Maybe it is just me but I was surprised at what I found.
First a little background.
I am in charge of the fundraising for my youngest son's Cubscout pack. They sell Christmas greenery to raise money for the pack. We offer incentives for the scouts to sell certain amounts. If you sell over $100 you can pick either a camp cup, a basic mess kit or some other small item. So all the orders are in and I am out getting the incentives.
So I have been going to the local Walmarts and Targets to get the incentives and I must say that there is a world of difference between the two. Target is much nicer than I expected it to be. The aisles are wide and not crowded with all sorts of crap. The shelves don't go all the way to the ceiling, leading to a nice open feel. Walmart feels much cheaper in quality. It is jammed with stuff all over the place. Stuff is in the aisles, blocking traffic.
Between the two I like Target a whole lot better than Walmart.
msquared
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
I was just in Target last night, for the first time in probably over a year.
I was pleasantly surprised at the cleanliness of it, and how neatly it was stocked etc.
HOWEVER, there just wasn't much stuff THERE - compared to Wal-Mart. Not near the selection. Nice stuff, and good prices, but only if they have exactly what you were wanting. And it was NOT crowded (Wal-Mart here is always absolutely packed with people), so it made for a pleasant shopping experience, -- but I couldn't have done all my shopping there, because they simply didn't carry everything I needed.
Farmgirl
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Wow. I keep waiting for a tornado to rip through this thread.
Posted by msquared (Member # 4484) on :
Tom
The trailer park is down the road a bit.
msquared
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
At least no one here is discussing Piggly-Wiggly or Farm'n'Fleet. Posted by Jacare Sorridente (Member # 1906) on :
Target has "targetted" the higher end of things. They sell better quality cheap junk than WalMart and they have consciously aimed for a much better appearance. One of the primary reasons for this is because no one can compete with WalMart on price, as Kmart found out to their chagrin.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I tend to like Target's clothing better. They normally have a better selection of a bit higher quality for close to walmart prices. It is also much nicer to shop in, if you have to shop for clothes.
AJ
Posted by msquared (Member # 4484) on :
I agree that Target may not have as big a selection, but they were fine for what I was looking for, and the prices were the same as Walmart. The atmosphere was just nicer.
msquared
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 619) on :
My wife is with you 100 percent on this issue, msquared. She loathes Wal-mart.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I love Target. *looks down at her Target shoes, snuggles in her Target shirt, and pushes the sleeves up on the Ann Taylor sweater*
But there is balance.
Posted by narrativium (Member # 3230) on :
quote:Wal-Mart's vast, non-unionized work force earns a typical wage of about $7 to $8 an hour. Unionized workers at Kroger, by contrast, said they were making between $11 and $13 an hour, with full health benefits. About 62 percent of Wal-Mart workers are eligible for benefits, but less than half of the work force participates. Critics say the low participation is because Wal-Mart requires steep employee contributions.
I refuse to shop at Wal-Mart. The above is one reason.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
Yeah -- someone besides me is quoting my local paper.
I have also heard that the only other store giving Wal-Mart a "run for their money" and actually worrying Wal-Mart as a competitor is CostCo.
Unfortunately, we don't have any CostCo's here in Wichita that I'm aware of.
Farmgirl
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Having shopped in several Wal-Marts in more than one state, I have concluded that minutes spent in Wal-Mart are 37% longer than regular minutes.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
I really, really don't enjoy going to Wal-Mart. It's crowded, feels a little grimy, and I just generally find it unplesant. My mood is almost invariably better going into a Wal-Mart than it is coming out of one. Shopping at Wal-Mart is always a last resort for me.
Target is a much nicer place to shop, although as has been noted, the selection isn't always the best.
I try to get as much as possible in the little shops in the tiny little town I'm living in now, and only go to the big box stores for the things I'm unable to get anyplace else.
Posted by Ayelar (Member # 183) on :
I love Bob's analysis.
They're trying to bring a Walmart to Ithaca, which is the last place on earth that should even consider having a Walmart.
I would honestly be only a small step away from throwing bricks through their windows if they were to set up shop here. I loathe Walmart in a way that only Walmart can be loathed.
Target, on the other hand, I like. I even considered working there when I was looking for a job. The only way you'd get me to work for Walmart would be if I had dynamite strapped to my cheap blue vest.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I only shop at the Mega-Lo-Mart.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Are you able to get propane and propane accessories there?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Mega-Lo-Mart fulfills all my propane needs.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Costco is only giving Walmart Corporation a run for their money when it comes to wholesaling. Costco competes head to head with Sam's Club, not the normal retail stuff. I actually have memberships to both. I like Costco better overall, but Sam's is much closer for a quick run, and has a one item in particular (2-liter sodas) that Costco doesn't have. Costco generally has higher quality specialty food and higher quality items all around. Costco makes about the same amount of profit as Sam's with less than half of the actual brick and mortar stores. Costco targets its markets much more carefully than Sams. Sams is better than nothing in a place like Oklahoma where there isn't the popluation density to make it worth Costco's while to come in.
AJ edit for stupid spelling
[ December 11, 2003, 11:40 AM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
I loathe Wal-Mart, too, and only go if I absolutely have to. It takes so long just to get in and out. The lines are always long. Which they could easily remedy by having more check out people but they don't. There are always twice as many registers as there are people actually on duty. It annoys me that my time is worth so little to them. You have to park a quarter mile away, and then it's a quarter mile inside the store to whatever it is you are trying to buy. You can't find things, and there is nobody around to tell you where things are. They do have great prices, but they don't have good selection or availability. I can save $2 on something I buy quite frequently, but half the time when I go, they are out of stock, or else (for catfood) they have almost none of the flavors that I'm looking for. So overall it's not worth it. I try to avoid it if there's any possible way.
I heard Target is better, but the only one near me is pretty far away. I think next time I have to go to Wal-Mart, I'll try Target instead and see if I like it more. It sounds like I would.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
You can even see the differences in their advertising. TV commercials for Wal-Mart seem cheap and more like a grocery store. Commercials for Target are more produced (if still cheesy) and more like a department store.
