• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court declines to take up Wal-Mart class action appeal….

Did you see me mention Kohl's? I didn't think so. Still using strawmen to argue your ridiculous points.

You say I don't know what I am talking about but offer no counter arguments to my points except for fluff. Sure wally world has name brand goods but that is not what people who shop at wally world generally go there for.

You asked for specifics. I gave you specifics. Instead of countering those specifics you go off on a tangent about a store that I never mentioned. You seem to have an issue with Kohl's. That is fine so do I. That is why I don't shop there either. I prefer the mom and pop places. I can afford it and I get better service, better quality of product and I am actually helping the local economy. I understand that not everyone can afford to keep it local so there is a place for discount stores. There are discount stores that are not as cheap as wally world in almost all respects. Kohl's is not even a discount store so the only reason I can figure that you keep bringing them up is that you are disgruntled former employee. You should probably work on that. The resentment will eat you up.

You have not given specifics of every store you mentioned in this exchange. You have done nothing more than give your extremely biased opinion.

I do not "keep bringing up" Kohl's, nor have I ever worked there. I mentioned the store one time.

I did work at a small "mom and pop" grocery store for a short time, and they were a complete rip-off price wise. ;)
 
Last edited:
When was that time in America when people solely relied on what they made, on family or charity?

So you are OK with people exploiting the welfare policies for personal gain like you are OK with companies doing the same thing? So you do not believe in personal responsibility as it relates to individuals? Collective responsibility of Companies and government as it relates to society at large? I can assume then you do not believe there is any such thing as social contract binding our society correct?

If that is the case then tell me what makes the U.S. a society?

a. no, i am not okay with people scamming the system for welfare
b. companies paying less than a "living wage" is not a scam, and not against the law
c. of course i believe in personal responsibility....we have TOO little of it going on here....too many dont rely on themselves, they have their hand out
d. there is no such thing as a social contract....never has been....never will be

you open a business....you can do whatever you like within the law to grow your customers, and increase your profits. if you make a gazillion dollars, good for you. I have zero issue with people on the whole being greedy....none whatsoever.

just as if you are the best quarterback to play the game, i expect you to hold out for the biggest contract you can get. We get one shot in life, and we need to make the most out of it...in every way possible

now....those that do make it, seem to also be some of the most charitable people i know. they have their pet projects that they spends huge amounts of time and money on....because they care about them

you somehow expect companies and people to "give away" that which they have earned in the form of higher salaries and wages for the lower skill workers. It doesnt work that way. I have little issue paying some of my best producers huge amounts of money....because they in turn are making me huge amounts of money. I have major issues giving someone more just because they are a warm body, and someone out there thinks they deserve more than i give them.

every employee here is given chances to move up their skill level, and production value. what they do with that chance determines what pay they end up with.
 
a. no, i am not okay with people scamming the system for welfare
b. companies paying less than a "living wage" is not a scam, and not against the law
c. of course i believe in personal responsibility....we have TOO little of it going on here....too many dont rely on themselves, they have their hand out
d. there is no such thing as a social contract....never has been....never will be

you open a business....you can do whatever you like within the law to grow your customers, and increase your profits. if you make a gazillion dollars, good for you. I have zero issue with people on the whole being greedy....none whatsoever.

just as if you are the best quarterback to play the game, i expect you to hold out for the biggest contract you can get. We get one shot in life, and we need to make the most out of it...in every way possible

now....those that do make it, seem to also be some of the most charitable people i know. they have their pet projects that they spends huge amounts of time and money on....because they care about them

you somehow expect companies and people to "give away" that which they have earned in the form of higher salaries and wages for the lower skill workers. It doesnt work that way. I have little issue paying some of my best producers huge amounts of money....because they in turn are making me huge amounts of money. I have major issues giving someone more just because they are a warm body, and someone out there thinks they deserve more than i give them.

every employee here is given chances to move up their skill level, and production value. what they do with that chance determines what pay they end up with.

No social contract??????? really??????? Congratulations you just threw over 2400+ years of Western political ideology in the trash bin. The social contract is a basic precept that is necessary to drive self-governance. You cannot have self-governance without a social contract. If your ideology doesn't believe in the social contract then you don't believe in self-governance.

