Wal-Mart accused of consumer fraud

[gobdogman 0]

I love my fellow VJ members

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

Well he's certainly learned his lesson about the mob mentality here in OT....VJ....sheesh

watch it or i'll put tabasco in your prostate medicine

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Hehehe I read pages 1 2 and 3. then I skipped to 13. It was as though nothing happened in pages 4-12! Probably nothing did.

WalMart is bad

but i like low prices!

repeat 4895 times

The best post of this stinking thread so far.

Well he's certainly learned his lesson about the mob mentality here in OT....VJ....sheesh

watch it or i'll put tabasco in your prostate medicine

Just don't give me the jellied finger.

[Sinergy 3]

Well he's certainly learned his lesson about the mob mentality here in OT....VJ....sheesh

watch it or i'll put tabasco in your prostate medicine

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Well he's certainly learned his lesson about the mob mentality here in OT....VJ....sheesh

we haven't mobbed him

No, but you all sure know how to beat a dead horse.

...including Robert

Edited January 25, 2007 by Steven_and_Jinky

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I still think it’s a strange argument to make about personal morality as it pertains to people’s shopping preferences at one store, regardless of its business practices when the free market economy thrives largely at the expense of ethics and morality – and is generally parasitic in nature.

Everyone participates in this to some degree. I mean, look at big tobacco and big oil. What about pharmaceuticals? None of these industries are spotless, but neither (except for tobacco) are they optional, and I really can’t see someone risking their health to take a “moral” stand on the ethics of pharmaceutical research by refusing to use for example, a specific heart medication because you don’t agree with the research and development practices of the company who owns the patent.

There are really no grounds for “moral” superiority. I guess I just don’t understand the argument

[Robor007 0]

Well he's certainly learned his lesson about the mob mentality here in OT....VJ....sheesh

Indeed. The maturity of a some (not all) posters in this thread remind me of teenagers. What starts as intelligent debate quickly spins into 'us against them' and some have such think skin they feel the need to band together do defend each other. Waaaah, he made fun of our beloved WalMart. Waaaaaaa, he questioned my morals and values for shopping there. Now I'm offended... Waaaaahhhhh! You know what? The fact that you're so fanatical about defending your alleged morals/values should tell you something.

I'll close by saying I don't give a flying ** what you catty girls think of or say about me. After saying that I guess I'm never going to be welcome in your little sewing circle now. (deep sigh) Too bad. I was really looking forward to getting that pink sweater with a big 'R' on it. Now I am so sad. I don't know how life will go on... Not. Grow up and get a friggin' life girls.

[Fandango 1,439]

seriously, Robor have you even READ the replies or are you just doing a 'reply by number'?

So hrmm...disagree with incorrectly being called out as having 'lower morality' and if you speak out against that, you're

1) a mob mentality

2) catty

3) need a life

4) need to grow up

5) *fill in the blank*

if anyone's made this personal, it's you

Edited January 25, 2007 by LisaD

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I still think it’s a strange argument to make about personal morality as it pertains to people’s shopping preferences at one store, regardless of its business practices when the free market economy thrives largely at the expense of ethics and morality – and is generally parasitic in nature.

Everyone participates in this to some degree. I mean, look at big tobacco and big oil. What about pharmaceuticals? None of these industries are spotless, but neither (except for tobacco) are they optional, and I really can’t see someone risking their health to take a “moral” stand on the ethics of pharmaceutical research by refusing to use for example, a specific heart medication because you don’t agree with the research and development practices of the company who owns the patent.

There are really no grounds for “moral” superiority. I guess I just don’t understand the argument

Good point and well said. However, I don't think Robert expressed a moral superiority, we all make consumer choices for varities of reasons. FOF (Focus On The Family) likes to boycott Ford and Disney for providing benefits for their gay employee's partners and thousands of Americans will join them. I've seen a lot of posts against PETA (People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals) - even calling it a terrorist organization. Prior to the elections, both parties were engaged in a game of which candidate/party is more moral over another. Numerous posts have been made which express one person's moral or ethical convictions (Dogs being chained to stake for example) - is it not the basis for most opinions here? We all are making personal choices everyday - are they always ego centric or are they not also influenced by our sense of right and wrong?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I still think it’s a strange argument to make about personal morality as it pertains to people’s shopping preferences at one store, regardless of its business practices when the free market economy thrives largely at the expense of ethics and morality – and is generally parasitic in nature.

Everyone participates in this to some degree. I mean, look at big tobacco and big oil. What about pharmaceuticals? None of these industries are spotless, but neither (except for tobacco) are they optional, and I really can’t see someone risking their health to take a “moral” stand on the ethics of pharmaceutical research by refusing to use for example, a specific heart medication because you don’t agree with the research and development practices of the company who owns the patent.