I've never found any particular difference in the selection between Target and Wal-Mart, although perhaps I've just had luck in finding very good Targets. But the quality is much better at Target. Plus, Target hasn't put quite as many local business under, nor are they nearly as bad for suppliers.
Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
We've had a Wal-Mart in town for about 10 years. This is a small town. 30.000 people, with a lot of community support for local business.
Wal-Mart wanted to expand to a Super Wal-Mart. They sent out "ballots" to residents with choices that read (in large type) "Yes! I want a Wal-Mart supercenter to bring savings and convenient one-stop shopping to my town" and (in smaller type) "No thanks, I'm not interested in the savings and selection a Supercenter would bring."
They "won" their little publicity election and petitioned the city council with the evidence of "local support." The city council said their election was irrelevant and put it to a real vote.
Wal-Mart lost. The majority of citizens in our town didn't want them to upsize. Wal-Mart didn't care. They found a loophole in city zoning laws, obtained their necessary permits, and expanded their store.
I made a vow to never step foot in Wal-Mart again.
Honestly - what can they possibly offer that's worth the dishonesty and shameless assimilation they promote? How far will we go to save 12 cents?
If you care about your community and the principles of honest business, if you want to support businesses who treats their employees like people rather than numbers, don't support monster chain stores like Wal-Mart. Americans spend 11% of their income on average on food, the lowest of any nation and the lowest of any time in history. You can afford to support smaller businesses. I'm a college student living on loans and ridiculously small paychecks, and I seem to do just fine shopping at our local food co-op and supporting independent bookstores and small downtown buisinesses. I encourage you to do the same.
Posted by Ophelia (Member # 653) on :
You know, I don't think I've ever set foot inside a Wal-Mart. I don't think I even know where one is, either here in Houston or back in my hometown. Weird.
I love Target, though. Especially since the one near my apartment became a Supertarget, which means it sells groceries, too.
Posted by solo (Member # 3148) on :
I shop very little at Walmart. The only things I buy there on a regular basis are diapers and wipes as they are the best quality store brand and the major brands cost at least twice as much. From the comments here it seems that the U.S. Walmart must be much worse than the ones I have been to in Canada. I don't like going to Walmart on a Saturday, but that is the only day they are usually really busy. The staff isn't very helpful, but the stores are usually clean. I don't like supporting them, but they really are the only place we can get quality diapers at a price we can afford. At least we only have a couple more years of buying diapers.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:How far will we go to save 12 cents?
To the very ends of the earth!
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I saved almost a hundred dollars on my TV by getting it at Wal-Mart.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: I have also heard that the only other store giving Wal-Mart a "run for their money" and actually worrying Wal-Mart as a competitor is CostCo.
Costco is indeed a very good store. You have to be a member though. There is a fee. If you don't at least 10 times in one year, you only come out about even. Their prices are as good as Wal-Mart, only: -They pay their people better -They have better customer service -They have top-quality meats -Every checkstand is open at all times
On a bad note, the lines in every checkstand is at least 10 people long. I wish they would build more Costco's. They kill Wal-Mart, they don't just compete.
As you can tell I really hate Wal-Mart. They put at least 4 supermarket stores (Safeway, Albertsons, Raley's, ACME) within a 10 mile radius. My city (Elk Grove) has 80,000+ people, and they have put a permanent restriction on Wal-Mart.
Costco also does this, but they respect supermarket business and that's why they refuse to put one closer than 10 miles from my house. And I have to fight 30 minutes of traffic just to get there.
Sorry for the long rant, but I hate Wal-Mart. They threaten to put companies like I work for out of business.
EDIT: Oh yeah, and Costco sells Herbrew National polish sausages at a snack bar for $1.50 including a 16oz soda. That's not bad at all, considering how good they are.
[ December 11, 2003, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: Nick ]
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
Sorry to burst everyone's bubble, but I loathe Target. I avoid shopping there as much as possible.
Wal-Mart allows charities, and non-profit organizations to collect there. Target does not. Target will not allow Toys for Tots, or any similar charities from the military. And as far as I know, they don't allow scouts to sell there either.
I don't know all the details of their policies, but that's the basic idea.
*prepares to get head bitten off by Target fans*
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
quote: You know, I don't think I've ever set foot inside a Wal-Mart. I don't think I even know where one is
((pssst..... Orphelia is really Paris Hilton in disguise..... she doesn't know about Wal-Mart!))
Farmgirl
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
I prefer Target to WalMart. It's a much nicer store and the prices are comparable. I even do some of my grocery shopping there when I can (no SuperTarget nearby) because their food prices, even in a regular Target, are better than a grocery store. Cereal is usually a buck or two cheaper.
WalMart does have the bigger selection though.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Currently, it's an easy choice for me. The closest Wal-marts are over 30 minutes away, and not particularly near anywhere I'd be going anyway. The closest Target is less than 20 minutes away, and practically next door to my kids' school. The fact that I prefer shopping there for many of the reasons mentioned by others is a bonus.
Wal-mart is planning to invade my area next year with something like 20 new stores. I haven't decided whether I will shop there or not, but I was leaning toward "not" even before this thread. Their planned invasion is responsible for the (STILL! AAAAAHHHHHH!) ongoing supermarket strike. The strikers are fighting reductions in healthcare coverage that the supermarkets want to put into place to be able to compete with the (NON-UNIONIZED! ) Wal-marts.
OTOH, as a recent series of articles in the Times pointed out, there is the lure of lower grocery prices. And since my grocery bills are obscene, even though I clip coupons religiously and do my best to buy things on sale, it will be tempting. But I'm not shopping at the two supermarket chains that are still being picketed (the union withdrew their strikers from the third), even when they have tempting sales. I'll likely manage to pass up Wal-mart's deals as well.
