Giving money to Amazon, Wal-Mart, Microsoft, Google .etc

It’s like, you can’t have an argument for price gouging, when you’re enabling them by spending. If people were smart, they’d stop giving them money 10 - 15 years ago and they’d be right now, trying to reconstruct so they can be more economically friendly than how they are now.

  • Vanth@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I’m doing better now, but 15 years ago Walmart was the only option I had for food. Local/regional grocery stores were more expensive and I was living paycheck to paycheck with growing debt.

    “If people were smart they would stop buying the most cost-efficient option” is really not feasible.

    “If people were smart” they would read and stop putting oligarchs in power.

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      “If people were smart they would stop buying the most cost-efficient option” is really not feasible.

      In fact, more and more people don’t have the luxury of buying more expensive options.

      Of course, stealing is an option, and I think ‘If people were smart’ they would accept that stealing from Walmart is not an ethical or pragmatic problem, but it’s a risky behavior so I wouldn’t criticize people for not stealing. [edit: see Fubarberry’s reply]

      • Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Stealing from walmart also isn’t sustainable if many people are doing it. For example there were a ton of walmarts and other stores in the Chicago area that recently closed due to high theft at those locations. Now whole communities there are left without convenient shopping options, which can be a big problem for people with limited transportation options.

          • Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            30 days ago

            You can look up videos of some of the stores that were closed, they were basically being straight up looted.

            I remember seeing the videos, and thinking to myself how I didn’t understand how they could afford to stay in business like that. So when they announced they were closing those stores for theft, I didn’t really think the given reason was ever in doubt.

            • Didros@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              "“The decision to close a store is never easy,” company officials said in a statement. “The simplest explanation is that collectively our Chicago stores have not been profitable since we opened the first one nearly 17 years ago.”

              The stores lose tens of millions of dollars a year, according to the company, a figure that nearly doubled in the last five years despite numerous strategies to boost performance, including building smaller stores, offering local products and building a Walmart Academy training center."

              https://news.wttw.com/2023/04/12/walmart-closing-4-chicago-stores-company-says-losses-have-doubled-last-5-years

              Doesn’t sound like theft was ever the problem here according to them?

        • comfy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          Good point. If there aren’t other local stores remaining to fill the gaps, then that would be a critical problem.

          • SinAdjetivos@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            30 days ago

            Walmart, Kroger, etc.'s entire business model is to undercut other local stores to drive them out and become local monopolies. If they exist in a location there likely aren’t many, if any, local stores remaining…

        • mke_geek@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          Stealing isn’t right.

          The Walmart near me closed due to high theft. There were actually people stealing from the construction site when the store was being built, so it really was a ticking clock as to how long the store itself would even last.

          Some people are just awful.

          • comfy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            30 days ago

            Stealing isn’t right.

            I conditionally disagree. In fact, there are many real situations where stealing is the right option. There are valid reasons why folk lore glorifies figures like Robin Hood. And when it comes to international conglomerates like Walmart, which hoard astronomical wealth while others who can’t afford bread starve nearby, theft of the hoard is justice in its most appropriate form (if one values human survival more than legal property rights).

                • NeoToasty@kbin.melroy.orgOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  28 days ago

                  Look. There was a subreddit that got banned because it was a bunch of shoplifters, dumb ones, showcasing what they stole. They all claim that they’re doing it to hurt corporations.

                  If anyone had a clue at all about working retail - that’s not how it works. The corporation is going to be sailing just fine. It’s you, the worker and the store that’s getting hurt.

                  And that’s why these shoplifters are absolute assholes. They steal enough, the store is closed, many jobs lost.

                  How the fuck is that hurting the corporation?

                  • comfy@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    28 days ago

                    I’m curious that you said if people were really smart, they would stop giving money to Amazon, Wal-Mart, Microsoft, Google, etc., and then suggest that taking their stock without giving them money is bad. This seems contradictory to me. If stealing wouldn’t hurt the company, then why would not giving money be a smart thing? If not giving them money is good, stealing would just increase those loses further and also be smart.

                    They all claim that they’re doing it to hurt corporations.

                    Personally, I think hurting dominant anti-social corporations like Walmart is a smart thing for society to do, but that’s besides the point. There are plenty of far more accepted reasons to steal, such as preventing starvation (like stealing basic food from supermarkets). I assert that stealing essentials is more socially beneficial than allowing oneself and dependents to starve or die, and it’s far more ethical to steal from multi-billion dollar income megacorporations than other households or smaller businesses (the alternatives). I would go as far as to say they are socially obliged to steal, because they are more useful to society alive than dead and the cost to achieve that is trivial to the theft victim.

                    They steal enough, the store is closed, many jobs lost.

                    Honestly, if we’re talking about companies like Walmart, then I say good that the store is closed, those workers are now forced to enter (or even recreate!) jobs which benefit society rather than destroy other local businesses. This is clearly unfortunate to those who are temporarily unemployed as a result, that’s real pain and it’s valid, and it’s unfortunate, but the store closure is still an overall positive.

                    How the fuck is that hurting the corporation?

                    Losing sales isn’t profitable. Closing a store certainly isn’t profitable. If theft didn’t hurt the corporation, they wouldn’t spend significant money stopping it.

                    Furthermore, for a publicly traded company, reputation damage is real financial damage. Reporting high theft and closing stores has a real reputational impact to investors.

    • NeoToasty@kbin.melroy.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      But you’ll notice that the price comparison is narrowing and Wal-Mart is slowly not looking better off than the competition. It’s almost like shopping at Dollar Tree is more feasible, it’s what some of us are going to be forced to be doing if not now. Just shopping Dollar Tree almost regularly.

      • finderscult@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        Entirely depends on region. Walmarts strategy is to take a loss in an area until all local competitors are out of business then crank back up until that area is profitable enough to subsidize new areas. In my area Walmart is cheaper than pretty much everyone except dollar stores, and dollar stores treat their employees even worse while having even worse quality food for barely any cheaper.