There are really no grounds for “moral” superiority. I guess I just don’t understand the argument

Good point and well said. However, I don't think Robert expressed a moral superiority, we all make consumer choices for varities of reasons. FOF (Focus On The Family) likes to boycott Ford and Disney for providing benefits for their gay employee's partners and thousands of Americans will join them. I've seen a lot of posts against PETA (People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals) - even calling it a terrorist organization. Prior to the elections, both parties were engaged in a game of which candidate/party is more moral over another. Numerous posts have been made which express one person's moral or ethical convictions (Dogs being chained to stake for example) - is it not the basis for most opinions here? We all are making personal choices everyday - are they always ego centric or are they not also influenced by our sense of right and wrong?

There's nothing wrong with taking a principled stand against a particular company whose business activities you disagree with. Still you're on shaky ground if you try to project that moral stand on everyone else and use it as a basis for impugning them for "putting price/convenience above morals". As I said, if you buy almost any mass produced consumer product you're participating in a corporate system that does precisely that.

So is it really justifiable to say that someone who refuses to buy or consume Coca Cola products (for the huge range of criticisms against that company) is any less moral than someone who refuses to shop at Walmart but has no problem buying Coca Cola?

Edited January 25, 2007 by erekose

[Henia 11]

Not that I am saying Walmart is right, but even with all the *bad* things Walmart is doing... Let's face it people are still shopping there. And more and more Walmarts are opening all over the US and worldwide. In my neighorhood, there has been a 4 year battle whether to open or not open a Super Walmart. One side says the community needs the extra renvenue, the other says the company will bring the downfall of the community's economy, the "traffic" would only cause trouble, distrub the quiteness of the community. Criticisms of Walmart go from this new mislabeling of organic products, treatment of the workers, foreign made products and the impact that Walmart leaves in the communities it builds new stores in.

WakeupWalmart

Edited January 26, 2007 by Henia

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I still think it’s a strange argument to make about personal morality as it pertains to people’s shopping preferences at one store, regardless of its business practices when the free market economy thrives largely at the expense of ethics and morality – and is generally parasitic in nature.

Everyone participates in this to some degree. I mean, look at big tobacco and big oil. What about pharmaceuticals? None of these industries are spotless, but neither (except for tobacco) are they optional, and I really can’t see someone risking their health to take a “moral” stand on the ethics of pharmaceutical research by refusing to use for example, a specific heart medication because you don’t agree with the research and development practices of the company who owns the patent.

There are really no grounds for “moral” superiority. I guess I just don’t understand the argument

Good point and well said. However, I don't think Robert expressed a moral superiority, we all make consumer choices for varities of reasons. FOF (Focus On The Family) likes to boycott Ford and Disney for providing benefits for their gay employee's partners and thousands of Americans will join them. I've seen a lot of posts against PETA (People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals) - even calling it a terrorist organization. Prior to the elections, both parties were engaged in a game of which candidate/party is more moral over another. Numerous posts have been made which express one person's moral or ethical convictions (Dogs being chained to stake for example) - is it not the basis for most opinions here? We all are making personal choices everyday - are they always ego centric or are they not also influenced by our sense of right and wrong?

There's nothing wrong with taking a principled stand against a particular company whose business activities you disagree with. Still you're on shaky ground if you try to project that moral stand on everyone else and use it as a basis for impugning them for "putting price/convenience above morals". As I said, if you buy almost any mass produced consumer product you're participating in a corporate system that does precisely that.

So is it really justifiable to say that someone who refuses to buy or consume Coca Cola products (for the huge range of criticisms against that company) is any less moral than someone who refuses to shop at Walmart but has no problem buying Coca Cola?

Maybe I missed that part because I didn't get that Robert was implying that at all.

[Marilyn. 340]

Meh, I was going to continue this debate but it's pointless to argue with the WalMart shoppers who put low prices and convenience above values and morality. I'll leave with a few paragraphs from an article on Wal-Mart's business practices. Enjoy your low prices and convenience WalMart shoppers...

.. edited for length....

I still think it’s a strange argument to make about personal morality as it pertains to people’s shopping preferences at one store, regardless of its business practices when the free market economy thrives largely at the expense of ethics and morality – and is generally parasitic in nature.

Everyone participates in this to some degree. I mean, look at big tobacco and big oil. What about pharmaceuticals? None of these industries are spotless, but neither (except for tobacco) are they optional, and I really can’t see someone risking their health to take a “moral” stand on the ethics of pharmaceutical research by refusing to use for example, a specific heart medication because you don’t agree with the research and development practices of the company who owns the patent.

There are really no grounds for “moral” superiority. I guess I just don’t understand the argument

Good point and well said. However, I don't think Robert expressed a moral superiority, we all make consumer choices for varities of reasons. FOF (Focus On The Family) likes to boycott Ford and Disney for providing benefits for their gay employee's partners and thousands of Americans will join them. I've seen a lot of posts against PETA (People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals) - even calling it a terrorist organization. Prior to the elections, both parties were engaged in a game of which candidate/party is more moral over another. Numerous posts have been made which express one person's moral or ethical convictions (Dogs being chained to stake for example) - is it not the basis for most opinions here? We all are making personal choices everyday - are they always ego centric or are they not also influenced by our sense of right and wrong?