My SIL, who lived last year in Iowa and is now in Nebraska, adores Wal-marts. I resist saying anything to her about them.
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
quote:Wow. I keep waiting for a tornado to rip through this thread.
And nary a j/k or to be seen.
It's a beautiful moment, people. And it made me laph (bonus!).
Posted by Dead_Horse (Member # 3027) on :
Having worked for a supplier of Walmart, I can tell you that if you find a brand name item at another store and one at walmart that look identical, they may not be. Walmart supports it's price cutting with quality cutting. They negotiate "savings" with their suppliers which requires the suppliers to remove features and use cheaper materials. So, compare carefully, and don't rely on similar item numbers or features listed on packaging to determine whether the item is a good value.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
What are you the " " and "jk" police?
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Nick, I said "Walmart Corporation" not "Walmart" when discussing Costco. This is because Costco is NOT competing directly with the Walmart retails stores. They are competing with Sam's Club, Walmart Corporations wholesale branch. Both Sam's and Costco have membership fees. Sam's is $35 and Costco is $45 for basic membership. Neither fee is horribly exclusionary. Overall Walmart is a much, much bigger company, and Costco is only beating them in the wholesale market, not the retail market.
AJ
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
All the Sam's Clubs in my area are in danger of going under. I wonder why that could be?
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
quote: What are you the " " and "jk" police?
YES. YES I AM.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote: Walmart supports it's price cutting with quality cutting. They negotiate "savings" with their suppliers which requires the suppliers to remove features and use cheaper materials.
Not only does Wal-mart support quality-cutting, their insistence on prices lower than a manufacturers costs has forced many to cut costs -- often by replacing decently-paid American workers with pennies-an-hour overseas labor. Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: Walmart supports it's price cutting with quality cutting. They negotiate "savings" with their suppliers which requires the suppliers to remove features and use cheaper materials.
So I take it that it's a bad idea to buy condoms there.....
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
Nick - Are you in the market? Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
*WHAP* Ralphie! you just used a smiley. That should have been deadpanned. Shame on you!!!
AJ
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
Or parachutes...
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Or smoke detectors, or brake parts.
Or elastic. Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
quote: WHAP* Ralphie! you just used a smiley. That should have been deadpanned. Shame on you!!!
I was being flirtatious. It gets Nick all flustered. It's cute.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
This one is not quite as good.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: I was being flirtatious. It gets Nick all flustered. It's cute.
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
Though I can't speak for all Walmarts, I've found that the ones where I used to live (Arkansas) actually ENCOURAGED small business. I've seen Walmarts go up in Benton and Little Rock in an empty spot off the highway and within just a few years that same spot is overrun with small businesses, restaurants, and movie theatres. Businesses go where the people are. Stores that originally cater to Walmart's contingency either adapt or go under. That may not be fair, but adaptaion is entirely possible.
Walmarts also vary in quality depending on who their area or regional manager is. One of the Walmarts I frequent has much better produce than the other ones, for example, while a different one has a better selection of other products.
Granted, Arkansas is Walmart country (there are five within driving distance of my house), so the points I'm making might not apply to everyone.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I hate 'em both. But for target, it's just a general throw away culture hatred, and for Wal-Mart it's a Evil, as in fru-its of the devil, hatred.
There was a historic site in the valley, but because it had never been registered with the state or anything, Wal-mart bulldozed the area, setting up a "heritage park" in the middle of their parking lot. What really made me mad is that they got some kind of bond to do it (low interest) because of the heritage park.
Target only offended me by only have sexy style maternity clothes when I went there to shop once. it's, like, "hello, I'm already knocked up, why do I want to dress like a bimbo?"
But since I never shop anywhere anymore, I guess it doesn't matter. If I did have any money, I would probably go back to getting stuff from Land's End. I guess I do buy a lot of stuff a Shopko.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:"hello, I'm already knocked up, why do I want to dress like a bimbo?"
*snort* This was wonderful. Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: "hello, I'm already knocked up, why do I want to dress like a bimbo?"
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
If dressing up like a bimbo is only to produce offspring, then I'm in trouble.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Well, right, but when you are already knocked up your grasp on logic can get a little shakey.
Edit: I used to think it was hormones, but it turns out it is due to chronic low blood sugar.
[ December 11, 2003, 08:16 PM: Message edited by: pooka ]
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
*is scared to get married and have children now*
Thanks a lot ladies! Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
Of course, with all those condoms you bought, you shouldn't worry too much about children.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
I didn't buy any condoms Jon. I was just being tongue-in-cheek, but of course you knew that right?
<derails thread> On a serious note, where does the LDS Church stand on contraceptives? I'm just curious.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I went to Target this afternoon, and thought of y'all.
They didn't have the item I had a raincheck for, but they did honor it for the same percentage off a similar item -- that's their policy.
They had lots of lanes open, and thus short lines, even though there were a quite a few holiday shoppers.
And with their coupon I had from online, the shampoo I got was practically free.
<-- happy shopper
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
To all the whining "save the small businesses!" and "they treat employees like numbers!" hippies...
You're all just wasting breath, and big busisses will survive as most logical stuff does, I really don't need to rub it in.
But I will.
Wal-Mart exists and grows because it sells in bulk, and at more reasonable prices than smaller competition.
I've never come across this "lowered quality" that everyone speaks of, and I buy a good majority of my stuff there. I've never seen the long lines, either...but if they're long, go at a less busy time. They're open 24 hours a day. I can buy a shirt there for $4 that lasts as long as the $15 equivalent at Target or that little hole-in-the-wall place down the street that everyone shops at because it's the hip thing to do. If you feel the need for genuine, hand-crafted furniture instead of the ample stuff they sell at Wal-Mart for under $100, get a freaking book and learn to make it yourself. If you want to spend $30 on a toaster that'll last you five years, I'm sure you'll always find a place that sells them. Me? I'll go to Wal-Mart and pay $6 for one that lasts three.
