Clearly these are the cons. but I don t think not buy is the solution. and clearly you are biased cause you don t mention the pros. the way to remedy your problems are not "not shop" "sabotage" etc
1. AMERICAN WAL-MART EMPLOYEES ARE EXPLOITED:
-these employees are free to choose another employer. If they are not able to find another employer it means they lack skills bla bla. this is their market price.
2. WAL-MART'S LOW PRICES ARE THE RESULT OF HUMAN MISERY:
if wal mart did not pay those cents they would get even less. or nothing. again this is the market. and it is also happening because chinese are not yet skilled enough as a people. so we don t have to pay as much for their work as for american work
3. WAL-MART FORCES ITS UNETHICAL PRACTICES ON ITS 65,000 SUPPLIERS:
I guess you could easily see the benefit for the consumer of this one: better price right? what do you ask when you enter in a store?
4. WAL-MART DESTROYS LOCAL COMMUNITIES:
this is to complicate to demonstrate that it s wrong, but trust me, it is
as an example: how the hell could you say tthat 3 jobs are better than 2 jobs to do the same one thing? it occupies a "1 man resource" for nothing. this man can contribute to the society with something else (of course if he has the determination to learn something)get a grip!
5. WAL-MART IS NOT ACCOUNTABLE:
this again is not solved by destroying wal mart. this is a very negative and false argument: "don t buy from wall mart because they are not accountable..." - think what happens after destroying wall mart. the problem JUST moves to some other retailer. you have to fix the problem some other way: regulatory, lobby, bla bla
really unbelievable. imagine you go to a book store/library/other place and BEFORE you buy/use a book you have to check a catalogue to see if the book is copyrighted or not!
really funny! really pathetic is what you say and the rest of RIIA keep-all-the-stolen-from-us-money arguments
I think this is the most ridiculous RIAA initiative ever. Would you vote for yes?
Next could be: The starving manager! or The starving XXth century owner! or what?
Methinks
Slashdot Mirror
Clearly these are the cons. but I don t think not buy is the solution. and clearly you are biased cause you don t mention the pros. the way to remedy your problems are not "not shop" "sabotage" etc 1. AMERICAN WAL-MART EMPLOYEES ARE EXPLOITED: -these employees are free to choose another employer. If they are not able to find another employer it means they lack skills bla bla. this is their market price. 2. WAL-MART'S LOW PRICES ARE THE RESULT OF HUMAN MISERY: if wal mart did not pay those cents they would get even less. or nothing. again this is the market. and it is also happening because chinese are not yet skilled enough as a people. so we don t have to pay as much for their work as for american work 3. WAL-MART FORCES ITS UNETHICAL PRACTICES ON ITS 65,000 SUPPLIERS: I guess you could easily see the benefit for the consumer of this one: better price right? what do you ask when you enter in a store? 4. WAL-MART DESTROYS LOCAL COMMUNITIES: this is to complicate to demonstrate that it s wrong, but trust me, it is as an example: how the hell could you say tthat 3 jobs are better than 2 jobs to do the same one thing? it occupies a "1 man resource" for nothing. this man can contribute to the society with something else (of course if he has the determination to learn something)get a grip! 5. WAL-MART IS NOT ACCOUNTABLE: this again is not solved by destroying wal mart. this is a very negative and false argument: "don t buy from wall mart because they are not accountable..." - think what happens after destroying wall mart. the problem JUST moves to some other retailer. you have to fix the problem some other way: regulatory, lobby, bla bla
really unbelievable. imagine you go to a book store/library/other place and BEFORE you buy/use a book you have to check a catalogue to see if the book is copyrighted or not! really funny! really pathetic is what you say and the rest of RIIA keep-all-the-stolen-from-us-money arguments
I think this is the most ridiculous RIAA initiative ever. Would you vote for yes? Next could be: The starving manager! or The starving XXth century owner! or what? Methinks