How Do You Feel About WalMart?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Oh, because a few Bernie Madoff-types and CEOs get indicted for fraud and the national media makes in a story for 6 months, now people that start/develop and run big companies are bad?? So the people that hired you are evil?
[/quote]

Define a few? The point is, why are poor people making those poor choices? Is it genetics? Why are they poor in the first place? Is it genetics?

Why does an already wealthy, educated person presumably from a “good” upbringing choose to steal? Is it genetics?

You want to paint the poor people on food stamps as immoral when the real immorality is expressed by those who should have known better.

82

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

It was Walmart’s mistake. They gave their items away because they fucked up.

The only people who really “stole” technically were the ones arrested after they quit accepting food stamps unlimited.

Does anyone think people on food stamps would NOT do this?[/quote]

You’re telling me the people that spent hundreds of dollars on cards that had pennies on it had no idea they were going over their limit and they should be absolved of any guilt?

Whether they would or would not do this doesn’t change the fact that it is theft. [/quote]

I don’t care about who feels “guilty”.

I know that technically, no one stole from Walmart until they alone said they would accept no more unlimited food stamps.

Attaching solid “guilt” to those people as far as misdemeanor theft is unlikely.[/quote]

Well they actually did still from a Wal-Mart in Mississippi after they rioted because they were told their EBT card wouldn’t work.[/quote]

That wasn’t the people here, was it?

Nope.

Therefore, actual crime committed equals “zero”>

Walmart fucked up. End of story.

Look, if I see a loofa sponge with a sticker on it for 30 cents and it rings up 4 bucks, you can bet I’m demanding it for the 30 cents even if they stuck the wrong sticker on it.

Same here.

LOL
[/quote]

If a bank “accidentally” wires $10k into your account, and you go out and spend that $10k, are you or are you not guilty of a crime? Use precedent to guide your answer.

Was the guy that stole your money in the Chick-Fil-A guilty or not guilty of a crime?[/quote]

It’s that simple; right or wrong. You can justify anything in your mind but wrong will always be wrong. God I hope people that disagree with that are not breeding.

83

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
The flaw in your reasoning is thinking that your tax dollars are going to the military when they are actually going into the pockets of private citizens (e.g., contractors) who, by virtue of being private citizens are no different than those who you refer to as leeches. And what exactly do you mean by indirect costs? They come directly from you no matter where they end up. [/quote]

Except contractors provide a good or a service for the money.[/quote]

A necessary evil is not the same as a good or service.
It is a serious problem that our culture does not recognize the difference. [/quote]

From a previous post in response to similar sentiment-

So, who then, is supposed to do these types of things?

Should we just shitcan our entire military? Are you going to build your own private defense force?
[/quote]

No we shouldn’t!
You and I are in complete agreement about how the ‘resources’ should be managed. When the nation requires these things, we should produce nothing less than the very best. Our men and women should be the best prepared and outfitted on the field of battle. Where we may part company is what issue/event rises to the level of ‘requiring’ our involvement.

84

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
The flaw in your reasoning is thinking that your tax dollars are going to the military when they are actually going into the pockets of private citizens (e.g., contractors) who, by virtue of being private citizens are no different than those who you refer to as leeches. And what exactly do you mean by indirect costs? They come directly from you no matter where they end up. [/quote]

Except contractors provide a good or a service for the money.[/quote]

A necessary evil is not the same as a good or service.
It is a serious problem that our culture does not recognize the difference. [/quote]

Making flight suits is a “necessary evil” vs. A good in your book? [/quote]

IMO…any resource that is manufactured/recruited/inventoried, etc. with the intent of destroying property/killing people is a “necessary evil”.

  • It is necessary because few events carry the risk to the health of the nation like war.
  • It is evil because war, even conducted at ‘best case scenario’ levels, involves a great deal of collateral damage.

see my earlier post: if we are going to make flight suits, they should be the best there is.

85

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
The flaw in your reasoning is thinking that your tax dollars are going to the military when they are actually going into the pockets of private citizens (e.g., contractors) who, by virtue of being private citizens are no different than those who you refer to as leeches. And what exactly do you mean by indirect costs? They come directly from you no matter where they end up. [/quote]

Except contractors provide a good or a service for the money.[/quote]

A necessary evil is not the same as a good or service.
It is a serious problem that our culture does not recognize the difference. [/quote]

Making flight suits is a “necessary evil” vs. A good in your book? [/quote]

IMO…any resource that is manufactured/recruited/inventoried, etc. with the intent of destroying property/killing people is a “necessary evil”.