This is by far the most pretentious, snobbish, full of posturing crap thread that I've seen here for a long time. And that's saying a lot, as we're a pretty pretentious, snobbish, posturing crowd.
This is not to say that I wouldn't advocate, as I've said before, placing chemicals which caused impotence in the air circulation ducts so as to prevent their most staunch customers from reproducing. I'd just wear a gas mask to do my shopping.
As for Target...I have nothing against it. It just seems like a park that's always empty. Gives me the creeps walking around by myself in a quiet store. At least at Wal-Mart, the people-watching is entertaining.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Frisco, what about the fact that Wal-mart admits that their full-time, senior employees do not make enough money to live on? Or that they're driving manufacturing overseas? To me, that's what makes them evil -- I have no problem buying cheap stuff. I do it all the time.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Hmmm...my roommate threw freight for them, and started at $9.50/hr. How is that not livable?
Maybe the cashiers make less, but what do you expect? It's a job that requires little education and fewer skills than it takes to run the fryers at McDonald's (not trying to disrespect either). I'm sorry that some people have to support families on salaries meant for high school kids, but I don't blame Wal-Mart for that. In the end, nobody has to work there.
And as for buying from overseas...well, again, it's not their fault that other countries are leagues more efficient at manufacturing. China and Taiwan have long been making the stuff we sell. I don't like that American maufacturers lay the responsibility of their success on consumers. If you can't make a product for cheaper than Asia+their shipping costs, then get into a different business.
So they're not a charity organization. Fine with me. Doesn't make them evil.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
The fact remains, when a Wal-mart moves into an area: average salary for THE SAME JOBS goes down, companies that have been hiring American workers and making a profit for decades now have to choose one or the other, and many businesses are driven out.
I don't expect them to be a charity organization. Neither will I support what I consider to be immoral business practices.
If that makes me a pretentious snob, I'll wear the label with pride. And I won't be buying it at Wal-mart.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
I hope you enjoy your $50 toaster, then.
[ December 11, 2003, 10:43 PM: Message edited by: Frisco ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:If you can't make a product for cheaper than Asia+their shipping costs, then get into a different business.
I agree with everything you said except this.
You can't compete with a country that doesn't have minimum wage.
My family has a business, and there is a very precise window of job size that is worth. Lots too small, and it isn't worth the set-up cost and paperwork (and headache). Too big, and it's cheaper to send it to China and send it back.
*sigh* Never mind, I guess I do agree with this. While the business hums along nicely, then next generation doesn't want it. That job-size window is narrowing rapidly.
[ December 11, 2003, 10:46 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I have a $20 toaster, thank you.
And I bought it at Sav-on. Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Why does everyone have to include some type of disclaimer or display some sort of emotional pain when they agree with me?!
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Just once, I would like to see an "I agree." without it being directly followed or preceeded with "*sigh*" or "Now I feel dirty."
[ December 11, 2003, 11:12 PM: Message edited by: Frisco ]
Posted by Ophelia (Member # 653) on :
Frisco always makes me sigh and/or feel dirty, depending on which picture of him I'm looking at.
Stupid sexy Frisco.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I agree.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Perhaps it's the way you put things, Frisco. It's much easier to agree with the statement "I like WalMart because things are cheaper there" than it is to agree with the statement "You're all posturing, high-faluting snobs who should be making your own furniture!"
Me, I shop at WalMart occasionally for commodities, things I don't particularly care about. The older I get, the more quality matters to me, and the less WalMart becomes a destination; the same applies to 24/7 hours, as I find that I desperately need to buy Ramen noodles at three in the morning much less often than I did in college.
If I shop at a WalMart OR a Target today, it's generally for things like batteries, storage containers, or DVDs, CDs, or board games that are being dumped below normal retail to drive sales.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Or diapers, or bottles, or... um, baby food...*searches brain* onesies...
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Oh, I really don't mind, Tom (hence the smilie). Hell, even I feel dirty agreeing with me. Especially when the Mormon girls start treating me like a piece of meat.
Just because you're generally non-controversial doesn't mean I'm working towards the same image. *grin*
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
No comment on how funny my post was? Heck, I giggled for almost four minutes!
[ December 12, 2003, 01:28 AM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
Someone asked way back there where the LDS church stands on contraceptives. The official teaching is that the timing and number of children a couple has is a private matter that the church has no say about. However, they do encourage people to have as many children as they can be good parents for. We love children, I guess. I think it's so cool in sacrament meeting to see all the kids there. It makes me happy. But there's absolutely nothing at all like the Pope's encyclical on birth control in the LDS church.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
kat, I thought it was hilarious. Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:We love children, I guess.
Ha!
You guys don't fool anyone. We know you're trying to take over the world!
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: Someone asked way back there where the LDS church stands on contraceptives. The official teaching is that the timing and number of children a couple has is a private matter that the church has no say about. However, they do encourage people to have as many children as they can be good parents for. We love children, I guess. I think it's so cool in sacrament meeting to see all the kids there. It makes me happy. But there's absolutely nothing at all like the Pope's encyclical on birth control in the LDS church.
Thank you Anne Kate. That helps a lot. Posted by Jenny Gardener (Member # 903) on :
In my experience, Wal-Mart is scary. Every time I walk in the store, I am shamed by the way Americans waste their natural resources. How much cheap plastic crap can people consume? Is there really that much demand for it? And the prices are so cheap - don't fix things, don't reuse them, just THROW THEM AWAY! Wal-Mart sells things cheap!
Also, at least in my town, Wal-Mart is the store preferred by overweight families who yell at their children. It really disturbs me. There is an aura of insecurity and oppression at the store that bothers me every time I go there. Which I don't, if I can help it.
Also, Wal-Mart gives me grief if I ask them to use my canvas shopping bags instead of their plastic ones. Meijer, a similar store across the street, actually gives me 5 cents on the bag when I try to reduce waste.
So, Wally World does NOT get my business.