All your other arguments are based on the flawed notion that there is no such thing as social contract. Since your underlying assumption is flawed your arguments are equally flawed.
 
No social contract??????? really??????? Congratulations you just threw over 2400+ years of Western political ideology in the trash bin. The social contract is a basic precept that is necessary to drive self-governance. You cannot have self-governance without a social contract. If your ideology doesn't believe in the social contract then you don't believe in self-governance.

All your other arguments are based on the flawed notion that there is no such thing as social contract. Since your underlying assumption is flawed your arguments are equally flawed.

we all cant be as perfect as you are....

and no, i dont believe a business has a "social contract" to give back anything

most do....but they DONT HAVE TO
 
No social contract??????? really??????? Congratulations you just threw over 2400+ years of Western political ideology in the trash bin. The social contract is a basic precept that is necessary to drive self-governance. You cannot have self-governance without a social contract. If your ideology doesn't believe in the social contract then you don't believe in self-governance.

All your other arguments are based on the flawed notion that there is no such thing as social contract. Since your underlying assumption is flawed your arguments are equally flawed.

Really dude, the social contract runs counter to self governance. The entire freaking point of the social contract is to bind people to the state.
 
You have not given specifics of every store you mentioned in this exchange. You have done nothing more than give your extremely biased opinion.

I do not "keep bringing up" Kohl's, nor have I ever worked there. I mentioned the store one time.

I did work at a small "mom and pop" grocery store for a short time, and they were a complete rip-off price wise. ;)

Oh so now you expect me to give specifics for everything?????? That is not what you stated before. You said I provided no specifics. You continue to move the goal posts. That's OK I can understand why.

Again arguing another straw man. I never stated all mom-pop stores were better just the ones I choose to patronize. If I get ripped off by a store I no longer patronize them. My experience, other than local mechanics, is that local businesses are far superior in customer service and quality than chain stores. That is not always the case but more often than not it is and it has the added benefit of aiding the local economy.

If it was not you that mentioned Kohls multiple times then I apologize. I don't have the energy nor time to go back and review every post. I just know that I have responded to several posts that use Kohl's as an example in this thread as if I had mentioned Kohl's as some sort of paragon of virtue which I have not.
 
Really dude, the social contract runs counter to self governance. The entire freaking point of the social contract is to bind people to the state.

That should get the idiotic post of the year award. The social contract does no such thing. Before you make such asinine claims educate yourself on what is being talked about.
 
That should get the idiotic post of the year award. The social contract does no such thing. Before you make such asinine claims educate yourself on what is being talked about.

Have you even read the largest contributors to the idea? lol. Regardless, you're talking of a philosophical concept that describes something that doesn't exist.
 
we all cant be as perfect as you are....

and no, i dont believe a business has a "social contract" to give back anything

most do....but they DONT HAVE TO

Yet another strawman. There are so many strawmen in this thread it needs to be declared a fire hazard.

I never stated I was perfect.

You are now changing your story. First you stated there is no social contract now you modifying that to say business does not have a social contract. Move goal posts much?

That being said again that throws cold water on over 2400 years of Western political thought. The social contract is a two way street between the government and the governed. Unless you know of businesses that are not run by people then businesses share in the social contract.

Let me know when you find a business not run by a human being...I think we could make millions.
 
Have you even read the largest contributors to the idea? lol. Regardless, you're talking of a philosophical concept that describes something that doesn't exist.

Of course I have. To suggest that it doesn't exist throws 2400+ years of Western Political thought in the trash heap. If you do not believe in the social contract you cannot believe in the foundation of Western self-governance. The two go hand in hand. Without the social contract there is no authority of government. Without the social contract there is no individual responsibility to society. Without individual responsibility to society there is no society. This is particularly true of the U.S. as there is no other binding principle for our society. Our society exists because we, as individuals in that society have agreed that it does. We have agreed through to this through principles espoused in the Constitution that sets up our self-governance. Without the social contract there is NO UNITED STATES.

This isn't rocket science. You obviously have no clue what the social contract is and its place in Western political thought.
 
Yet another strawman. There are so many strawmen in this thread it needs to be declared a fire hazard.

I never stated I was perfect.

You are now changing your story. First you stated there is no social contract now you modifying that to say business does not have a social contract. Move goal posts much?

