lovemachine said:

again, you are comparing a charitable organization that FEEDS PEOPLE FOR FREE to a global corporation. i guess they do have something in common - i'm sure Second Harvest feeds a lot of families in which one or more members work at Wal-Mart. the similarities end there.

some people type in italics, some in color, and i type in bold. it's really as simple as that.

IrresistibleB1tch said:

You avoided answering the question. I wonder why?

I know...becasue you hate Walmart so they are evil for doing the same thing that a charity is doing.

Clearly the charity has good intentions but by your logic they are being "opportunistic" for hitting people up "before their heating bills arrive". There is no way around this using your earlier logic.

lovemachine said:

as a nonprofit fundraiser, i know the challenges these groups face - everybody is anticipating higher than usual client needs and are working toward securing the funds to meet these needs.

making sure that people have enough to eat during tough economic times is more important, imo, than a global retailer securing its profit margins. i'm sorry that i wasn't clearer about this, maybe i thought it went without saying.

if you want to give your money to Wal-Mart, knock yourself out. just know that it comes at a price, not only to the community, but also to you.

IrresistibleB1tch said:

It's allright that the non-profits are stumping for money but it is also allright that corporations are also. If the corporations don't make any money stocks fall and regular people who work 9 to 5 jobs 401k's fall and there is a huge domino effect.

I just found it interesting that you can call Walmart evil for doing the exact same thing the charities are doing and defend it solely with the arguement that they are Walmart.

But essentially you were just looking for another reason to hate Walmart. Walmart is being any more opportunistic then anyone else but you just don't like the company so they are evil and everyone else is justified.

I just thought of you when I read that quote this morning

lovemachine said:

oh, man, i feel like i'm talking to a wall...

you don't hear me speak poorly about all corporations. there are many businesses, large and small, that treat their employees well AND are profitable. there is nothing wrong with making money - i've said that before. where things are of concern (and not only to me, but many others, or there wouldn't be so much outrage about companies like Wal-Mart) is when unethical business policies are implemented to boost the bottom line. all of these have already been listed here, yet the Wal-Mart apologists keep harping on the "making money is evil" theme.

in turn, i would speak out against a charitable organization treating their employees poorly, or being irresponsible with the money they raise.

does that clarify things?

IrresistibleB1tch said:

Not really because at the end of the day you are just justifying calling one company opportunistic and evil for doing the exact same thing charities and other companies are doing. We are only talking about ONE issue here and they are both doing the EXACT same thing. I would never usually compare Walmart to a charity but for this one paticular issue you made such a big deal out of they are doing teh exact same thing. This is why I feel like I'm talking to a wall because you won't address this one issue.

I also read in to todays paper that Walmart is letting the Salvation Army start ringing three weeks ealier this year. Last year when Target booted the Salvation Army Walmart stepped up to the plate and the salvation Army had a record year and it appears Walmart is stepping up to the plate again.


But for a second lets focus on the second part of why Second Harvest is starting ealier which is because they want to beat the other charities. Why do charities compete against each other? How do they justify getting money for their paticular pet cause if it takes away from someone elses pet cause which has just as good intentions and is helping just as many people?

Me personally I will NEVER give to any charity that has fund-raising goals because I don't believe that is what charity is about. Charity is giving what you can. So pretty much any of the big time charities or churches aren't going to see a dime from me.
[Edited 11/7/05 11:41am]

lovemachine said:

wow - who would have thunk it?!

IrresistibleB1tch said:

You are so self-righteous. You don't know anything about anything.

lovemachine said:

that is SO true!

wait, one thing i do know is that you have started some circular argument to bait me and others who want to put their money where their mouths are.

i guess we can agree to disagree at this point and move on with our lives. i'm sure that you feel much better about yourself now that you have insulted me.

lovemachine said:

I'd ask why someone thinks they need a gun in the first place.

meow85 said:

I always looked at it like this, a person going to buy a gun is going to get a gun, walmart, gun store whatever. Someone shopping for something else might pass the gun aisle a few times and start thinking it would be easy buy get a gun, so why not - it seems like a normal thing to do, heck you can even buy them here - lot's of folk probably do it!

i've been away from this conversation for too long, apparantly. i don't quite get the comparison between Wal-mart and not-for-profit charities. have we really become a society which compares profit driven corporations who have little to no regard for anything besides bottom line in to that of a non-profit organization that is concerned for the well-being of other human beings? i understand non-profits are concerned for money but the motivation is a very different one. while corporations need to make profit to ensure success of their products thus guaranteeing their execs a comfy life, these non-profit outfits need to raise money so they can continue to offer homes for veterans, feed and clothe homeless adults and children, provide educational assistance to under-privileged members of our community, etc, etc. its hardly a comparison.

i don't have a problem with the products Wal-mart sells. i don't have a problem with Wal-mart being an incredibly successful corporation. a lot of work goes into making successful corporations and these corporations in turn provide a plethora of benefits to society at large. my problem with Wal-mart comes in when i see how hard they fight for the right to NOT offer health benefits. my problems with the corporation are highlighted by the examples of their business practices, not by the sheer fact that they are a business. for example, starbucks is mega-corporation but i have no problem with them because (from what i understand of their business practices) they are an ethical company.

its important to pick your battles wisely. fighting on behalf of the idea of "the corporation" is great but arguing on behalf of a greedy, cannibalistic, selfish corporation and using them as an example of "the corporation" for which you fight is a bad idea. its like picking the worst apple out of the barrel and offering it as an example of why we should keep all the apples in that barrel.

lovemachine said:

Good for you. We all have to do it.