Target is okay, but it doesn't have groceries. Prices are higher but the quality is good.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
I am just afraid of the Wal-Mart zombies. I mean, all their employees have this prostitute-crack-whore look, like they've just gotten through with the Bataan death march and are just waiting to make a dash for freedom with what little energy they have left.
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
I think someone mentioned a while back that they can't ever find anyone to help them at Walmart. My experience has always been the opposite. I don't have any problems finding an employee at Walmart, but I've had to go back to the front of the store numerous times at Target if I needed help.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
Well, since two of my nephews work at Wal-Mart, and I'm trying to get my 16-year-old son hired on there, I guess I can't slam them too bad.
Frisco is right in many ways -- this is simply supply & demand in society, and as long as people keep jamming their bodies into Wal-Mart, they are going to keep building more and bigger Wal-Marts everywhere. Obviously there isn't a great deal of the population concerned with some of the points brought up here, or else the corporation wouldn't be successful.
Jenny - my only answer to that is that I tell my sacker at Wal-mart to use as FEW sacks as possible, please. (some of them seem to want to put one item in each sack!) And also they offer a "sack recycling" bin where you can bring your old plastic sacks back in to go to the recycler (now, whether they actually DO send them to recycling or not, I have not been able to prove).
Farmgirl
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Has anyone noticed the stereotypical view that many people on this thread have espoused about the typical Wal-Mart patron and employee?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
It's just so hard to find things about which it is socially acceptable to be snotty.
Posted by Theca (Member # 1629) on :
I like Walmart ok. And my brother is an assistant manager of a Walmart. People actually have made condescending remarks to me about his job when they find out what he does for a living. I don't understand that at all. He works hard and arranging all that stuff in one store must be very complicated.
I suppose we grew up in a town where, if you needed something, it was at walmart. There were no other places to go. I admit I get annoyed when I go to Walmart at midnight and the place is full of parents with small children who ought to be in bed asleep.
Posted by IdemosthenesI (Member # 862) on :
Wal-Mart is the best argument in existence against capitalism in general.
Not only do they drive out small business, but they encourage homogenized society, bully their suppliers, and at this point probably have more power over many organizations than the government does.
Target is a similar beast, but it's a hell of a lot nicer looking one! :-) In Tyler, the Target and Wal-Mart are directly across the street from each other, so it's easy to do a side by side comparison. Wal-Mart trips take tons of time and generally yield fairly frustrating experiences. The blue vests are frightfully sparse, so time is usually spent traipsing back and forth through the aisles until my feet are bloody, ragged, floppy stumps and my mind has transformed to a lukewarm glob of congealed tapioca. Furthermore, there is no cieling, but rather a visible gridwork above the shopping area with enormous lights like the ones to be found in a gymnasium. The effect is remarkably similar to shopping in an airplane hangar. Also, the clothes that can be found at Wal-Mart are perfectly suited only for the stereotypical Wal-Mart shopper in their base of operations, backwoods Arkansas.
In the meantime, Target has a cozy atmosphere with an actual cieling. Their marketing plans usually incorporate warm, friendly colors and their clothing, while still cheapo department store fare, is wearable. In short, I have to shop at Target, and I have concluded that...
Wal-Mart is the devil.
How incredibly fitting that Mc'Donalds' have attached themselves to many Wal-Marts.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:they encourage homogenized society...
Target is a similar beast, but it's a hell of a lot nicer looking one!
Oh, good grief. Anything large will encourge homogenized society. Heck, Hatrack encourages homogenized society, which is why we die without newbies.
So, it's okay to do evil if the doer is pretty?
---------------
Y'all are getting snottier by the second. Of all the things to feel superior about, the choice of discount supermarket has got to be the lamest.
[ December 12, 2003, 11:59 AM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:prostitute-crack-whore
The only thing scarier than a crack-whore is a prostitute-crack-whore. Posted by IdemosthenesI (Member # 862) on :
Sorry, my smiley didn't work. Didn't these used to automatically turn yellow and purty? Haven't been here in a while. Anyway, that was supposed to be:
But it's a hell of a lot nicer looking one. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Oddly enough, the winking smiley didn't change the content of the post.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
And by the way, I unashamedly shop at Wal-Mart. I'm wearing a shirt from Wal-Mart, and our three-foot-tall Christmas tree came from Wal-Mart. Evil or not, it's still a good store for cheap stuff.
Posted by IdemosthenesI (Member # 862) on :
Well, you can't blame me for trying. I suppose you have a point. I didn't write that post very well.
I guess my main reason for feeling comfortable shopping at Target as opposed to Wal-Mart is that the latter has more power, which allows them to perpetuate the sort of social atrocities catalogued previously in this thread. Then again, I'm sure that if Target were in the same economic position, they would do the same sorts of things (or maybe I'm just a cynical bastard.) The fact is, they aren't, so they haven't. That's why I shop there.
The fact that Target actually cares how their stores look is an added bonus.
[ December 12, 2003, 12:10 PM: Message edited by: IdemosthenesI ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Okay. Fair enough.
1. Don't want to encourage that monolith, and 2. Prettier store.
Very nice. And there's no need to run down anyone!
-----
This thread has made me a little uncomfortable. It's like what David Bowles used to describe about the social heirarchy in his Texas border town.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: And by the way, I unashamedly shop at Wal-Mart. I'm wearing a shirt from Wal-Mart, and our three-foot-tall Christmas tree came from Wal-Mart. Evil or not, it's still a good store for cheap stuff.
That is true Jon Boy. I'm not being snotty, I just refuse to shop there because they are destroying the grocery business as we know it. I work in the grocery business (however low my position is ). My dad did work in the grocery business, but because Wal-Mart has been destroying grocery stores like Safeway, Albertsons, Raley's, and ACME, sales and marketing companies have had to lay off people (like my dad) and possibly myself. The only reason I'm not gone is because my position(merchandiser aka shelf rearranger guy ) is still in very much demand. Anyway, It's not like the experience of shopping at their store that discourages me, it's their business policies. That is why I hate Wal-Mart. Posted by Sarcasm (Member # 4653) on :
It doesn't seem to be destroying grocery stores in Utah Valley. That's probably because it's way out by the freeway, and grocery stores are a lot closer. Macey's is so packed that they could probably open up a store on every other block. Of course, Utah Valley is a very special place . . .