That being said again that throws cold water on over 2400 years of Western political thought. The social contract is a two way street between the government and the governed. Unless you know of businesses that are not run by people then businesses share in the social contract.

Let me know when you find a business not run by a human being...I think we could make millions.

So why don't you prove the social contract exists. The social contract is really just a theory trying to rationalize violence and force.

And a government by definition is not self governance.
 
Yet another strawman. There are so many strawmen in this thread it needs to be declared a fire hazard.

I never stated I was perfect.

You are now changing your story. First you stated there is no social contract now you modifying that to say business does not have a social contract. Move goal posts much?

That being said again that throws cold water on over 2400 years of Western political thought. The social contract is a two way street between the government and the governed. Unless you know of businesses that are not run by people then businesses share in the social contract.

Let me know when you find a business not run by a human being...I think we could make millions.


this whole thread has been about business

you dont like my answers....fine

you say you are a business manager

but i wonder if your owner has the same philosophy you do? i wonder if he knows that you think profit is secondary, and the "social contract" is first

I wonder what his response would be?

most owners think like i do....it is one of the reasons i have been sought after for 20+ years by headhunters

i try to get the most out of everything....personnel, assets, etc

and nothing is secondary to the health and profit of the company.....nothing

there is an old saying.....maybe you have heard it from time to time

"friendship is friendship, and business is business, and never the twain shall meet"

that is business 101....and throws your social contract right out the window
 
this whole thread has been about business

you dont like my answers....fine

you say you are a business manager

but i wonder if your owner has the same philosophy you do? i wonder if he knows that you think profit is secondary, and the "social contract" is first

I wonder what his response would be?

most owners think like i do....it is one of the reasons i have been sought after for 20+ years by headhunters

i try to get the most out of everything....personnel, assets, etc

and nothing is secondary to the health and profit of the company.....nothing

there is an old saying.....maybe you have heard it from time to time

"friendship is friendship, and business is business, and never the twain shall meet"

that is business 101....and throws your social contract right out the window

That is a modern concept of business. An unsustainable business model. There are no owners in my company. It is a public company. Do my bosses know my philosophy...yes. Some agree some don't. Doesn't matter I still get results. You say nothing comes before the profit and health of the business. The root issue is that many, like you, seem to believe that the profit and the health of the business are the same thing. They are not. Sometimes the health of the company is best served by not always taking the profit of the company into consideration. I could give you specific examples but I don't really see the point since there is such a fundamental split between our philosophies on business we are just talking past one another. The one thing I know for certain though, is that whenever I get a VP or director that cares more about profit than the health of company both end up suffering.
 
So why don't you prove the social contract exists. The social contract is really just a theory trying to rationalize violence and force.

And a government by definition is not self governance.

The proof is in the pudding. Without a social contract the U.S. would not exist.
 
Oh so now you expect me to give specifics for everything?????? That is not what you stated before. You said I provided no specifics. You continue to move the goal posts. That's OK I can understand why.

Again arguing another straw man. I never stated all mom-pop stores were better just the ones I choose to patronize. If I get ripped off by a store I no longer patronize them. My experience, other than local mechanics, is that local businesses are far superior in customer service and quality than chain stores. That is not always the case but more often than not it is and it has the added benefit of aiding the local economy.

If it was not you that mentioned Kohls multiple times then I apologize. I don't have the energy nor time to go back and review every post. I just know that I have responded to several posts that use Kohl's as an example in this thread as if I had mentioned Kohl's as some sort of paragon of virtue which I have not.

I have no further use for you if you are going to make claims you cannot back up. I do not play silly games. You are the one who claimed Walmart carried inferior products, and other stores (which you named) carried superior products at "moderately higher prices". You have yet to provide tangible evidence to support your obviously bogus claims.
 
I have no further use for you if you are going to make claims you cannot back up. I do not play silly games. You are the one who claimed Walmart carried inferior products, and other stores (which you named) carried superior products at "moderately higher prices". You have yet to provide tangible evidence to support your obviously bogus claims.

Do you want me to send you some product samples???? what a crock.
 
