legodavee123 wrote:I'm... not sure I understand your point. You think I was implying that they would try to pay their Danish workers $4/hour or something?
You said Lego's salary gap is much smaller than other companies like this...if that's true then any reasons why it would be smaller would be due to the market and laws in Denmark, not due to Lego's "kind heart".
If, by your logic, every company in the world is trying as hard as they can to maximize profits, and is stupid not to do so, the why wouldn't LEGO outsource more (or all!) of its plastics molding out of Denmark, which is probably one of the MOST expensive places to do the molding?
There are many possible reasons.....just think how expensive it would be to move factories to different continents. Plus if there is a noticable difference in quality, then Lego suddenly doesn't have a huge advantage over Megabloks...there are many outside variables to consider.
Others are more motivated by doing the right thing.
I don't want to go off on a tangent here (we can continue this in PM if you want) but first off, "right thing" is by opinion and second, outsourcing is just using an open market. It's just like trading. Choosing not to outsource just to help your local workers is like imposing tariffs/quotas on imports. Tariffs/quotas hurt your consumers MUCH more than they help your manufacturers (again, take economics....or PM for facts to back it up) not to mention you're also hurting the country you could be trading with. So, the "right thing", eventhough an opinion, would be regarded by most to outsource if it's cheaper. (when looking at the stats)
Unfortunately, people that are motivated by money are often more successful, and the companies that they run do better and get bigger than those with a more ethical focus. LEGO was one of the exceptions to that rule until around 2006 when they started changing their philosophy.
I totally disagree and I don't think you can keep making these assumptions without a single source to back any of it up. I think it's pretty safe to assume Lego has been a profit-maximizing business just like everyone else.
I don't mind people claiming that LEGO has capitalist practices. Of course they do. However, to call them "just as capitalist" I believe is inaccurate, and in my opinion, it makes LEGO out to be some sort of greedy bad guy-- or at least, just as much of a greedy bad guy as Walmart or Hasbro or McDonalds or what-have-you.
I don't know which news source gave you the idea that capitalism = "greedy bad guy" but again, you can believe Lego is run by Santa's Elves, but without any sources or data to back anything up, I don't see how those opinions have any merit in a debate.