[ December 12, 2003, 12:32 PM: Message edited by: Sarcasm ]
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
The farther you get from Bentonville, the worse the Walmart will be.
The first time I walked into a walmart here in CA I was disgusted. Items thrown on the shelves, none of them were marked and the employees didn't give a rats buttocks if you shopped there or not.
I thought to myself "Sam would be rolling over in his grave. This looks like a K-Mart."
On the other hand, Target here is nice. But I agree, less selection.
Tom, your elitist, anti-middle America comments show what kind of person you are.
Pix
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:The only thing scarier than a crack-whore is a prostitute-crack-whore.
I don't know, Jon Boy; even scarier than that, to me, are the legions of prostitute-crack-whores who were forced to take part in the Bataan Death March.
You know, I can't quite put my finger on why, but I have this general impression that Tom may not be The Pixiest's favorite person ever. Probably just my imagination though.
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
My friend from Louisiana LOVES Walmart's clothing. Apparently her location has nice stuff. It's like I said before about different store managers effect the quality of the store and emphasis on certain products. My Arkansas Walmarts' clothing had the ugliest colors and prints you have ever seen, broken up slightly by 4x tweety tshirts. I get all my jeans and some other pants at walmart, though, because you just can't mess up jeans.
Posted by jehovoid (Member # 2014) on :
My grandpa works as a greeter at Wal-Mart. Not that he needs the money or anything. He just does it to get out of the house. I haven't talked to him in depth about it, but he really enjoys it.
I don't shop much at all, so I don't have any strong opinion either way.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"Tom, your elitist, anti-middle America comments show what kind of person you are."
I'm actually baffled by this, since I'm one of the people on this thread who has NOT heavily criticized either Target or WalMart. Perhaps Pix is talking about some other hypothetical thread somewhere in which I made some other kind of comment about the Middle America in which I happen to be living. Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
quote:They're open 24 hours a day
The only things I would ever leave the house for at 3AM are things I can't get at Walmart. For example, Chinese food and donuts (in the same "restaurant"). Or crappy, Americanized Mexican food.
Posted by jehovoid (Member # 2014) on :
What about whipped cream and a pair of handcuffs?
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
Nope.
Posted by msquared (Member # 4484) on :
I think that this is the first thread on Hatcrack that I have started that has made it to three pages.
msquared
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
You know, I miss the days when there were both a 24 Hour Chinese Food and Donuts and a $1 Chinese Food and Donuts within 10 minutes of my dorm. (Which do you go to? Depends on what time it is and how much money you have.) Although there are both Taco Bell and Del Taco within a quarter mile of my apartment.
Posted by Theca (Member # 1629) on :
I like going to Walmart at three in the morning. It's nice and empty and I can get through the store quickly. Not very quiet, tho, they always seem to be playing music too loudly overhead at night.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
I'm sure not either, Tom, but perhaps
quote: Me, I shop at WalMart occasionally for commodities, things I don't particularly care about. The older I get, the more quality matters to me, and the less WalMart becomes a destination
might have come across to some as saying those of us who can only afford Wal-Mart stuff are somewhat lower class (can't get "quality") or something. Other than that, I'm not sure what offended pixie.
FG [edit: oops -- didn't see we were already on page3]
[ December 12, 2003, 01:56 PM: Message edited by: Farmgirl ]
Posted by jehovoid (Member # 2014) on :
I think it's the way he started off his sentence with "Me,."
I mean really, how pretentious-sounding can you get?
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
I figure it had to be the tornado joke he tossed off earlier in the thread. I've reread his post on the second page a bunch of times looking for whatever it was that set The Pixiest off, and I honestly can't find anything offensive in it. I know that sometimes Tom says something that could have a snarky interpretation, and I'm not always sure which interpretation he intended, or if he actually intended both of them to be present. In this thread, though, I really haven't seen anything like that. The Pixiest seems to have had a problem with Tom for ages, and I think that she just generally has such a chip on her shoulder about him that when she sees a post of his, she automatically assumes the worst. Too bad, really; they're both nice people that I like quite a bit. It happens, though. The whole Belle/Anne Kate thing, or the Anne Kate/kat thing (which, happily, got resolved) spring to mind.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
Hmm... I always thought The Pixiest was a guy.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: Tom, your elitist, anti-middle America comments show what kind of person you are.
I didn't get that from him...
Granted, I might not agree with some of Tom's viewpoints about people or issues, but at least he is respectful in the way he expresses them.
In other words: Be nice! Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
What on earth?? Anne Kate and I were fighting? When did this happen?? Was I there?
*thinks* Oh, you probably mean Olivet. Yes, all happily resolved. Yay! She's wonderful.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Oh, right, it was you and Olivet who didn't get along for awhile. I'm glad that got resolved. I hate it when people I like a lot dislike each other.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
That makes me feel better. I was afraid there was some sort of evil-Katie twin that arguing with Anne Kate. I can only handle one evil Katie at a time.
That whole thing seems so long ago now. You know it was almost a year and a half ago? Holy cow. hey, does this mean it's officially entered Hatrack Legend? Like bonduca and the time OSC still posted.
[ December 12, 2003, 02:27 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
I don't think that I've been a part of any Hatrack legends. I mean, I was the first person to create a "God" account, but since I'm probably the only person who remembers it, it doesn't really count.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
We could get into a flame war if you would like. I suspect if we really tried and put our backs into it, we could smoke the leaves off the logo. Posted by Lissande (Member # 350) on :
Nope. Noemon and CT agreeing on everything and complimenting each other about it is definitely a part of Hatrack Legend.
edit: like Tristan and Isolde, Lancelot and Guinevere, Romeo and Juliet - except without the love and death. And on the internet. But otherwise, really quite similar.
