How is Target any less evil than Walmart?

[InflatableBuddha]

Originally posted by: HumblePie

Originally posted by: FeuerFrei
Most of the supposed 'negatives' of Wal*Mart are inherent to any large retailer. Nothing Wal*Mart specific.

Yay, someone else caught on to what I was trying to point out to InflatableBuddha. His points, while he was "saying" were what makes Walmart bad, were actually points in the general of large corporations.

Look, you try to organize and huge corporation spread out across the world that employees millions and see how well you do. No one person can do it alone and it takes the concerted effort of tons of management to get it all done. Try as you might, there is no way to always hire 100% honest people all the time. The bigger you are, the more drastic the effect of hiring a bad apple is going to be when they screw up and how high up the food chain they are when they do.

InflatableBuddha, I was pointing out that almost ALL your argument was not against Walmart but against large corporations in general, and calling out Walmart because it's Walmart is ridiculous. Re-read what I post and you might actually get it.

Like you, I am effing glad when failed systems die off and something new arises that is better and stronger. That's free market. Oh wait you tried to say you are against that? Yet you also stated you wanted to see AIG and the Big 3 die. So which is it? Free market would like to see them go and be eaten by something bigger and stronger, and a managed market would see them survive off public funds.

Also, trying to compare entertainment competition to dog eat dog world competition not even in the "same class" as you put it. Seeing a heavyweight boxer fight a bantam weight isn't worth watching because it is competition for entertainment value only. It's a farce from the get go. So by forcing regulations upon an competition for entertainment, it brings up the entertainment value drastically.

Anyhow, before I digress much further, I will reiterate. Political views up the system in which things are currently done should NOT be a reflection upon the morale values of an entity working with in that system. You are forcing your own propoganda and political views upon Walmart and I was pointing out what you saw "wrong" and evil with Walmart is not correct.

I also agree that a purely "free" market economy doesn't work because the big make sure the weak don't survive without violence. Hence the definition of a tyranny or a despot or a monopoly. I agree that is not right. However, you don't see Walmart typically running around doing the despicable practices that say, Intel or Microsoft do. Now THOSE are closer to large "evil" corporations in my book. But walmart? Bleh, not even close.

HumblePie,

OK, you dragged me back in. I guess we've had a bit of a misunderstanding.

The points I made against WalMart may (and probably do) apply to other corporations. However, I didn't want to specifically say that "Corporation X" is also guilty of all the transgressions I leveled against WalMart. I don't have evidence of that, so I wouldn't make that generalization.

Intel and Microsoft - sure, they're large corporations guilty of some illegal and unethical practices. But they're in different industries than WalMart, and their offenses are different. I'm not trying to tag them for paying crap wages, fudging the books or abusing social programs. Similarly, I can't attack WalMart for being anti-trust. Hence while there are some general trends regarding objectionable corporate behaviour, I can't paint all corporations with the same brush.

To clarify, I am for free market, with regulations. It is hypocritical and wrong that our current governments claim to support free markets, and yet they bail out massive corporations like AIG and the Big 3. I am glad we agree to oppose completely free markets.

Where I disagree is that "bigger and stronger" is necessarily better. Why not replace failed entities with smaller, more innovative and efficiently run businesses? Especially since it seems to be so difficult to avoid major problems in large corporations.

My metaphor about sports was the best example I could come up with at the time. It doesn't correlate perfectly, but I think you see my point that mismatched entities are a farce. The regulations improve the entertainment value and make the system better. Similarly, regulations are a good thing in the business world.

I'm afraid I don't understand your point about political views relating to moral values in a system. I think you're missing some words in the sentence that would make it clearer. You're correct that I am expressing my political viewpoint when evaluating WalMart, but you are doing the same, through a different political lens. I have referred to verifiable points in my arguments; they are not propaganda.

At this juncture, we've agreed on some points and disagreed on others. I think it best to leave this now, as little else will be resolved. Good debate though.

 

[WildHorse]

``