There's nothing wrong with taking a principled stand against a particular company whose business activities you disagree with. Still you're on shaky ground if you try to project that moral stand on everyone else and use it as a basis for impugning them for "putting price/convenience above morals". As I said, if you buy almost any mass produced consumer product you're participating in a corporate system that does precisely that.

So is it really justifiable to say that someone who refuses to buy or consume Coca Cola products (for the huge range of criticisms against that company) is any less moral than someone who refuses to shop at Walmart but has no problem buying Coca Cola?

Maybe I missed that part because I didn't get that Robert was implying that at all.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Meh, I was going to continue this debate but it's pointless to argue with the WalMart shoppers who put low prices and convenience above values and morality. I'll leave with a few paragraphs from an article on Wal-Mart's business practices. Enjoy your low prices and convenience WalMart shoppers...

.. edited for length....

I still think it’s a strange argument to make about personal morality as it pertains to people’s shopping preferences at one store, regardless of its business practices when the free market economy thrives largely at the expense of ethics and morality – and is generally parasitic in nature.

Everyone participates in this to some degree. I mean, look at big tobacco and big oil. What about pharmaceuticals? None of these industries are spotless, but neither (except for tobacco) are they optional, and I really can’t see someone risking their health to take a “moral” stand on the ethics of pharmaceutical research by refusing to use for example, a specific heart medication because you don’t agree with the research and development practices of the company who owns the patent.

There are really no grounds for “moral” superiority. I guess I just don’t understand the argument

Good point and well said. However, I don't think Robert expressed a moral superiority, we all make consumer choices for varities of reasons. FOF (Focus On The Family) likes to boycott Ford and Disney for providing benefits for their gay employee's partners and thousands of Americans will join them. I've seen a lot of posts against PETA (People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals) - even calling it a terrorist organization. Prior to the elections, both parties were engaged in a game of which candidate/party is more moral over another. Numerous posts have been made which express one person's moral or ethical convictions (Dogs being chained to stake for example) - is it not the basis for most opinions here? We all are making personal choices everyday - are they always ego centric or are they not also influenced by our sense of right and wrong?

There's nothing wrong with taking a principled stand against a particular company whose business activities you disagree with. Still you're on shaky ground if you try to project that moral stand on everyone else and use it as a basis for impugning them for "putting price/convenience above morals". As I said, if you buy almost any mass produced consumer product you're participating in a corporate system that does precisely that.

So is it really justifiable to say that someone who refuses to buy or consume Coca Cola products (for the huge range of criticisms against that company) is any less moral than someone who refuses to shop at Walmart but has no problem buying Coca Cola?

Maybe I missed that part because I didn't get that Robert was implying that at all.

That statement he made could be about anything made by anyone here, IMO. For example, "I don't understand why someone would have the gall to chain their dog to a stake and leave it there for hours unattended to." Or, "People who scream at their kids and call them names makes me sick." Aren't we all making value judgments? Does it imply a sense of righteousness? I suppose there's always an element of that, but that's what having different views grounded in different sets of values is all about. I hate smoking and I'm not shy about saying I hate it. If I said to a smoker, "Smoking is disgusting and makes me sick," I'm moralizing in some way but I don't think a smoker would or should feel they are being attacked. It's just expressing an opinion.

I'm sorry this thread took a nasty turn - it's too bad that people couldn't have just left it alone since the argument just became circular.

[Sinergy 3]

Well he's certainly learned his lesson about the mob mentality here in OT....VJ....sheesh

Indeed. The maturity of a some (not all) posters in this thread remind me of teenagers. What starts as intelligent debate quickly spins into 'us against them' and some have such think skin they feel the need to band together do defend each other. Waaaah, he made fun of our beloved WalMart. Waaaaaaa, he questioned my morals and values for shopping there. Now I'm offended... Waaaaahhhhh! You know what? The fact that you're so fanatical about defending your alleged morals/values should tell you something.

I'll close by saying I don't give a flying ** what you catty girls think of or say about me. After saying that I guess I'm never going to be welcome in your little sewing circle now. (deep sigh) Too bad. I was really looking forward to getting that pink sweater with a big 'R' on it. Now I am so sad. I don't know how life will go on... Not. Grow up and get a friggin' life girls.

reality check here robor007, you are the one who attacked everyone who shops at walmart way before we said anything to you. You didnt QUESTION our morals you plain out belittled them with what you said. And again no one is putting words in your mouth, you said what you said. and as far as growing up, your the one lashing out immature 15 yr old stuff like "Grow up and get a friggin' life girls." and "Waaaaaaa, he questioned my morals and values for shopping there. Now I'm offended... Waaaaahhhhh! " and the fact that you THOUGHT you were being intelligent in this "discussion" thread. Oh wait i have to quote my fav "mature" statement of agent robor007 "After saying that I guess I'm never going to be welcome in your little sewing circle now." HAHAHHAAH that made me laugh so hard i almost fell out of my chair. You must get this alot in real life as well to feel this hardened by a forum.