Acceptable risk
May 18, 2005 9:16 PM   Subscribe

Acceptable risk

(from these guys again).
posted by lupus_yonderboy (17 comments total)
This made me laugh and laugh! Where do I get the keychain?
posted by mwhybark at 9:27 PM on May 18, 2005

Or will it be a golden skeleton--will it have harsh, but acceptable costs?

I smell a blog buzzword coming on...

3. Your project will involve significant injury to humans. Factoring in profit projections, such damage might potentially be inappropriate.

4.You might consider selecting a location with a more positive culture.

I, for one, dig the subversion of the nonjudgmental tone used by caricatures of psychologists and utilized by a life-destroying (fake) chemical behemoth.
posted by Joybooth at 10:25 PM on May 18, 2005

once again , i am potentially inappropriate .
posted by mishaco at 10:31 PM on May 18, 2005

... and "these guys" look as if they are having their cake and eating it too.
posted by TimothyMason at 10:46 PM on May 18, 2005

"How many lives equal how much benefit? Where's the tipping point? Making this explicit would of course mean putting a precise value on human life. The government can't do that, and of course nobody else can either.

well of course the government, CAN and does. In the US its somewhere between 3-10 million per person...
and then he goes on and...

We would of course never wish to imply that an Indian life is worth any more or less than any other. I myself believe in the sanctity of life. But the market has its own logic, and if we're going to live with it, we must make the most of its choices.

but our market based calculator found out that clearly an indian is culturally worth much less than a Vermonter...

the skeleton was pretty sweet though... guess its made out of the same stuff as a golden parachute..

posted by stratastar at 11:28 PM on May 18, 2005

Isn't this sort of "I'm so funny" anti-corporatism a little 2003? It takes me back to the good old days of Adbusters and the WTO riots. Ahhh, nostalgia. But, much like SNL, it seems that this style of "criticism" has not improved with age.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 1:04 AM on May 19, 2005

MetaFilter: anti-corporatism is so 2003.
posted by mek at 3:29 AM on May 19, 2005

Bulletin to thedevildancedlightly and mek: I teach corporate law in Madison, Wisconsin, where anti-corporatism has been fashionable as far back as anyone here remembers, and it doesn't seem to be waning. It was not limited to one year, and it certainly is not extinct. Not in Madison, or anywhere else.
posted by Gordon Smith at 6:54 AM on May 19, 2005

Yeah, it's really funny to see the detached way some people calculate how much shit we can accept before they make a good profit. But taking as example, and constantly talking about skeletons, kind of proves they are fooling us, not themselves. They never act in innocence. Anti-corporatism my ass. Trust a fucking tag to help you stop thinking seriously about something. Guys, this is not a fad. People react to corporate logic because of a strong survival instinct.
posted by acrobat at 7:04 AM on May 19, 2005

I suppose if it's not new, hip, and funny, then the content is invalid.
posted by trey at 7:31 AM on May 19, 2005

acrobat, right on.
posted by modernerd at 7:33 AM on May 19, 2005

acrobat, you did get that the website was fake, right?
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:00 AM on May 19, 2005

I saw "The Yes Men" movie a couple of weeks ago. While I totally approve of what these guys do and mostly approve of where they're coming from, I still remained unimpressed.

They're good writers, and they have some good gags, and the movie was competent enough. But it all seemed so useless. They were usually giving these speeches in front of 50 sleeping corporate drones who couldn't give a fuck if they were being made fun of or not. The closest thing to a reaction they got was when they did it in front of a college seminar - but really, how does that accomplish anything?

I like their style, but they need to rethink their tactics and do some real damage.
posted by fungible at 8:26 AM on May 19, 2005

I think the Yes Men are quite good at what they do, being brash enough to make a statement, yet subtle enough for their targets not to get the joke. It highlights the absurdity of corporate values without being "shrill" or "utopian" or "idealistic" or any of the other things that are now uncool. I sure hope that the whole idea of corporate responsibility hasn't become unfashionable, but I'm afraid it may now be in our upside-down world.
posted by jimmy76 at 10:46 AM on May 19, 2005

What is risk? And what makes it so risky?
< /g. costanza voice with nasal twang added>

Anything that makes fun of corporate America/world is OK with me.
posted by a_day_late at 12:24 PM on May 19, 2005

I think the Yes men are spooking corporate globalism.
posted by troutfishing at 8:21 PM on May 19, 2005

This is a very delayed response, but yes, of course I got the game. It's the bankers' total acceptance of said skeleton and logic that I'm mad about!
posted by acrobat at 3:33 AM on May 23, 2005

« Older Iran   |   The Map is the Territory Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments