Jeffrey Shaw Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 A though re the Olympics 2012. Its website tells us this: Worldwide partners: Coca Cola, Acer, Atos Origin, GE, McDonald’s, Omega, Panasonic, Samsung, Visa London 2012 Official Partners: adidas, BP, British Airways, BT, EDF Energy, Lloyds TSB, Nortel London 2012 Official Supporters: Deloitte, Cadbury So one way of objecting to the entire hoo-hah would be to support and patronise firms that are rivals to those: e.g. Pepsi-Cola [not Coca-Cola], Mastercard [not Visa], Shell [not BP], etc. Yes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Why would you do that? Surely there are bigger issues in the world than the Olympics. You don't even live in London do you? You can just turn the TV off if you want to ignore it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted June 18, 2012 Author Share Posted June 18, 2012 True; but, just like you, I'm a taxpayer. It's much less possible to opt-out of that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 It's possible to opt out of a pointless boycott that only you will join & is only going to cost you more money, or leave you without. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted June 18, 2012 Author Share Posted June 18, 2012 Example: Visa has demanded (and LOCOG has cravenly agreed) that all Mastercard payments be rejected a the Games and that all Mastercard ATMs be disabled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 It'll cost the UK taxpayer about the same as the extra revenue it brings into the UK economy. Less than 10% of the most recent bank bailout. Are you boycotting banks too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted June 18, 2012 Author Share Posted June 18, 2012 Money spent by UK citizens is NOT extra revenue [brought] into the UK economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Money that people spend is another persons revenue, that's how the economy works. If they wouldn't have spent that money otherwise then it is indeed extra revenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted June 18, 2012 Author Share Posted June 18, 2012 Yet one cannot spend what what does not have. It's excess borrowing that caused many of the UK's problems! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 I listened to a R4 programme recently which almost temps me to join this pointless boycott. The International Olympic Committee are so protective of their brand, that they were taking legal action against many schools and local groups from using the word "Olympic" in their events. So, for example, schools renaming their sports days as "Olympic Sports Day" to encourage a feeling of participation were being prevented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.