Wal-Mart/Big Business : Your views

[Comprehend]

I am a classical liberal and have stayed out of the thread so far because Soup already knows what I think about the topic but I wanted to point out that nobody has addressed the question in the OP about whether or not using the internet is supporting big business?

so how about it? is the internet run by big business? who is responsible for the infrastructure and administration? ...know any telecom giants?.....Global Crossing (among others) ring a bell?

Yes, the internet is quite obviously run by big businesses. that is why nobody has said anything about that question, yes?

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I am a classical liberal and have stayed out of the thread so far because Soup already knows what I think about the topic but I wanted to point out that nobody has addressed the question in the OP about whether or not using the internet is supporting big business?

so how about it? is the internet run by big business? who is responsible for the infrastructure and administration? ...know any telecom giants?.....Global Crossing (among others) ring a bell?

Yes, the internet is quite obviously run by big businesses. that is why nobody has said anything about that question, yes?

Interesting point. But I also use gas, occassionally shop at Hannaford Bros., and buy some products produced by big business. The problem is, usage by a person says nothing about that person's argument. I could make the argument that if everyone in the world wore bright colors, the world would be a better place even while I wore all black. Arguing that I have no right to take such a stand because I do not follow it is a fallacy.

I do understand you, though. I am against big business for ecological concerns, yet I use a technology run by big business that operates on fossil fuel energy. I am hypocritical, yes. It makes me human.

But I cannot deny my concerns about big business.

 

[bflydad]

Two different issues here and I want to address both.

First, Walmart. I am morally opposed to shopping there. However, I still do. I would much prefer to shop at local stores but being in the military I move around a lot and each time I move it takes time to find new stores that are reliable. Then, when it comes time to shop, it takes much more time to go to a half dozen different stores in the evening or on the weekend than to go to one. As a husband and father with little kids (including a baby), I don't have that much time available.

What I am unclear of is how much better Target is than Walmart. I acknowledge that Walmart may be the worst. But Target still drives out small business. It still lowers the average income in a community. It still promotes child labor in other countries. yada, yada, yada.

When I think about Walmart I remember talk about the rainforests years ago and about how we in America are crying about the rainforests being cut down when the countries who are doing it are crying about their people starving and are looking at the one "cash crop" they have. I think the same issue is true for Walmart. How can we complain about Walmart when it is allowing people to stretch their very limited dollars far enough so that they can take care of their families?

Second, big business running the Internet. uuum, I must be very ignorant on this one. Google search is inherently non-advertiser focused and it seems to me Google's search is the most common way of searching the Internet (if people want me to explain about how Google search works, let me know; my MS was in a related area). So how does big business control the Internet? While I have concerns about blogs and about the lack of peer review for "news websites", they certainly are the antithesis of big business. Setting up a website to sell is very easy and doesn't cost much money. I'm sorry. Can someone fill me in on what I'm missing? Thanks

-Butterfly

 

[Aqualung]

Interesting point. But I also use gas, occassionally shop at Hannaford Bros., and buy some products produced by big business. The problem is, usage by a person says nothing about that person's argument. I could make the argument that if everyone in the world wore bright colors, the world would be a better place even while I wore all black. Arguing that I have no right to take such a stand because I do not follow it is a fallacy.

I do understand you, though. I am against big business for ecological concerns, yet I use a technology run by big business that operates on fossil fuel energy. I am hypocritical, yes. It makes me human.

But I cannot deny my concerns about big business.

But your benefits must be outweighed by your concerns, or why else would you argue for the cons while embracing the pros?

 

[Guitar's Cry]

But your benefits must be outweighed by your concerns, or why else would you argue for the cons while embracing the pros?

Wishful thinking, perhaps.

The internet becomes a tool with which I feel I may make a difference in the world. Other than RF, e-mailing (which is almost a neccesity in our modern world and where I work), and the occasional adult site, I don't use it. In fact, the benefits of discussion in RF I do think are worth it.

It's not big business that I benefit from anyway, it's the internet. The internet could exist without it.

As another example, all those who do not like Walmart yet shop there are benefitting from the food or clothing they buy. That they get it at Walmart is a grudging neccesity. I do not have to shop there, so I don't. But I do not begrudge a person from shopping there.

 

[lilithu]

Since I consider myself a liberal more then a conservative, is it okay if I peek my head in here. I'm sure eveyrone saw the heated "Wal-Mart" discussion thread the past two days. And I did admit I've lost my cool about it, but are your thoughts on Wal-Mart, do you buy there? And do you see the 'internet' as being run by big businesses (as stated in post #111 on the Walmart thread)? Why do you boycott the companies you do? Basically this is a dicussion big businesses and what they are doing to America.

Um... no, I didn't see the thread, and I probably shouldn't go looking for it. I have participated in another Walmart thread in the past.