I still live at home with my mother because my two jobs combined don't make me enough money to afford rent for an apartment or basement suite in even the cheapest, shittiest part of town. Nevermind bills, food, and other expenses. I'm not asking for welfare or handouts from her OR the government. All I want is some kind of assurance that if I get hurt on the job (they don't make us wear steel-toed boots and heavy gloves for nothing) things'll be alright, or should I get sick I won't be fired right away. Even though neither job is going to be for the long-run, don't I deserve that just as much as someone with a "career"? Or do I not because I'm expendable -there's always going to be someone waiting to step in and take my place.


Wow. So those are the options Big Business has layed out for us, eh? A heart attack from a soul-sucking career, or a broken back from a job that overworks an employee for the lowest possible legal amount of money.

Capitalism sure is fun.

meow85 said:

maybe they hunt. maybe shooting is a family or cultural tradition. maybe the person feels safer with a gun in the house. there are a variety of reasons one may want to own a gun. in addition, there is a constitutional right in this nation to the access to arms. there is historical relevance to why we have guns. every nation is unique in the way in which it developed and the right to bear arms is a stong part of our history.

in the end, its better to monitor a right than strip us of that right.
[Edited 11/8/05 1:12am]

meow85 said:

again, we should not be attacking capitalism as a whole but rather the elements within capitalism that add to the malaise. humankind is inherently flawed and in any system of governance there is the threat of corruption and greed.

nilegettolrahc said:

Fact of the matter is, weapons and toys should never share space for any reason. Believe whatever you want about the right to bear arms -selling a handgun 4 aisles down from a teddy bear is fucking nuts.

meow85 said:

this is getting off topic but...

so what items, exactly, should be shared in the same space as toys? motor oil? kitchen knives? car alarms? what are the boundaries you are suggesting?

SassyBritches said:

Very true. But when you look at the options layed out for us -don't you think it's time for a change? Most people work their their asses off their entire lives just to have enough money to pay the bills and get food on the table, at the risk of their health, their relationships, their life. Amd what for?

Why does it have to work that way? Why is our system set up so that money is central to everything; that profits are more important than people. From the lowest paid employee to the top executive, people are wasting their real potential. I'm sure we weren't put on this planet to do the 9 to 5 grind our entire adult lives.


But what do I know. According to some, I don't have a "real" job anyway.

SassyBritches said:

While I personally think there's no reason for any ordinary, law-abiding civilian to own a weapon of any kind, I realise this is not the law in your country. It's not my country, and not my laws to object to -if some of you think it's necessary to own weapons, have at 'er.

Just explain to me why you need the damn things on demand, and from the same place you buy groceries and children's toys.

SassyBritches said:

thank you.

SassyBritches said:

The ONLY connection that I ever suggested is because of something that Irresistible bitch said ealier in this thread:



and I pointed out that I read in the paper that Second Harvest was starting their Holiday drive early because they wanted to hit people up BEFORE THE HEATING BILLS ARRIVED and other charities got to them.

So I asked if this meant they were also "opportunistic"?

I did not try to compare them any other way because obviously there is no cmoparison but in this one instance the charity is guilty of doing the exact same thing that IB called "opportunistic". I just wanted to point out her hypocracy which comes from her complete hatred of Walmart.


.
[Edited 11/8/05 7:10am]

lovemachine said:

Here's a definition of "Opportunistic"...

http://www.answers.com/op...istic&r=67



Here's a definition of "Proactive"...

http://www.answers.com/proactive

IrresistibleB1tch said:

Hey you know what, i bought 2 soft and chwey bag of chips ohoy for 4 dollars total. That was very cheap at Walmart. I couldn't go anywhere else and see that!!!!! WOW!! What a bargain!!!!!

All I personally know about Walmart is that they hired my sister who has severe memory problems from being on a heart lung machine too long as a baby and then after her heart went bad again and she had to have another operation the corporation GAVE her $3,000 to use towards medical expenses and continued to pay her while she was out of work (and I'm not talking Social Security or whoever normally helps sick employees). They didn't have to do anything but apparnantly they have funds set aside to give to ill employees.

So excuse me if I fail to see how they are completely evil. I've noticed its usually not the employees complaining about how badly they are treated it's always lefty who are out to save the world (whether they want to be saved or not) because THEY know best.


I also notice how nobody ever speaks about how Walmart completely saved The Salvation Army last year and directly because of Walmart they had a record year and Walmart allowed them to come 3 weeks ealier this year becaise of anticipated needs and shortages.

lovemachine said:

AMEN SISTA OR BROTHA, they also gave 25 million to katrina also.

i want 600 view hits to this darn it.

hit it!!! hit it!!!!!