smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | DanAbnrml9@aol.com |
| Subject | Re: Wal-Mart |
| Date | Fri, 5 Dec 2003 18:28:16 EST |
[Part 1 text/plain US-ASCII (1.6 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
In a message dated 12/5/2003 5:01:38 PM Eastern Standard Time,
audities-owner@smoe.org writes:
<< Bottom line - ALL (yup, blanket statement) businesses are
deigned to make money (whether they do or not is a matter of how good they
are at meeting their aim). Capitalism is not an ethical principal, and I
assure you that most of the businesses with which you deal bend or break
ethical ideals on a regular basis. >>
I don't doubt that, but do you really feel comfortable supporting that type
of behavior with your own money? I have no doubt that it's impossible to track
every company's indiscretions (many of which, in all likelihood, you have no
way of even knowing about), but, at least at the surface, don't you feel that
blatantly contributing to the cycle is a mistake? Don't you feel that if the
public changes their behavior as a result of the actions of the companies that
the companies themselves will be forced to change? It's wishful, idealistic
thinking, yes, but it has to start someplace, too.
<< Combining posts to make it look as if I made any of those statements is
remarkably rude - I didn't. >>
I've never claimed I wasn't remarkably rude, and have often publicly admitted
to being stubborn and obnoxious. But I'm willing to call out a mistake when
I've made one: the problem with subscribing to the digest is that, on occasions
like these, I may take the message of one post and merge it with the atittude
of another, formulating a response that means nothing to anyone and just
pisses everyone off. This is one of those times, and I apologize. And on that I'll
drop it.--Jason
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.