Jump to content




Photo
- - - - -

The Anti-Walmart


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
235 replies to this topic

#217 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,303
  • Reputation: 483
HUDDLER

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:07 PM

What is Walmart thinking...they should just quit buying from them and shut down the plant.

#218 PhillyB

PhillyB

    sườn núi phía đông thứ ba của mặt trời

  • Joined: 29-November 08
  • posts: 23,894
  • Reputation: 20,229
SUPPORTER

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:11 PM

I see the wrong here on Walmart's part in using that particular company.
But shouldn't that actual owner of the factory get the blame ?


ultimately, yes, the factory owner is a douchehound and should get the bulk of the blame. but i think the larger question at play here is one of ethics, specifically relating to making a massive profit by shipping jobs overseas to exploit unbelievably poor people, which is exactly what this is.

#219 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 14,030
  • Reputation: 443
HUDDLER

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:13 PM

I see the wrong here on Walmart's part in using that particular company.
But shouldn't that actual owner of the factory get the blame ?


do you actually believe that the owner of this factory holds ANY cards in his relationship with walmart? they could've forced the factory owner to upgrade... but it would have increased prices...walmart knew of the situation... said "f*ck it, abusing people keeps our prices low" and 100 people died. It doesn't matter who is responsible in addition to walmart, walmart is in the drivers seat with EVERY SINGLE DEAL THEY MAKE. They actively lobby for low wages and poor working conditions... how much more culpable can you be? I mean, i guess you could blame the fire department or the architect as well... but really...


this is all beside the point... the question was... if companies like walmart were allowed, do you believe they'd treat their workers in this country the same way?

#220 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,303
  • Reputation: 483
HUDDLER

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:15 PM

Much better for those people to not have jobs than succomb to exploitation by Walmart and fat Americans.

#221 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 14,030
  • Reputation: 443
HUDDLER

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:17 PM

Much better for those people to not have jobs than to have burned to death making disposable bullshiat for fat americans


ftfy.

#222 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 13,865
  • Reputation: 4,621
Administrators

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:18 PM

do you actually believe that the owner of this factory holds ANY cards in his relationship with walmart? they could've forced the factory owner to upgrade... but it would have increased prices...walmart knew of the situation... said "f*ck it, abusing people keeps our prices low" and 100 people died. It doesn't matter who is responsible in addition to walmart, walmart is in the drivers seat with EVERY SINGLE DEAL THEY MAKE. They actively lobby for low wages and poor working conditions... how much more culpable can you be? I mean, i guess you could blame the fire department or the architect as well... but really...


this is all beside the point... the question was... if companies like walmart were allowed, do you believe they'd treat their workers in this country the same way?



Guys I'm no fan of Walmart.
They are a big problem with how many injustices go down.

#223 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,303
  • Reputation: 483
HUDDLER

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:22 PM

ftfy.


That works too.

#224 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 18,190
  • Reputation: 1,566
HUDDLER

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:30 PM

so walmart chooses suppliers that allow their workers to die due to poor work conditions in order to keep prices low?


3rd largest company in the world... victim of conniving bangledeshi garment factory.


Wait, are you talking about Walmart or Apple?

#225 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,303
  • Reputation: 483
HUDDLER

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:36 PM

Apple products are high-brow products...not plastic kitchenware and clothing.

Apple is justified in exploitation because they pay their workers more.

Is that the correct logic?

#226 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 14,030
  • Reputation: 443
HUDDLER

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:36 PM

Wait, are you talking about Walmart or Apple?


one doesn't exclude the other. you wanna get down on apple, you won't hear a peep from me.

#227 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,811
  • Reputation: 2,515
Moderators

Posted 05 December 2012 - 02:00 PM

Wait, are you talking about Walmart or Apple?


Posted Image

#228 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 18,190
  • Reputation: 1,566
HUDDLER

Posted 05 December 2012 - 02:17 PM

one doesn't exclude the other. you wanna get down on apple, you won't hear a peep from me.


That is good, I have discussed similar issues with many who will not criticise Apple, but will slam the practices of Walmart because most of Walmart's customers are poor or lower middle class.

Some criticism of the low end retailers such as Walmart are justified, but Walmart also has some market limits on what it can and can't do. If Walmart decides to dump the evil vendors, and go with a vendor who provides better working conditions for its own employees, cost goes up. Higher prices might mean they give up market share to another retailer who gets its products from that crappy vendor. Which of course doesn't help the workers for the crappy vendor and hurts walmart employees and shareholders.

Walmart would likely be just as happy if they could maintain their profit margin and pay more for the products they buy from these countries. I remember a few years ago, they even tried a buy american campaign. It failed miserably because the items were higher priced and people really didn't look at the labels. Shoppers want the cheap crap.

I guess the government could step in and perhaps place additional tariffs on imports from countries with poor employer policing, and that would level the playing field somewhat. But that also causes problems, as well as a lot of voter anger once prices start going up.