  • It is necessary because few events carry the risk to the health of the nation like war.
  • It is evil because war, even conducted at ‘best case scenario’ levels, involves a great deal of collateral damage.

see my earlier post: if we are going to make flight suits, they should be the best there is.

[/quote]

I figured that’s what you would say. Makes sense.

86

[quote]doublelung84 wrote:

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

It was Walmart’s mistake. They gave their items away because they fucked up.

The only people who really “stole” technically were the ones arrested after they quit accepting food stamps unlimited.

Does anyone think people on food stamps would NOT do this?[/quote]

You’re telling me the people that spent hundreds of dollars on cards that had pennies on it had no idea they were going over their limit and they should be absolved of any guilt?

Whether they would or would not do this doesn’t change the fact that it is theft. [/quote]

I don’t care about who feels “guilty”.

I know that technically, no one stole from Walmart until they alone said they would accept no more unlimited food stamps.

Attaching solid “guilt” to those people as far as misdemeanor theft is unlikely.[/quote]

Well they actually did still from a Wal-Mart in Mississippi after they rioted because they were told their EBT card wouldn’t work.[/quote]

That wasn’t the people here, was it?

Nope.

Therefore, actual crime committed equals “zero”>

Walmart fucked up. End of story.

Look, if I see a loofa sponge with a sticker on it for 30 cents and it rings up 4 bucks, you can bet I’m demanding it for the 30 cents even if they stuck the wrong sticker on it.

Same here.

LOL
[/quote]

If a bank “accidentally” wires $10k into your account, and you go out and spend that $10k, are you or are you not guilty of a crime? Use precedent to guide your answer.

Was the guy that stole your money in the Chick-Fil-A guilty or not guilty of a crime?[/quote]

It’s that simple; right or wrong. You can justify anything in your mind but wrong will always be wrong. God I hope people that disagree with that are not breeding.[/quote]

The law seems to disagree unless these people are being brought up on charges.

Are they?

Look, I am not discussing what is morally right or wrong. I am simply discussing what is legal and illegal…which is really all we should be discussing.

87

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The law seems to disagree unless these people are being brought up on charges.

Are they?

Look, I am not discussing what is morally right or wrong. I am simply discussing what is legal and illegal…which is really all we should be discussing.[/quote]

What these people did is fraud. This in no different than bouncing a check on purpose, which is illegal. They are guilty of a crime whether charges are brought or not.

88

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The law seems to disagree unless these people are being brought up on charges.

Are they?

Look, I am not discussing what is morally right or wrong. I am simply discussing what is legal and illegal…which is really all we should be discussing.[/quote]

What these people did is fraud. This in no different than bouncing a check on purpose, which is illegal. They are guilty of a crime whether charges are brought or not. [/quote]

Actually, they aren’t…because you aren’t guilty of anything in this country until PROVEN GUILTY in a court of law.

89

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The law seems to disagree unless these people are being brought up on charges.

Are they?

Look, I am not discussing what is morally right or wrong. I am simply discussing what is legal and illegal…which is really all we should be discussing.[/quote]

What these people did is fraud. This in no different than bouncing a check on purpose, which is illegal. They are guilty of a crime whether charges are brought or not. [/quote]

A crime that is not punished does not make it legal.

90

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The law seems to disagree unless these people are being brought up on charges.

Are they?

Look, I am not discussing what is morally right or wrong. I am simply discussing what is legal and illegal…which is really all we should be discussing.[/quote]

What these people did is fraud. This in no different than bouncing a check on purpose, which is illegal. They are guilty of a crime whether charges are brought or not. [/quote]

A crime that is not punished does not make it legal.
[/quote]

A crime that is not prosecuted means you can’t accuse someone of guilt in this country.

91

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The law seems to disagree unless these people are being brought up on charges.

Are they?

Look, I am not discussing what is morally right or wrong. I am simply discussing what is legal and illegal…which is really all we should be discussing.[/quote]

What these people did is fraud. This in no different than bouncing a check on purpose, which is illegal. They are guilty of a crime whether charges are brought or not. [/quote]

A crime that is not punished does not make it legal.
[/quote]

Yup, I guess no one committed murder in every unsolved murder case ever…

92

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

Yup, I guess no one committed murder in every unsolved murder case ever…[/quote]

It means no one was found guilty of murder if it unsolved.

93

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

Yup, I guess no one committed murder in every unsolved murder case ever…[/quote]

It means no one was found guilty of murder if it unsolved.[/quote]

Oh my God PWI…

Yes, legally, every single person that committed fraud in this incident is innocent until proven guilty.