Just really quickly as I'm at work, no I don't shop at Walmart. I will try to dig up my previous posts, which go into more detail as to why I don't. I feel that there are good reasons to boycott. I think that there are serious problems with the way that big business does business. BUT, that said, I know you like Walmart Becky. And I don't think that people should be made to feel bad for that (again, haven't seen the recent thread so I don't know if that's what happened). These issues are complicated, and it's not just about business/economics; it's also about culture. I'm surrounded by people who despise Walmart, as well as McDonald's and Starbucks and Disney, etc. And they have valid reasons to criticize, but the self-righteousness gets a bit much for me. It becomes more about being against something rather than being for something else. Also, the classism really bothers me. A lot of people go to places like Walmart or MickeyD's because it's cheaper and they're on a tight budget.

Anyway, gotta run. more later....

 

[des]

First of all, like in the DIR forums, I don't mind respectful questions from interested non-liberals but don't really appreciate comments that are mocking. Would you say on the Christian DIR forum, "you have to be a card carrying Christian."? Well I wouldn't. I think that there are a lot of people going into the liberal forum, who are *clearly* not at all liberal, and making comments that are not true to the nature of a "liberal only forum".
I don't know if that exists in the conservative forum as I don't read it.

--des

I don't shop at Wal-mart, or shall I say I try to avoid it (probably go there once or twice a year-- mostly for summer school stuff). I am just drawing the line somewhere, as I think there are companies whose practices are just about as bad. The reason I don't shop there is that they are so efficient at what they do. It isn't that they are a monopoly-- it is that they have a tangle hold on tons of different markets and get them to do their bidding, including requiring companies to outsource to get their prices down. In comparison to Target, which is still a huge store, Target is inefficient. It asks for merchandise and just sells what it gets. If it gets all ugly socks and no one wants to buy them, there is no guarantee that they won't get them next month. Wal-mart would never make that kind of error, they tie up who buys what and so forth. It also has changed the landscape of many areas and forced out many small stores, but you could say that for Borders, Starbucks, etc. (and I do). It's just that Wal-mart does it better. Our city is actually thinking of buying up land Wal-mart wants to keep it open space. It is as if Wal-mart can't stand any piece of open space left.

But I don't know that anyone (I mean that I know of) is really calling for an actual boycott of Wal-mart. The problem is that a. 1/5 of Americans work at Wal-mart (I think) and they don't have the salaries to go and buy elsewhere. b. Wal-mart has driven out or caused outsourcing of many companies and the workers now have lower salaries. So where are they going to shop? c. The poorest people while they are ironically hurt by Wal-mart also get helped by the low prices. So yes, I think that drive would be kind of Classist.


I think a real liberal will think about not just policies of Wal-mart but also the situation of those that are affected by Wal-mart, pro and con.


--des

Um... no, I didn't see the thread, and I probably shouldn't go looking for it. I have participated in another Walmart thread in the past.

Just really quickly as I'm at work, no I don't shop at Walmart. I will try to dig up my previous posts, which go into more detail as to why I don't. I feel that there are good reasons to boycott. I think that there are serious problems with the way that big business does business. BUT, that said, I know you like Walmart Becky. And I don't think that people should be made to feel bad for that (again, haven't seen the recent thread so I don't know if that's what happened). These issues are complicated, and it's not just about business/economics; it's also about culture. I'm surrounded by people who despise Walmart, as well as McDonald's and Starbucks and Disney, etc. And they have valid reasons to criticize, but the self-righteousness gets a bit much for me. It becomes more about being against something rather than being for something else. Also, the classism really bothers me. A lot of people go to places like Walmart or MickeyD's because it's cheaper and they're on a tight budget.

Anyway, gotta run. more later....

 

[Mathematician]

I forget who posted this link (I think Lil is to credit), but you may be interested in this site, Becky: http://www.buyblue.org/

I don't pay too much attention to the political contributions, only how the companies are ranked based on employee treatment and environmental concern.

 

[Mathematician]

I forget who posted this link (I think Lil is to credit), but you may be interested in this site, Becky: http://www.buyblue.org/

I don't pay too much attention to the political contributions, only how the companies are ranked based on employee treatment and environmental concern.

 

[Bishka]

I forget who posted this link (I think Lil is to credit), but you may be interested in this site, Becky: http://www.buyblue.org/

I don't pay too much attention to the political contributions, only how the companies are ranked based on employee treatment and environmental concern.

Thank you Gene. That link is very much appreciated. There are several reasons I just don't support Walmart; horrible customer service, treatment of employees, treatment of small businesses, quality of merchandise, aesthitics, moral issues on how their employ foreign people, etc, etc. etc.

I feel that I could better support my community by supporting 'mom and pop' businesses as much as possible. In my concern, in the long run, that would better affect my husband and the people we purchase from. There may be times that there is no other place then a Walmart or Kmart; but I am going to try to do my best and stick to what I believe is true.

 

[giant space amoeba]

since i havn't actually participated in any of the other big business genre topics, i'm not sure what's going on.

my personal feelings are neutral. i don't have a problem with Wal-Mart. America is all about people succeeding in something they do, yet when someone succeeds, and succeeds on such a grand level as the dude in charge of wal-mart (don't know his name), we get mad at them. seems like a double-standard to me.

Yes - and the way i view it todays small business could be tommorows big business. Someone becomes successful and people complain. It is well within the owners right to have a large business.

