Its simple, capitalism treats the consumer like cattle, and the optimization of profit drives them to replace real quality products with cheaper and cheaper substitutes over time until you're expected to bite into that tire and go "wow, this chicken is delicious"
Well, everything is learned in comparison. I lived in USSR, and that OP meme for USSR would be just an empty frame. At least under capitalism there is this wealth that is being transferred and if it is democratic capitalism then a safety net can be created to correct for capitalism failures.
Capitalism is also highly adept at taking the credit for the inventions and innovations of talented engineers and other scientists.
(Pictured: a now deceased deadbeat dad/marketer/capitalist/new age medicine enthusiast who never invented anything, but sure did enjoy wearing turtlenecks)
I can't find it anymore, but there was an excellent Youtube vid or podcast about the components and integrations of an iPhone and how almost none of them were new inventions even though their particular use was patented by Apple, and they were in fact mostly publicly funded projects! University grants, AR&D defense contracts, infrastructure allocations, open source, etc.
GPS, touchscreen, LCDs, cell networks, HTTP, GPS, IMUs, basically every file format on the thing aside from distribution formats, much of the SDK and the foundations of the IDE.
Capitalism does not foster innovation. It fosters opportunism. The public sector takes the 1-in-a-million risk inventing something like HTTP, and carefully nurses small saplings into a sprawling fruit-bearing orchard, then the private sector comes along and harvests it, taking credit for inventing the apple. (Pun intended)
Capitalism only ever optimizes along the "maximum profitability for the seller" axis, and buyers only ever benefit if there is a ton of competition and it's a low brand recognition domain (otherwise the profitavility optimization mostly just ends up influencing marketing, not price or quality) and only ever whilst said situation lasts (the profit optimization will also tend to end high-competition low brand recognition situations if possible as that's not optimal for profitability).
Optimization is only a guaranteed good thing for those who benefit ftom what is deemed the optimal state or direction of improvement and in Capitalism that's the ones taking the profits.
Huh... good point, i didnt think about it like that, and it kinda does bring the whole post down into something like "old man yells at cloud" kinda thing but with the twist being more like "Young snowflake yells at chicken burger".
But i think the point being made in the meme its still valid, that being the chase for infinte grow doesnt really promote innovation, instead it just promotes copying what already works while not really improving the thing and not making peoples lifes better, and that they would rather do that than to invest into something that could make peoples lifes better because that wouldnt make as much money ore would be to risky, but i feel like this is more aplicable into artistic industries like movies and music or even with tech industries, while in gastronomy it really is just offers more variety, otherwise what? You would have to get the same chicken burger from the same corporation and thats monopoly and its bad. Probably a better example would have been with smartphones, specially the apple ones.
Sorry for the rant btw, i just got al this realizations in my brain and had to dump them somewhere.
Even though I disagree with the statement "capitalism breeds innovation", this is poor way to demonstrate that it's bullshit.
Of course a chicken sandwich isn't going to appear fundamentally different from Popeyes to KFC. They're also not the only items that these restaurants sell.
The idea is that these restaurants exist as some kind of better option over a local mom & pop sandwich joint with higher unit overhead. Whether or not the value proposition is sufficient for you is personal.
It's also an example of something capitalism does well. Those chicken sandwiches are not interchangeable, and you can buy the one that best suits your taste and budget, plus competition generally keeps the quality pretty good.
Capitalism ruins a hell of a lot of things that really matter, but not chicken sandwiches.
Exactly. I'm as "last stage capitalism" as they come (okay maybe not extreme) but this image is a terrible take.
All those varieties saw a market that demanded a product. Companies innovated and are selling the products and making a profit.
I feel like the OP missed the point. A better example would be to show pure monopolies like ISPs. The fact we're paying hand over fist for subpar internet is an example of innovation not working.
See, unfettered capitalism is completely fucked, but this is a bad example. It would be like getting a bunch of different coffee brands and putting them together like this and saying the same thing.
Coffee is coffee.
Chicken Sandwiches are chicken sandwiches.
There are bigger issues with capitalism that are worth discussing instead
I don't get it, how much can you possibly do to differentiate a chicken sandwich? There's plenty of issues to discuss but you can do better than this, come on.
Fast food has a lot more competitive aspects than just the actual food, marketing, other unique products to draw customers in, location, branding, kitchen effiency, customer retention, franchising structure, ingredient sourcing. The public facing stuff is also the easiest to copy so that's why a lot of those things are similar.
It's an illusion of choice. You've got eight different corporations spending billions of dollars in "Pick Me!" marketing campaigns, but its all just the same sad looking chicken sandwich.
that's not fair! our sandwich has a sauce that is formulated to be the closest we can get to chemically addictive without the FDA nuking our headquarters!
They taste distinctly different. I like spicy chicken sandwiches so I've tried a couple of these. Burger King's tastes like they just slapped a bunch of ingredients together and wrapped it up. McDonald's actually tastes and feels like a chicken sandwich. Popeye's has a very buttery mouth feel, and the bun is a lot more flavorful and rich.
I get what the meme is trying to say, but this is a poor example of it.
Capitalism (here meaning a market economy dominated by a powerful investor class) breeds a dozen different companies trying to differentiate themselves with minor variations. Sometimes those variations lead to actual, legitimate improvements that are then spread throughout the industry.
Most of the time it just leads to one wondering what the fuck the difference is between 'Cheerios' and 'Cheery Os' in the cereal aisle at the grocery store.
Well, pardner, gather 'round and let me spin ya a yarn about Wendy's spicy chicken sandwich. Now, this here sandwich, it ain't no newfangled creation. No siree, it's been around for a long time.