Just like, legally, if a murder case is unsolved no one has been, legally, found guilt. Let’s use our common sense here. It still means SOMEONE murdered SOMEONE. Just like, while charges have not been filed, fraud was committed in this case.

94

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

Yup, I guess no one committed murder in every unsolved murder case ever…[/quote]

It means no one was found guilty of murder if it unsolved.[/quote]

Oh my God PWI…

Yes, legally, every single person that committed fraud in this incident is innocent until proven guilty.

Just like, legally, if a murder case is unsolved no one has been, legally, found guilt. Let’s use our common sense here. It still means SOMEONE murdered SOMEONE. Just like, while charges have not been filed, fraud was committed in this case.
[/quote]

If it is fraud that no one is willing to prosecute, then you can’t call someone guilty of it.

I mean, seriously, we have gone back and forth on this like ping pong.

I am not saying they were “morally right”.

I am saying if no one is prosecuting or accusing them of any crime, then you can’t call them criminals.

That is how the law works.

If I go pick up an MP3 player and walk right out the store with it and the owner sees me, waves at me and says, “hey, you can have that…no worries”…I didn’t steal shit.

95

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

Yup, I guess no one committed murder in every unsolved murder case ever…[/quote]

It means no one was found guilty of murder if it unsolved.[/quote]

Oh my God PWI…

Yes, legally, every single person that committed fraud in this incident is innocent until proven guilty.

Just like, legally, if a murder case is unsolved no one has been, legally, found guilt. Let’s use our common sense here. It still means SOMEONE murdered SOMEONE. Just like, while charges have not been filed, fraud was committed in this case.
[/quote]

If it is fraud that no one is willing to prosecute, then you can’t call someone guilty of it.

I mean, seriously, we have gone back and forth on this like ping pong.

I am not saying they were “morally right”.

I am saying if no one is prosecuting or accusing them of any crime, then you can’t call them criminals.

That is how the law works.

If I go pick up an MP3 player and walk right out the store with it and the owner sees me, waves at me and says, “hey, you can have that…no worries”…I didn’t steal shit.[/quote]

This is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever read. Yes, the owner gave it to you in this case.

96

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

This is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever read. Yes, you did steal that MP3 player. [/quote]

Gee, no I didn’t.

If the OWNER of the store looks at me and say it is ok…how can you say I stole it?

No one is accusing or prosecuting these people of anything…and the store itself sat there and let them check out.

That was the store’s fault.

That is how the law works in this country.

Otherwise, we could be guilty until proven innocent.

97

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

This is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever read. Yes, you did steal that MP3 player. [/quote]

Gee, no I didn’t.

If the OWNER of the store looks at me and say it is ok…how can you say I stole it?

No one is accusing or prosecuting these people of anything…and the store itself sat there and let them check out.

That was the store’s fault.

That is how the law works in this country.

Otherwise, we could be guilty until proven innocent.[/quote]

Ya ya, I did a quick edit. I miss read your post.

98

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

This is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever read. Yes, you did steal that MP3 player. [/quote]

Gee, no I didn’t.

If the OWNER of the store looks at me and say it is ok…how can you say I stole it?

No one is accusing or prosecuting these people of anything…and the store itself sat there and let them check out.

That was the store’s fault.

That is how the law works in this country.

Otherwise, we could be guilty until proven innocent.[/quote]

No, the store processed the EBT transactions, ON GOOD FAITH, that the money was there. Wal-mart wasn’t like, “Hey take everything you want since the EBT system is down…” Your example isn’t the same a what happened.

99

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

This is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever read. Yes, you did steal that MP3 player. [/quote]

Gee, no I didn’t.

If the OWNER of the store looks at me and say it is ok…how can you say I stole it?

No one is accusing or prosecuting these people of anything…and the store itself sat there and let them check out.

That was the store’s fault.

That is how the law works in this country.

Otherwise, we could be guilty until proven innocent.[/quote]

No, the store processed the EBT transactions, ON GOOD FAITH, that the money was there. Wal-mart wasn’t like, “Hey take everything you want since the EBT system is down…” Your example isn’t the same a what happened. [/quote]

Let’e get serious, man. You’re military too so I know you have real world experience on lock down.

You know as well as I do that Walmart was trying to get over and was hoping for a big return on the back end.

THEY FUCKED UP.

I only fault Walmart for that fuck up.

100

Like I said, this is no different than walking in store, grabbing a 60" TV, writing a check knowing your account balance, and then the check bouncing. You knew you only have $0.53 in your checking account when you wrote that $1,300 check. FRAUD plain and simple.