Tag: capitalism

  • Food watchdog lodges complaint over Nestle mineral water ‘fraud’

    Food watchdog lodges complaint over Nestle mineral water ‘fraud’

    Paris, France – Consumer watchdog Foodwatch said it was filing a legal complaint Wednesday against food giant Nestle and another group over them allegedly fraudulently treating water for their top mineral water brands.

    A government probe reported by media last month said about 30 percent of mineral water sold in France had undergone purification treatment only meant to be used on tap water.

    Foodwatch said it was lodging its complaint with a Paris court against Nestle Waters, behind brands such as Perrier and Vittel, and the Sources Alma group, which also owns several water labels.

    “This is a massive fraud for which Nestle Waters, the Sources Alma group and the French government must answer,” the European watchdog said.

    “Nobody, not even a multinational like Nestle, is above the law,” Foodwatch spokeswoman Ingrid Kragl said.

    The NGO claimed Nestle Waters and Sources Alma had “illegally processed their bottled waters and then sold them without informing consumers”.

    French law, based on a European Union directive, forbids such purification of mineral water, which is supposed to be of naturally high quality before bottling.

    French prosecutors last month said they had opened an investigation into suspected fraud by Nestle Waters after a complaint by France’s ARS health regulator.

    They spoke after Le Monde and Radio France reported that a government investigation had concluded in 2022 that “almost 30 percent of commercial brands undergo non-compliant treatments”.

    Nestle Waters said it put some top brands, such as Perrier and Vittel, through ultraviolet light and active carbon filters “to guarantee food safety”, and had informed French authorities about this in 2021.

    A government source told AFP that authorities had found “no health risk” linked to the bottled water.

    Foodwatch said it had also written to the European Commission, denouncing “the complacency of France, which… should have alerted European authorities and the other member states importing these waters”.

    max/spb/ah/rl

    © Agence France-Presse

  • American entrepreneur paying $4 per hour criticised for exploiting Pakistanis

    American entrepreneur paying $4 per hour criticised for exploiting Pakistanis

    A video shared on X (formerly Twitter) on Sunday is being criticised by users. The video, which features an X user named Christian, says that he remotely hires people from Pakistan to work for him.

    He has a marketing agency and he stated he pays his employees $4 an hour and “they’re extremely grateful to be working with me”.

    Christian explains that he hires a virtual assistant from Pakistan for administrative level tasks for his business like formatting spreadsheets, setting up email accounts and pays them 4 USD an hour.

    He justifies the meagre amount by expounding that an average monthly income in Pakistan is 280 USD, but as he is paying them four USD an hour, they are getting 160 USD a week or 640 USD a month, which is almost 3 times the average income, “a really great living for them”, he adds.

    “They live very very well.”

    He also added that if they perform well, the pay can be raised up to $7 an hour which is 4-6 times the average monthly income of a typical person in Pakistan.

    “They’re really grateful to be working with me because of the money they make. They have a great income, I get a great employee — it’s a win win.”

    He, however, concluded the video keeping in mind the expected criticism;

    “Before you leave a comment, yes i have US based employees. Yes, they make way more than $4 an hour. I’m just saying for this specific task, I pay a Pakistani assistant $4 an hour and they are very appreciative of it.”

    While some appreciated his work, many have criticised him for exploiting people from developing countries by paying them less than those from developed countries.

  • The Common Good

    “Pure capitalism is basically selfish in nature and it leads to a particular attitude in the rich — that they deserve to be wealthy and the poor are poor because they are either lazy or stupid or both — or else because they are just an ‘inferior species’.”

    A friend in Karachi describes the unease that fills shoppers at an affluent Karachi supermarket when they step out of the store laden with as much as they can buy amid the coronavirus lockdown. They are faced with the sight of desperate day labourers standing outside staring quietly as they load bags of food supplies into their cars. The labourers hold the tools of their trade — shovels and pickaxes — and to the affluent shoppers, these now appear to be dangerous weapons.

    “They are starving,” says my friend, “their families don’t have food, they could be driven to despair and could easily attack shoppers to get food”.

    The public response to the crisis has been impressive in Pakistan, but can such efforts provide the scale of relief that is needed in a country where, according to a 2016 national assessment, almost 40 per cent of the population lives in poverty? People have donated generously to schemes that deliver basic rations to those in need and many organisations and individuals have mobilised their time and resources to feed the hungry but reports seem to indicate that this is proving woefully inadequate. The livelihood of so many households has been affected that the knock-on effect is totally devastating. Apart from those dependent on a daily wage, those running small business initiatives or taking on work outsourced from running businesses now have no work, no money and no food.

    And they are being told to stay in their homes and maintain social distancing in public places…

    In such circumstances, riots are a very real possibility. Not just in Pakistan but in other countries as well, particularly those with great social and economic inequality. And interestingly, it is this fear of unrest that is now leading many people to the realisation that depriving people of basic rights is not just an issue for the poor and oppressed but rather it is something that, eventually,  affects everybody — even the very rich and powerful. Pure capitalism is basically selfish in nature and it leads to a particular attitude in the rich — that they deserve to be wealthy and the poor are poor because they are either lazy or stupid or both — or else because they are just an ‘inferior species’.

    “For years the world has been veering towards a nasty form of capitalism in which the erosion of workers’ rights and social welfare is seen as an ‘efficient’ way to manage the economy. But the only thing it did efficiently was enriching and protecting a small minority that lived in a fortress bulwarked by wealth and privilege.”

    This basic lack of social empathy is rooted in the belief that wealth can buy you an island of privilege and anything outside the walls of this wealth is a) not your problem and b) does not affect you. Hence the attitude of the Pakistani glitterati, who spend millions on making their homes into palaces but then just tip their garbage onto the street corner instead of a bin; who spend thousands on fast food and designer outfits but are outraged when a staffer asks them for a salary of a few thousand rupees in advance. It is the same attitude that drives coalitions like the Conservative-LibDem one in the UK to close down public libraries or threaten the funding of the public service broadcaster. Instead of understanding that libraries and public service broadcasting can inform and educate, the attitude is that these are not essential as they have no tangible benefit i.e. profit. Public libraries, in particular, are essential to any civilised society as they provide access to learning, opportunity and advice and also provide resources like computers, printers and internet access.

    In Pakistan, schools and colleges with adequate resources have switched to online learning but what about all of those students from poorer institutions? And what about students who are expected to follow online curriculums but may not have a wifi connection or a laptop? The same question is relevant in the UK even though efforts are being made to cater to students with these sorts of disadvantages, many may fall through the cracks. Just a few months ago when the Labour Party announced a policy of free wifi for all in their election manifesto, the idea was widely derided, scoffed at and dismissed as ‘unworkable’, but now Jeremy Corbyn’s insistence that broadband access should be regarded as a basic right does not seem so ridiculous after all.

    For years the world has been veering towards a nasty form of capitalism in which the erosion of workers’ rights and social welfare is seen as an ‘efficient’ way to manage the economy. But the only thing it did efficiently was enriching and protecting a small minority that lived in a fortress bulwarked by wealth and privilege. But now a virus has illustrated that we are all connected. Ensuring access to basic rights and a proper welfare structure provides for a less insecure society and ‘feel good’ philanthropy and private charity or a mai baap approach to individual staff is simply not enough.

    Perhaps it’s time for all of us to embrace the idea of a socialist society, to recognise the importance of the dignity of labour and the protection of employee rights, to stop privatising and outsourcing and spending compulsively. It’s time for us to completely rethink the way we live.