[ December 12, 2003, 02:37 PM: Message edited by: Lissande ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
You're right, Lissande. No need for the flame war. And I was coming in here to propose doing it in verse, just to make it memorable. *sad*
Posted by Lissande (Member # 350) on :
Since you bring it up, kat, I don't think I'm in Hatrack Lore. Maybe you and I could do the flame war? Or maybe we should just blow everyone away with the wit and intelligence shining through our every post.
*thinks* Of course, that last one hasn't worked so far...
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Lissande's the poster who's known this place long Transcribes the legends and stays for a song. She famously won Dante's millionaire game He ducked out of the prize and now nothing's the same...
We could do that. Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
I thought Lissande to be the legendary Threadkiller of Hatrack, further famed for the serendipitous invention of the last post thread.
Posted by Lissande (Member # 350) on :
*laugh* That's great. Stinkin Dante never did marry us, did he? ANY of us. All that hoopla and fanfare, and it was a scam all along. I am ashamed to admit, though, that I couldn't make a decent rhyme if you offered me a million dollars and a chocolate bunny for it. My English degree actually has a stipulation in it that I never be allowed to even attempt to write poetry. I think the English Language (corporately) might revoke my right to speak it if I tried. It's embarrassing to have to admit this in a public forum, but there you go.
So I'm stuck with the wit and vivacity angle. Or no...I think we're going about this the wrong way. Of course we're part of Hatrack Legend, kat - why shouldn't we be? We can't think of specific instances because it is our entire Hatrack careers that people admire and remember fondly. Don't you think so? (This is so much less effort...) Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Oh, absolutely. We are going to be like Humphrey Bogart and just get some sort of Lifetime Achievement award towards the end of our days, when everyone gets all embarassed and can't remember why we didn't win any prizes for anything specific before. *grin*
Posted by Lissande (Member # 350) on :
aspectre...you must be thinking of some other charming, shockingly brilliant and mind-blowingly beautiful jatraquera. I don't remember who it was that started the thread, but now that you mention it, wasn't the first last-post thread the one where no one wanted to let anyone else bear the pain of killing a thread (which it turned out we were all deathly afraid of) and so people kept posting so as to spare the feelings of the person immediately preceding them? I'd forgotten about that. Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Saxon, what kind of guy would have a name like "The Pixiest"??
Tom, It was the Tornado comment. Like we all live in Trailer parks or something.
Honestly I've met more people who live in double wides since moving to California than I knew growing up in Arkansas.
Pix
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I'd like to call Ralphie's attention to the above post, as it applies to her observation (at 3:42PM on the 11th) regarding the absence of presumably optional conditional smileys. Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Nope. Noemon and CT agreeing on everything and complimenting each other about it is definitely a part of Hatrack Legend.
I do like the colors and layout of Target more than WalMart, but really my tastes are so very very refined that I can't tell much difference between the products they carry. If I cannot have a Fortuny silk dress, of what possible relevance is the choice between one cotton shirt and another? If I cannot have an original Rodin, why on earth would I care whether I used a $10 or $30 lamp?
Tom, elitist? Ha, ha! I laugh. Actually, it's the highest form of elitist snobbery that drives me to shop at Goodwill and the Salvation Army (and, less rarely than my husband would like, stop the car en route to pull something useful-looking out of a dumpster).
That, and the desire to leave as few material traces on the world as possible, since I expect to step through a time/space wormhole sometime soon, and the fewer material inconsistencies this would create, the easier on the tummy. Paradoxes are so hard to digest.
[ December 13, 2003, 07:12 AM: Message edited by: ClaudiaTherese ]
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
I really do love to shop secondhand. Part of the beauty of wood is the way it ages, how it curves and colors with use, how the stroking of hands polishes to the smoothest sheen. Secondhand clothes rarely shrink with washing -- they are pre-softened, the seams flattened and the colors well-fixed.
Practice makes this more fun, as with any skill. I can spot cashmere from feet away, but I prefer to close my eyes and run my fingers along the close-packed shoulders of the hanging sweaters. Cashmere is barely-there, and good cashmere is pill-free. Really good cashmere only continues to soften with hand-washing, and the best cashmere can be worn in spring or fall, in winter layers, and in all but the nakedest of summers. Secondhand has taught me how to choose my cashmere.
Raw silk has the slight roughness of a true oyster pearl. It is unmistakable.
Hand-blown glass has slight imperfections which set off the form. The waviness of the hand-blown and cut glass bowl on my counter perfectly sets off the curve of the apples inside.
Secondhand lets you get exactly what you want. Maybe not today, but over the course of building a wardrobe or nesting a home, it certainly does. You aren't limited to the latest fads and trends. Classic French enameled cookware, rather than the cheap modern aluminum; tightly-knit Hudson's Bay wool blanket, soft and water-impervious, rather than friable acrylic; and timeless cookbooks like the Poor Poet's, rather than the latest craze for burned nouvelle. Or whatever.
Good grief, I love secondhand. If I must forgo being painted by DaVinci, being clothed by Fortuny, and being sung to by Leonard Cohen, at least I can make my selection from the best available, over decades rather than the days (or hours?) of fashion trends.
[I guess Target's pretty good for batteries, but my most beautiful things don't need batteries. The pager, however, does. And secondhand litter has very little to offer me, with even less to offer the cats. So I'm with Tom on the commodities part. Still, he's not nearly snobby enough to shop at the St Vincent DePaul Dig&Save -- clothes, $1 a pound -- on a regular basis. ]
[ December 13, 2003, 07:27 AM: Message edited by: ClaudiaTherese ]
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
But I am serious about the time/space wormhole. When I disappear off the face of the earth, you'll know where I went.
Er, rather, you won't know where. Or when. Neither will I, at least at first.
(Isn't it exciting? )
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"Still, he's not nearly snobby enough to shop at the St Vincent DePaul Dig&Save -- clothes, $1 a pound -- on a regular basis."
