Do you think Wal-Mart is evil?
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Sunday, November 27, 2005 20:12
VIEWED: 21084
PAGE 5 of 17
Size does matter.
Naturally in competition, monopolies are bad. But in general, capitalist enterprises which are specialized always tend to fair better in the truly long term, which I guess lends hope.
Basically, what I see when I see Walmart is the old Soviet GUM store. I would concede that in some ways it's worse than its socialist equivalent because of the labor law abuses, but overall it's at least just as bad as the GUM for the same reasons. In a way, it IS the GUM, just the Chinese GUM for America. And Europe. I'm going to stick with my initial kill it quick plan.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I agree with chris that Wal-Mart has lost its personal appeal, which I think was pivotal in giving it the edge over major competitors like K-Mart. Wal-Mart had somewhat of a wholesome down-home American-made appeal to it. To a large extent that appearance is being peeled away for a lot of reasons. Part of it is just the bureaucracy of large corporations which tend to be very impersonal and part of it is a politically correct response to attacks, which almost seem political in nature. I think some of it comes from anti-Americanism or resentment of American Capitalism, which often takes the shape of questionable accusations of some kind of American imperialism endemic in American cultural aspects like fast food and super department stores. Wal-Mart seems to be trying to please everyone and that degree acquiescence might be the nail in its coffin. A recent bit of bad publicity traveling around here has a lot of people not very happy with Wal-Mart. Whatever the root causes, Wal-Mart has definitely lost its small-town appeal from my vantage.
-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreamtrove:
1. Walmart is socialist I'm sorry some people are too dumb to recognize the identical idea (socialism) in corporation form. I won't argue it either, it's too obvious, and I'm not defending my position re: socialism is evil. It kills. End of story.
Whatever, thanks for the insult, I underlined it so you couldn't tell me you weren't going for the insult.
As for Wal-Mart being Socialist, it's obvious alright:
You don't like Wal-Mart, you don't like Socialism, ergo Wal-Mart is socialist.
Capitalism is evil for the exact same criteria you give for socialism being evil.
I don't think either are evil per-se, and I know Wal-Mart isn't socialist, not unless you redefine socialism to "anything evil".
But whatever, I haven't the energy to get into another flame war with you.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you Beeeer Milkshakes!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I agree with chris that Wal-Mart has lost its personal appeal, which I think was pivotal in giving it the edge over major competitors like K-Mart.
I doubt that the people who benefit most from Wal-Mart's end focus - lower prices for everyday doodads - see it the same way or even have a clue about their "practices" overseas. They just want one place with a lot of cheap stuff and damn the torpedoes.
Speaking of walking a mile in someone else's shoes, how about figuring out how to get clothes and basic living goods for your 3 kids on $1500 a month, combined take home. Hello Wal-Mart. Isn't there something just a little admirable in their business plan of trying to meet the needs of the lower income?
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.net
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
And God forbid the people running the company get up off their warm leather chairs long enough to actually SEE their stores and how they run and meet the people who work good portions of their lives for them. Warm and fuzzy isn't part of the oversized corporate/computerized culture, where hands-on is only at its' lowest level.
I read where Ken Lay was actually pretty good at walking amongst Enron's employees and chatting and pressing the flesh and being the nice guy, well liked even. *Insert recent history here*
Also, I seriously doubt you really believe that all exec types do is warm their leather chairs. If so, please re-read ALL of the memo again - there'a lot of time and hard work in there.
"Hello Real World - Goodbye Expectations!" Euripides, from "The Daily Theogonist."
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.net
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I’m not disagreeing with you. I certainly see the value in it. In fact, I see Wal-Mart as an example of how capitalism provides opportunity for the lower income as well as the higher income. It is an example of functional capitalism. The kind of thing the Marx claimed could never exist. And I think you’re right, that those who do shop there, particularly those with low incomes, probably don’t pay as much attention to the politics as those who don’t shop there. Nonetheless, if the image of Wal-Mart becomes too impersonal or they get an image of being “anti-Christmas,” people will begin to stop shopping there. Having cheap goods will only keep your store in business until your competitors lowers their prices, then you need something else. A good example is K-mart, which has been put out of business all the over the country by Wal-Mart, yet you can generally get merchandize cheaper at K-Mart. When one buys cheap merchandize, one wishes to feel that the seller has their best interests at heart, because otherwise the “you get what you pay for” axiom comes into play. It was service and friendliness that gave Wal-Mart the advantage over K-Mar, not prices. It’s not all just about money; there is some psychology to it. People may not necessarily care about the politics, but if Wal-Mart, through some politically correct policy, begins to distance itself from the culture of the people it is serving, those people may began to view Wal-Mart as impersonal or foreign. And this something Wal-Mart would do well to avoid.
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
I doubt that the people who benefit most from Wal-Mart's end focus - lower prices for everyday doodads - see it the same way or even have a clue about their "practices" overseas. They just want one place with a lot of cheap stuff and damn the torpedoes.
Speaking of walking a mile in someone else's shoes, how about figuring out how to get clothes and basic living goods for your 3 kids on $1500 a month, combined take home. Hello Wal-Mart. Isn't there something just a little admirable in their business plan of trying to meet the needs of the lower income?
