people can benefit themselves by doing injustice within that system.

          It’s equally true that people can be violently bigoted against religious, racial and sexual minorities in every system, but only a few actively ENCOURAGE them to.

        • Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          And what makes capitalism superior to any other form of resource distribution that humanity has tried so far is not that it does or doesn’t allow greed, but it lets the greedy use their greed in a way that has at least the potential to benefit the many. And by having a legal avenue for greed to be used, capitalism forces greed to the surface and makes it legal for everyone to discuss.

          • Quokka@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Oh yeah, we’re all feeling that trickle down any day now.

            • Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You are missing the point. EU countries also have capitalism and they are far better off. It’s not capitalism that sets taxation laws or anti-trust laws, those are what has failed in the US. In the EU, while not perfect, those types of laws are more rigorous and in turn those countries suffer less from corruption and injustice.

              • Quokka@quokk.au
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Not everyone is American.

                Also capitalism is still ticking up the EU, there’s a reason they have to constantly fight against it just to ensure the most basic of freedoms for its citizens.