Sadly, in my case, it's not snobbery (or lack thereof) that prevents me from purchasing secondhand clothes, but rather the limitations of physics; clothes that are too small for me in the Dig&Save bin will remain too small for me at home. Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Tom, you just need the right pair of eyes looking for you. I could fit a 7-foot tall kangaroo with an extra head out of the Dig & Save. (That's the kangaroo which has the extra head, mind. I've never found an extra head at St Vincent DePaul. Not yet. )
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
CT, when's the last time you slept? I think you're hallucinating Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
mack, I've been up since 3am. It's one of those days.
The hallucination about the head? No, man, I was just joking.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
See!
I'm not a man.
--I--
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
[edited for propriety]
[ December 13, 2003, 01:03 PM: Message edited by: ClaudiaTherese ]
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
On the plus side, a head at the Dig&Save would cost less than a head anywhere else, and would probably be only slightly discolored.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
(mackillian, that was boorishly crude reference visual humor. I withdraw the comment and respectfully beg pardon. )
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Tom, 50 cents a pound on Wednesdays. Can't beat that for a head price, nowheres.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Oh my gosh, mackillian, it just occurred to me that you might have thought I meant you could look like a man, if one looked at you cross-eyed. Good grief, woman, it never even crossed my mind.
I meant that your visual symbol above had certain man-parts-ish look to it. I couldn't figure out why this made you sad (affronted, perhaps, or the classic o_O , but not sad).
Is that what you thought? I must send you you an email. Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Yeah, that's what I thought.
Some ass called me sir yesterday.
I don't get it. I have a feminine body and a feminine face. I wear girl clothes.
But people see short hair, even though it's cut in a girl way, and think "Boy."
Though, I'd be a very...um...fruity boy.
And I can't just grow my hair out--I look silly with longer hair. Short hair suits my face.
Which apparently isn't feminine enough. Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
oh, mack, I'm so sorry. No, I was comparing the "bird" to a penis.
Crude coarse humor, and I'm sorry. It took a lot of thinking really hard to figure out what could have made you sad. (Obviously, the thought of you as remotely unfeminine is very hard for me to grasp as a concept.)
The part was just being juvenile.
Very sorry. I do know better, anyway. Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
It was the putting "see!" right above a phallic symbol that got me giggling.
[Today I will do some penance. ]
[ December 13, 2003, 02:39 PM: Message edited by: ClaudiaTherese ]
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
I get it.
I was just reacting to stupid people from yesterday. I'm really getting tired of that assumption that short hair=boy.
When someone addresses me as "sir" I usually make it a point to glance down at my chest.
I just don't get THAT.
[ December 13, 2003, 02:40 PM: Message edited by: mackillian ]
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Now that I think about it (again), it must also have something to do with the crap I got as a kid because I was a tomboy. Southern girls tend not to approve of tomboys, so I got a ton of torment from them. Of course, this developed into a harsh self-image and no confidence in my body.
A lot has changed since then, and while I still have a harsh self-image, it's a bit better from the initiave I've taken to improve my thought processes and even improving my physical image (wearing clothing that fits to my form instead of hiding it, working out, etc).
So even with that, I suppose I'm sensitive.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
I'm so sorry for triggering the extra stress.
For what it's worth, I had to get really really creative to get it. *tackle handshake*
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Nah, no stress. Am fine
Aren't you going to GO GET SOME SLEEP?
*tackle*
Posted by Lerris (Member # 3530) on :
Count me in the line of anti-Walmart. This is one of the most informative articles that I have found on the subject.
quote:"Wal-Mart has a big pencil," says Garson. "They have such awesome purchasing power that they write their own ticket. If they don't like your prices, they'll go vertical and do it themselves--or they'll find someone that will meet their terms."
The bastards.
From the article:
quote:There is very little academic and statistical study of Wal-Mart`s impact on the health of its suppliers and virtually nothing in the last decade, when Wal-Mart`s size has increased by a factor of five.
So the article is based on a couple anecdotes? Even with the "bad" things they say about Wal-Mart, it reads, to me, as praise.
They require the companies it buys from to meet high standards? Damn them. Companies do business with Wal-Mart to boost dismal sales, yet choose not to leave when the relationship stops benefitting them? Burn WallyWorld!
If you aren't making any money selling to Wal-Mart, for God's sake, stop selling to them! WM is going to keep lowering prices and searching for the best deal, but it's eventually going to have to balance out. If some already diminishing companies go out of business in the balancing process because they get greedy and can't resist selling to Wal-Mart, oh well.
Posted by Da_Goat (Member # 5529) on :
I used to go to Wal-Mart, but it expanded into a supercenter (with true popular demand, though) and now it's much too crowded there, and Target never has what I want. So now I just go to the mall. All I ever get at any of these places is music, books, and video games; and the mall has a Sam Goody, Barnes & Noble, and Gamestop. Plus, it has the food court, and you can't beat a Subway sandwhich for supper and a Dairy Queen blizzard for dessert.
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
quote:I'd like to call Ralphie's attention to the above post, as it applies to her observation (at 3:42PM on the 11th) regarding the absence of presumably optional conditional smileys.
Okay, Tom. I give up.
Just as I think you've been broken of this habit, someone comes along and deliberately misinterprets your comments and blows the whole thing to hell. I can't fight against the anal retentives masquerading as freedom fighters. They win.
Keep your smilies for self-preservation purposes. Just know that everytime you must post a "j/k" or " ," there's a forlorn Ralphie, crying quietly to herself in the corner.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
" and "jk" police?![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
) Wal-marts.![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
I'll likely manage to pass up Wal-mart's deals as well.![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
What on earth?? Anne Kate and I were fighting? When did this happen?? Was I there?![[Monkeys]](graemlins/monkeys.gif)
part was just being juvenile.![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Southern girls tend not to approve of tomboys, so I got a ton of torment from them. Of course, this developed into a harsh self-image and no confidence in my body.