-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, Citizen, don't be an ass. I told you why walmart is socialist.
It is majorly f^&king offensively insulting that you say " oh DT hates socialism and Walmart and that's why he lies"
Well, I said exactly why I hate walmart because it has all these features of the other thing I hate, socialism, like being part of a big commie plot.
The insult was meant for fletch, not you.
Nothing personal fletch, just the same I just said here. Walmart:socialism parallel is totally valid, via four things 1) the top down angle 2) the no competitition angle,. 3) the Soviet GUM store angle and 4) the communist china angle.
You people already know someone else posted 'bin laden is a socialist' and I shot it down. I'll shoot down any generic 'evil' is a socialist. The label only belongs on socialist evils.
I still don't get why people stick to an ideology that seems clearly responsible for most of the world's genocide. Even today.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
A good example is K-mart, which has been put out of business all the over the country by Wal-Mart, yet you can generally get merchandize cheaper at K-Mart.
I would peg K-Mart's failure with their confusing marketing strategy. Instead of going "rock bottom" like Wal-Mart, they went middling faux upscale with Martha Stewart Linens. That moved them away from low income families to the realm that Target owns (Target has Robert Graves' designed toasters for God sakes! How'd they pull that off?!). K-Mart may be cheaper, but that's not the public's perception by their own doing.
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
When one buys cheap merchandize, one wishes to feel that the seller has their best interests at heart, because otherwise the “you get what you pay for” axiom comes into play.
I politely beg to differ. When one buys cheap merchandise one wants the cheapest friggin' price - period. They'll sort out "quality" once they get it home. If there was "do the right thing" surcharge at the cash register of 10% ("S'cuze me ma'am, this coffee maker was made by Chinese prisoners, would you like to donate an extra $2 dollars to help prevent the US from importing cheap goods made by unfree citizens of foreign countries?") how many would pay it?
"Naw, pass for now, just give me the toaster."
"Sorry, management makes me ask."
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.net
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreamtrove:
I told you why walmart is socialist.
I'm not really sure you have, I haven't seen a clear reasoning of Socialism wants this, and so does Wal-Mart.
All corporations want a monopoly, it's good for business. Microsoft, the one or two car companies left in the world (you can literally count them on your fingers) are symptoms of this.
What company wouldn't want to charge what it likes safe in the knowledge that the customers won't go anywhere else, because they can't.
This is where capitalism leads, it's not a part of some Socialist Commie pinko plot, It's where capitalism takes us, and I can give you reason after reason why this is so.
Say Socialism is an unworkable system, by all means, it's true. But to say it's evil, and too start apportioning blame to Socialism for things that have nothing to do with it?
Capitalism is also unworkable as a system. Neither Socialism or Capitalism has ever been implemented, you will not find a state that is or was pure Socialist nor pure Capitalist.
Quote:
It is majorly f^&king offensively insulting that you say " oh DT hates socialism and Walmart and that's why he lies"
I never said you lied, I'm sure you believe everything you're saying, ergo not lying. I also think your logic is flawed on this issue.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you Beeeer Milkshakes!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I don’t remember seeing the Martha Stuart stuff until K-Mart was already pretty much out of business around here, so I think that is an effort by K-Mart to change their base. I think they had pretty much accepted defeat at the hands of Wal-Mart by then.
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
I would peg K-Mart's failure with their confusing marketing strategy. Instead of going "rock bottom" like Wal-Mart, they went middling faux upscale with Martha Stewart Linens. That moved them away from low income families to the realm that Target owns (Target has Robert Graves' designed toasters for God sakes! How'd they pull that off?!). K-Mart may be cheaper, but that's not the public's perception by their own doing.
Quote:I think your confusing too different things. I’m not talking about the Chinese human rights issues, which contrary to popular belief, are the fault of the Chinese not Wal-Mart. What I’m saying is that people want to feel good about their purchase, and if they don’t trust the seller they will be inclined to stray. In spite of how it may look, Wal-Mart does not have a monopoly, and competition is actually very fierce. For instance, if you can buy baby clothes at store A and store B at the same price, you’re going to go to the one that is most convenient or that you trust, but the price means nothing, because you’re going to pay the same either way. It doesn’t make any difference to you. You will probably not even be aware that you chose one over the other, but it will felt by both store A and store B, because one will get your business while the other will not.
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
I politely beg to differ. When one buys cheap merchandise one wants the cheapest friggin' price - period. They'll sort out "quality" once they get it home. If there was "do the right thing" surcharge at the cash register of 10% ("S'cuze me ma'am, this coffee maker was made by Chinese prisoners, would you like to donate an extra $2 dollars to help prevent the US from importing cheap goods made by unfree citizens of foreign countries?") how many would pay it?
"Naw, pass for now, just give me the toaster."
"Sorry, management makes me ask."
“Because they know all they solda ya was a guaranteed piece of shit. That's all it is. Hey, if you want me to take a dump in a box and mark it guaranteed, I will. I got spare time. But for right now, for your sake, for your daughter's sake, ya might wanna think about buying a quality item from me.”
- - Tommy Callahan, Callahan Auto Parts.
-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME