Not efficient so much, as it externalizes costs away from the customer purchasing transaction and onto other actors in the system, like farmers and the environment.
Monsanto is not the only beneficiary of their evil ways, though: because of their evilness, millions of Americans spend less on food than they otherwise would.
Have you thought this through? Are you saying exploitation of some to the 'benefit' of others is okay?
Have you thought this through? Are you saying exploitation of some to the 'benefit' of others is okay?
That's the philosophy of utilitarianism in a nutshell. This is not a debate that can, or will, be resolved on HN. You might want to read up on 'Kaldor-Hicks efficiency' and 'Pareto optimality' which explores this concept in greater detail. 'Efficiency' here means net economic utility, as opposed to Company X just saving a few $.
Not efficient so much, as it externalizes costs away from the customer purchasing transaction and onto other actors in the system, like farmers and the environment.
Monsanto is not the only beneficiary of their evil ways, though: because of their evilness, millions of Americans spend less on food than they otherwise would.
Have you thought this through? Are you saying exploitation of some to the 'benefit' of others is okay?