Another trope that never gets old, it seems.

Many people have stopped going to McDonald's by the way. But not enough for McD to hurt.

Then what? What does our agency change in the world in this situation?

You are using cop-outs as well.

Cooking for yourself is a trope? You realise that's what most of the world does every day.

If making your own meals is literally out of your reach then I feel really sad for you. That must truly suck to be so dependent on companies just to eat...

Are you being obtuse on purpose or are you really desperate to "win" this debate?

EXTREMELY OBVIOUSLY I meant this part of your comment:

> As long as you keep signaling to MD that you'll tolerate more and more crap for lower prices, they happily oblige.

That is the trope many use, yourself included. A lot of people signal their displeasure with various status quo. Still nothing changes. I wonder how does the one-dimensional quote above addresses the messy and complex real world out there.

Sorry, it wasn't obvious to me. I misread your point.

I'm not really trying to "win" anything. I'm telling you that you have agency. Whether that means anything to you, or if you do anything with it, I guess that's up to you.

Personally I'm not looking for my agency to change anyone else or how any company behaves. I don't do it for them, I do it for me.

I choose to support companies that align with my requirements. If a company makes me feel like crap I go elsewhere. I'm not out to change the world, just choose how I live in it.

Now I look like an a-hole! :D

It's OK, of course, and yes I take a number of stances out there by supporting one and not supporting another, company.

My point however was that nowadays that's mostly a feel-good measure. Not the unquestionable actual agency many make it out to be.

Do you grow 100% of your own food? It may be helpful for your understanding (and this conversation) to get off the high horse and realise that you're also dependent on companies "just to eat".

I never said I wasn't dependent on companies. I very much am. For everything. But I have choices and, when I gave the opportunity, I make those choices meaningfully.

For example, I don't much care for the McDonald's experience, so I go elsewhere. Indeed on occasion I find going 'nowhere' to be preferable if there's no alternative. I haven't been to MD in 30 years.

I'm not trying to be on a high horse. I follow a path that works for me, and I don't complain about it. You choose the path that works best for you.

I think I understand you: everyone at the bottom end of society should just have more money or more personal time, or both. I wonder how we could make that happen.

Different people are in different places. And obviously some people have been fortunate enough to have choices, and some do not.

I would assume that most people in this thread are not working 3 jobs to survive etc. My context is not their context.

I'd also guess they are far less invested in concepts like whether or not the server offers fries with that. In my long ago, limited experience, I couldn't have cared less about how many adverts there were, there were more pressing things to worry about.

Back to your point - I choose personal time over more money. My spending is modest, my income is likely much lower than most here. Frankly I have more than enough. Living is a lot cheaper when the goal isn't money.