Back in the days when the sun beat down on dusty trails and tumbleweeds rolled through the town, folks would mosey on over to Wendy's for a taste of that spicy chicken goodness. The sandwich had a kick to it, a real fiery flavor that could wake a sleepy cowboy right up.
They say the recipe was a closely guarded secret, passed down through generations of Wendy's cooks. The chicken was crispy, the spices were just right, and the bun, well, it held it all together like a trusty steed on a rough ride.
Folks from far and wide would ride in from all corners of the territory just to sink their teeth into one of them spicy chicken sandwiches. It became a legend in these parts, a symbol of good eatin' and a taste of the wild, wild west.
So, next time you saunter on down to Wendy's and order yourself a spicy chicken sandwich, remember, you're tappin' into a taste of history, partner. It's been around for a long time, and it's still kickin' to this very day.
I've always had a soft spot for Wendy's chicken sandwich and I can confidently say they didn't even try to change anything when the Great Chicken Wars started.
Popeyes putting their fried chicken on Brioche with a decent sauce was an innovation, at least for fast food. It was sold out at most locations in CA when it launched. The BK and KFC both copied it.
Meh I would love some of the more affordable models to hit we need to relax Tariffs to allow for more choice, and more affordable batteries, because the US is trying to manifest a battery industry out of thin air, and the players that have the more innovative products aren't getting funding. I like how the Chinese are able to buy as much car as they can afford with the amount of volume
CAFE standards are pushing the industry towards large wheelbase vehicles, which are not required to be nearly as efficient as small wheelbase vehicles. It costs money to make a vehicle more fuel efficient, and it costs money for an automaker to put a serious EV program into place (not just "here's one EV that can't compete with Tesla and China, which we will cancel in a year, please buy the SUVs instead").
Turning up that serious EV production requires a long term committment, long term investment, and a willingness to wait beyond the next two quarters for the return on that investment.
There are few memes I actively dislike. This is one of them. Like, where's the joke? Am I supposed to laugh at a remark that annoying nazi kid in your class make because they think it makes them look smart? Like even the base premise is abusive and shitty.
Capitalism takes innovation and beats the life out of it to flog the corpse for a quick buck. The thing that made KFC special wasn't the blend of herbs and spices (that they don't even fucking use anymore and you used to be able to buy ready mixed at the shops) it was the new innovative cooking technique that they immediately tossed in the trash because it was cheaper to just throw it all in a deep frier like everyone already did.
Maybe it's because this is posted in c/politicalmemes but I think y'all are thinking to deeply about something that should be a mild chuckle and then moving on.
I think you're all missing the point, half of these places were known for hamburgers, the other half for whole pieces of fried chicken. They all ended up with slight variations on the same product. The point isn't that they should've innovated the chicken sandwich it's that they all ended up with the same product, the opposite of innovation in a market full of restaurants.
In the real world, people often eat in groups. Some overlap is to be expected, especially when what is really being sold isn't a chicken sandwich, it's addictive convenient food.
I realized this a couple of days ago when we were in a rush to be somewhere and thought to just go for fastfood drive-thru to eat. Asked my wife what she liked and she said not a burger. Every fastfood drive-thru I could think of was a burger/sandwich except for taco bell.
For me it's all the snack combinations coming out, like cool ranch Lay's. Between that and all the remakes and reboots it's like consumer culture is eating itself.
There is no innovation; everyone is just copying everyone else. And this is with current regulations. Without them, even more blatant copying trying to capitalize on others success would be much more prevalent. Not to mention all the false advertising and straight up scams.
Am I the only one who thinks the Popeyes sandwich is the greasiest fuckin thing ever? Everyone raved about it but I couldn't finish it, I really gave it an honest try. It was gross.
Innovation just get you to the point of being large enough to stop innovating and focus entirely on maximizing profitability which is done by maximizing your appeal to the lowest common denominator.
You could easily make a similar meme using cell phones and the "innovations" of everyone copying Apple (which often just copied someone else), especially on stuff that's stupid, like removing the headphone jack, gluing the back to make changing battery a hassle, thinness being good for whatever reason.
I must be missing something here, because I've had Popeye's and it's just a chicken sandwich like all the others. It's not like they're making it from scratch like they would at some small business.
Yeah, but the difference between the Popeyes chicken sandwich and the best chicken sandwich I've ever had is not a lot, and the difference between the Popeyes chicken sandwich and that overcooked piece of breaded leather from McDonalds is fucking lightyears.
I love having all of these because if my wife wants x fast food I get x chicken sandwich all in one stop. Some of them are much much better than others. If you add "spicy" to it then the whole tier arrangement changes as well.
But I really dont see why anyone is complaining that more places have good chicken sandwiches. Seems like an odd things to hate on IMO.
How are you support to innovate a sandwich? The only diffrence is the quality of taste, and even then it's still all fast food, so it's no less good/bad than the others.
I love the mobile game version of this because it shows how everyone just rips each other off. This is more of an example of food companies optimizing a tried and true formula.
Listen, on the one hand, yes. On the other hand, I believe that Chick Fil A originally commercialized the fast food fried chicken sandwich, and their chicken sandwich sucks. So in this one specific instance, I am grateful.
Having lots of options for chicken sandwiches doesn't seem to be a problem with capitalism, and one could always decline to eat a chicken sandwich, or make your own. Wealth inequality and special interests controlling the government are much more of a problem.
In America maybe. In the rest of the world, a sandwich is something between two slices of bread. Something between two halves of a bun or roll is a 'roll' or a 'burger'.
When they first launched Zaxby's chicken sandwich was great. Massive breast, crispy breading, high quality bun, and well seasoned. The reality has since caught up with it.
I make a mean chicken sandwich at home, by foregoing the traditional southern fried style for a katsu style.