I tend to buy from both big businesses and small businesses. ASDA, which is now owned by walmart in the UK is actually not a bad place to shop at. I also have no problem with Virgin, well maybe except buying music (way too expensive).

Issues i have with big businesses is the way they sometimes swallow up the smaller ones, however i find that for example larger supermarkets tend to join with other big businesses (ie allow a macdonalds within their building or premises). I see no problem with this.

 

[des]

I think the issue is quite complex (which is why I don't favor a boycott).
For instance, Starbucks is quite an interesting case. They have bought out or otherwise undermined their competition. In a NM magizine, they were rated as havign the best coffee. I think that's sad (and not true either, imo). They have also engaged in some strong armed tactics in Ethiopia (to my understanding). OTOH, they sell some Fair Trade coffee (probably more than any single seller). And they give their employees health insurance even if they work part-time (I think 70-80% of the cost of coffee there goes to health insurance). So in some cases, companies can have good and bad aspects. I'm not sure for Wal-mart, but I think the low costs are good, but the unintended (or even intended) can be bad.

I found the buy blue interesting, and wondered about some of the ratings.
The Gap (I was looking for Google) had good employee ratings. This is supposed to consider things like sweat shops, I wonder if the raters know that. (Google had no responses).



--des

Thank you Gene. That link is very much appreciated. There are several reasons I just don't support Walmart; horrible customer service, treatment of employees, treatment of small businesses, quality of merchandise, aesthitics, moral issues on how their employ foreign people, etc, etc. etc.

I feel that I could better support my community by supporting 'mom and pop' businesses as much as possible. In my concern, in the long run, that would better affect my husband and the people we purchase from. There may be times that there is no other place then a Walmart or Kmart; but I am going to try to do my best and stick to what I believe is true.

 

[des]

This is pretty complex as well. Obviously most of us get our connection thru a big business (mine is from Qwest for instance-- there are much bigger fish in there like AT&T). However, shut down all the major players and the internet wouldn't go down, that's the interesting thing. There are also major companies buying up little ones or dot coms. For instance Time Warner, Google, and UTube are all connected together. (Time Warner doesn't own Google, but Google isn't exactly little!) BTW, infrastructure has almost always been the province of a small no. of companies that specialize in that alone, can't recall any main players at the moment. They do routers and stuff that you might not ever know existed. They mostly ALWAYS done the internet, even before it your ISP was a big name company. When I first started on the net, I had a little local ISP where tech support knew my name. We had parties and get togethers in person. This was the late 1980s.
And most of the net was text based.

I think the really big question that keeps coming up is the one of net neutrality-- to keep the net from having essentially channels where some could be faster or slower. For instance, under a non-neutral net, some company like Viacom (which is interested in this), could offer a faster net for its "services" for people or companies-essentially websites or consumers-- willing to pay the rate. This would make other sites slower an eventually this could end up as a huge factor. Ever notice how your radio stations are mostly owned by ClearChannel and all sound somewhat the same?

Anyway, if you want to know more websearch net neutrality. BTW, there are some strange bedfellows for net neutrality-- The ACLU, various organizations of the Christian right, Google and Amazon, Move on, etc. etc.
It does not really seem to be a liberal conservative issue, but most Democrats have voted for it, and some Republicans have been for it and some against it. OTOH, the Telecomm bill was passed by the Clinton admin. , in it were good things but also stuff that made it possible for ClearChannel to take over your radio.

The only person I have ever heard on tv talk about this is Bill Moyers.


--des

obody has addressed the question in the OP about whether or not using the internet is supporting big business?

so how about it? is the internet run by big business? who is responsible for the infrastructure and administration? ...know any telecom giants?.....Global Crossing (among others) ring a bell?

Yes, the internet is quite obviously run by big businesses. that is why nobody has said anything about that question, yes?

 

[nutshell]

Ahhh....too bad.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18140057/

 

[Bishka]

Yes - and the way i view it todays small business could be tommorows big business. .

Actually, there are some businesses out there, that aren't there to 'take over the world' or be big. They jsut want to run a small business and help people.

 

[giant space amoeba]

Actually, there are some businesses out there, that aren't there to 'take over the world' or be big. They jsut want to run a small business and help people.

im aware of that but i was just aknowledging that what i said could be the case.

 

[nutshell]

Actually, there are some businesses out there, that aren't there to 'take over the world' or be big. They jsut want to run a small business and help people.

And why does a small business wanting to succeed and get a bigger piece of the pie automatically mean they seek to "take over the world."

Bottom line question: What's wrong with trying to succeed at the next level when you've had success as a small business?

 

[Bishka]

And why does a small business wanting to succeed and get a bigger piece of the pie automatically mean they seek to "take over the world."

It doesn't, you just assumed I meant that.

Bottom line question: What's wrong with trying to succeed at the next level when you've had success as a small business?

Nothing. I never said it was; I'm more concerened about the big business/corporation types that are only in it for the money. A business should be about more then money, it should be about providing good quality products and good quality service -- no matter how big or how small.

 

[nutshell]

I'm not going to play the assumption game.

 

[Bishka]

I'm not going to play the assumption game.

Then don't