-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Another Wal-Mart Rollback
- Thread starter Paul12
- Start date
HazyRigby
Bunny Infidel
- Aug 4, 2002
- 2,008
- 6
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Others
I don't shop at Wal-Mart, but for a different reason. Ever since they decided to stop selling certain magazines (and since they won't carry the Colorado Springs Independent because of its free-thinking slant), I decided that my money was better spent elsewhere. They can choose to carry whatever magazines they want, true, but I can choose to shop somewhere where the store doesn't presume to be preaching morals to its consumers.
Besides, every Wal-Mart I've ever been in has been a haven of sticky children running around the store, putting lollipop-covered hands on all of the merchandise and screaming their lungs out. I can live without that, thanks.
Besides, every Wal-Mart I've ever been in has been a haven of sticky children running around the store, putting lollipop-covered hands on all of the merchandise and screaming their lungs out. I can live without that, thanks.
Upvote
0
the Colonel
STARGATE SG-1!
- Oct 1, 2003
- 3,330
- 184
- 53
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Constitution
HazyRigby said:
LOL Yeah, my wife and I try to avoid Walmart like the plague. Once in a while, we buy certain items from there that are so much cheaper, but in general we shop elsewhere. It's always busy, and there are never enough lanes open.
It's very frustrating to shop at Walmart. There are much nicer places to shop.
Upvote
0
ZaraDurden
Comfortably Numb
- Aug 5, 2003
- 2,838
- 140
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Inspired
only hurts when I breathe
Jamin Chef said:
If they knew about the fact that the sub contractors were involved in illegal hiring practices, they are breaking several laws.
Wal-mart is already in a world of trouble with other pending suits
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/10/22/videogame.lawsuit.ap/index.html
A class action suit for gender discrimination
https://walmart.walmartclass.com/clients/walmart/
Selling dangerous products
http://www.cnn.com/2001/LAW/05/25/walmart.lawsuit/index.html
Upvote
0
burrow_owl
Senior Contributor
- Aug 17, 2003
- 8,561
- 381
- 48
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Walmart is very successful. What laws are they breaking? Should we put limits on success?
They aren't breaking any laws, but mere abstention from breaking laws doesn't necessarily mean they're acting in an ethical way, or in a way that helps America at large. The disagreement over wal-mart foregrounds a number of interesting issues: for example, by moving into a sector that has historically provided means for people to move into the middle-class (unionized grocery stores), wal-mart, assuming they're as successful in the grocer business as they are elsewhere, is going to shift a pretty big swath of people from the middle-class to the lower classes (since they'll make far less and have far fewer benefits).
Also, as a matter of public policy, should governments allow companies to move into their borders that effectively shift the responsibility and burden of providing health care from the company to the government?
Is saving money on groceries worth the attendant difficulties? It's a pretty interesting question.
They aren't breaking any laws, but mere abstention from breaking laws doesn't necessarily mean they're acting in an ethical way, or in a way that helps America at large. The disagreement over wal-mart foregrounds a number of interesting issues: for example, by moving into a sector that has historically provided means for people to move into the middle-class (unionized grocery stores), wal-mart, assuming they're as successful in the grocer business as they are elsewhere, is going to shift a pretty big swath of people from the middle-class to the lower classes (since they'll make far less and have far fewer benefits).
Also, as a matter of public policy, should governments allow companies to move into their borders that effectively shift the responsibility and burden of providing health care from the company to the government?
Is saving money on groceries worth the attendant difficulties? It's a pretty interesting question.
Upvote
0
ACougar
U.S. Army Retired
- Feb 7, 2003
- 16,795
- 1,295
- Faith
- Pagan
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
It's a very important question and one we should all be asking. Perhaps the governent should tax companies like Walmart more than companies that provide decent wages and benefits for thier workers.
burrow_owl said:
Upvote
0
Actually, wal-mart does break the law. Such as the use of illegal immigrants.
More disgusting, however, is their blatant violation of property rights. They go to small towns that are in desperate need of jobs and promise to open stores, if the local officals agree to abuse laws and property rights and throw home-owners off land. This allows Wal-mart of build stores in key locations for cheap. Most of the local governments can get away with it by enacting policies and legislation that allows for 'public good' projects... such as buying up homes and building an expressway in their place.
I wouldn't doubt there are a lot of 'campaign contributions' taking place as well. Wal-mart isn't about capitalistic success, but success based on breaking laws and getting advantages through illegal and pseudo-legal government polices.
More disgusting, however, is their blatant violation of property rights. They go to small towns that are in desperate need of jobs and promise to open stores, if the local officals agree to abuse laws and property rights and throw home-owners off land. This allows Wal-mart of build stores in key locations for cheap. Most of the local governments can get away with it by enacting policies and legislation that allows for 'public good' projects... such as buying up homes and building an expressway in their place.
I wouldn't doubt there are a lot of 'campaign contributions' taking place as well. Wal-mart isn't about capitalistic success, but success based on breaking laws and getting advantages through illegal and pseudo-legal government polices.
Upvote
0
I thought the main idea behind capitalism was competition. Walmart effectively snuffs out the competition. As long as people keep shopping there, they'll have no reason to improve their business ethics and as long as they keep putting other stores out of business, eventually they'll also have no reason to keep their prices low. Anyways, I've found that I get far better quality AND prices at small, locally owned stores than I do at any of the major retailers, including Walmart. You just have to know where to look.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