That is a modern concept of business. An unsustainable business model. There are no owners in my company. It is a public company. Do my bosses know my philosophy...yes. Some agree some don't. Doesn't matter I still get results. You say nothing comes before the profit and health of the business. The root issue is that many, like you, seem to believe that the profit and the health of the business are the same thing. They are not. Sometimes the health of the company is best served by not always taking the profit of the company into consideration. I could give you specific examples but I don't really see the point since there is such a fundamental split between our philosophies on business we are just talking past one another. The one thing I know for certain though, is that whenever I get a VP or director that cares more about profit than the health of company both end up suffering.

a public company as in shareholders?

i would bet they care about earnings and share price more than you do....which is a shame

you would be better served in a government entity, or a non profit

seems to fit your philosophy more so than the corporate world

and your company would be better off also

i have met many like you over my 30+ years.....idealistic not realistic
 
a public company as in shareholders?

i would bet they care about earnings and share price more than you do....which is a shame

you would be better served in a government entity, or a non profit

seems to fit your philosophy more so than the corporate world

and your company would be better off also

i have met many like you over my 30+ years.....idealistic not realistic

I could say the exact same about you. It is your ideology that governs your actions. An ideology that is fundamentally flawed an unsustainable for reasons I have already given. I have also ran into many VP's and Director's that have your idealistic approach of profit uber alles. They create many more problems than they solve and leave us to pick up the pieces and rebuild the organization after they leave or transfer out as they inevitably do because what they do is unsustainable. My approach is the opposite of idealism. It is an approach based on the knowledge that no one single single things trumps all other considerations. That is a recipe for long term disaster.
 
Do you want me to send you some product samples???? what a crock.

No, I want you to prove your point. Is that too much to ask?
 
The proof is in the pudding. Without a social contract the U.S. would not exist.

yes it would. however this does not prove a social contract.
 
a public company as in shareholders?

i would bet they care about earnings and share price more than you do....which is a shame

you would be better served in a government entity, or a non profit

seems to fit your philosophy more so than the corporate world

and your company would be better off also

i have met many like you over my 30+ years.....idealistic not realistic

Considering the poster's dishonesty concerning "inferior" products supposedly carried by Walmart, and "superior" products carried by all the other big box retailers, I wouldn't really believe anything he says. ;) Probably a government employee.
 
That is a modern concept of business. An unsustainable business model. There are no owners in my company. It is a public company.
unless you are working for the government even then your company has owners. it is any investor that has put money into that company.
by law your company has a fiduciary duty to those people. if you work for the government then your owners are us the people and you are accountable to us.

Do my bosses know my philosophy...yes. Some agree some don't. Doesn't matter I still get results. You say nothing comes before the profit and health of the business. The root issue is that many, like you, seem to believe that the profit and the health of the business are the same thing. They are not. Sometimes the health of the company is best served by not always taking the profit of the company into consideration. I could give you specific examples but I don't really see the point since there is such a fundamental split between our philosophies on business we are just talking past one another. The one thing I know for certain though, is that whenever I get a VP or director that cares more about profit than the health of company both end up suffering.

without money or profit the company cannot pay it's bills and cannot expand and grow in the future.
the owners of your company pretty much will want profit generated by the company that is why they started the company in the first place.

you take any management or business class the first rule of business is to make money.
if you are not making money as a business you don't have a business you have a hobby.

without profit you don't have a business. the health of the company has many factors to it yes, but the company lives and dies
by money generation. you can have the happiest staff in the world, but without money they get fired and the doors close.
 
Considering the poster's dishonesty concerning "inferior" products supposedly carried by Walmart, and "superior" products carried by all the other big box retailers, I wouldn't really believe anything he says. ;) Probably a government employee.

like anywhere (even mom and pop shops) you just have to watch what you buy. some are good others are not.
it depends on the maker of the product not who sells it.
 
No, I want you to prove your point. Is that too much to ask?

I owe nothing to you. The proof is self evident if you go to the store and check out their products. People like you will never be satisfied. You have already moved the goal posts several times and will keep doing so.
 
Considering the poster's dishonesty concerning "inferior" products supposedly carried by Walmart, and "superior" products carried by all the other big box retailers, I wouldn't really believe anything he says. ;) Probably a government employee.

You are the dishonest debater in this scenario. You keep moving your goal posts. I don't care if you believe me or not. I am not on this board to impress anyone. You can believe me or not. What you cannot do is call me dishonest when it is you that has a problem with honest debating.
 
Back
Top Bottom