Online Purchasing

So.. when you came home this year, did you rotate the newer toilet paper to the bottom of the pile? I would think that the pressure of the top rolls, and possibly even the paper towels, would cause tissue breakdown and your underlying tissue could be damaged.

I did not account for toilet paper breakdown.
 
just adding my two cents...

I shop online, but I buy at the store.

I've always tried to eliminate the middle man where possible. I only see online purchasing as a way to eliminate competition and thereby jack prices up to everyone in the future.

Unless the online purchase is via a manufacturer. If that's the case, then I shop online and purchase via the phone.
 
if that's true, why was the only thing you talked about? literally, it was the only thing in your post.

Because my point was about how annoying it is to me that people think that $24k for a warehouse job is annoying. The whole argument that they try to make is weakened by such a statement, in my opinion. I stated that my argument was not against the fact that it's a bad place to work. I stated, several times, that it sounds awful. But it is my pet peeve when people bitch about things that don't really require bitching. People enjoy the prices of Amazon, yet want higher pay for their employees. I wasn't calling into question the fun of working for Amazon. I was complaining about the author's comments about pay, because that's what bothered me.

I liken it to the following flow of logic:

Everyone I know (practically) whines about their cost for electricity, despite the fact that they have a near perfectly reliable source of energy every time they flip a switch. They also want to bitch about the harm that it does to the environment and call for greener power and cleaner energy. Yet, no one wants to pay the price and suffer in reliability for the inferior green energy.

bingo.

it isn't always as easy as that, pmann. why do you think people work for walmart when those guys are complete fucktards? nobody wants to work for walmart: it's that they don't have a choice.

additionally: large employers pay a lot in income taxes to the local community, and the local government is often loathe to come down on them. they also sometimes get involved in (read: make campaign contributions) local politics, which buys them a lot of influence.

ed

It does suck that people are financially bound to work for companies due to their circumstances. I agree that is a terrible situation to be and I hope I'm never in that situation myself. I certainly feel for those people who find themselves there.

But sadly, these large employers, hate them or love them, do provide jobs. Lots of them. So, I would ask, where would these employees work if they did not work at Amazon? I would assume an Amazon factory provides jobs for more than a few hundred people. Walmart probably does the same.

I shop at Amazon often. However, I avoid Walmart like herpes. I hate the store and everything about it, more specifically, the people in there. Not everyone, obviously. But good lord the amount of inbreeding that just take place there is fucking horrendous.
 
All that, and I'll still run to WalMart for my Kashi and KIND bars. It's a dollar cheaper! and don't tell me that it's only a dollar. I have three sons. They eat as if I had a dozen.

Not all sons, but I have three kids who really like to eat, so I totally understand where you're coming from.

I'll confess that I do all of my grocery shopping at Walmart. There are very few things I have to have name brand on, so I'm ok with generic/store brand. And still, Walmart brand beats the pants off Target or Publix by being, on average, anywhere from 20 to 50 cents lower per item. For one or two things, that's pretty negligible. Over the course of my entire list? It adds up to significant weekly savings over other places I could conceivably shop.
 
I'll confess that I do all of my grocery shopping at Walmart. There are very few things I have to have name brand on, so I'm ok with generic/store brand. And still, Walmart brand beats the pants off Target or Publix by being, on average, anywhere from 20 to 50 cents lower per item. For one or two things, that's pretty negligible. Over the course of my entire list? It adds up to significant weekly savings over other places I could conceivably shop.

Hehe, you say "confess" like we are going to require Hail Marys for it. :)

I think it's all about what we establish as important. I just do not like Walmart. Not an ethical thing, I just don't like the store. I love Publix. I shop there almost exclusively because I like the layout of the store and it's worth it to me to spend an extra $20 a month there and avoid Walmart.

However, I really like Whole Foods. I rarely shop there because they are, on average, way 1-2 testicles more expensive on every item. I like the store and their products. But they are sometimes double the price of Publix. Plus, they hire so many hipsters, I struggle with shopping there. I mostly just buy specialty items there like cheeses, scallops and such.

I can't think of any company I boycott or support because of moral reasons. I don't know any company that has such strong moral disagreements with me that I can't buy from them. I'm sure they exist, but I'm just not aware of them.

I remember the last election how outraged the hippies were that the owner of Whole Foods was a Republican. The hippies threatened to boycott. Then the republicans decided to do a buycott, which was the first one I had ever heard that. I'm sure the outrage died down and hippies are back their with their Birkenstocks and filthy feet and the republicans have returned to killing their own food with their guns and arrows. I just found it extremely interesting.

There are two companies, however, in which I wish I could invest my money because they are (IMO) run flawlessly, which is. Publix and Chick-Fil-A.
 
Hehe, you say "confess" like we are going to require Hail Marys for it. :)

That's the result of being raised in what I call a Captist family (half Catholic, half Baptist [and not just Baptist. Southern Baptist]). :eek:
 
Yes. That's 3 packs of 36. We don't always use that though. For instance, we bought 3 packs this year. However, every other year we will probably have to buy only two packs. Does that make sense? Were you thinking that amount of toilet paper was too much or too little?

The caveat to doing this is that it looks like, when you are checking out at the retailer, that you do nothing but shit yourself silly.

This brought to thought a friend who had a female roommate. He'd bitch that they would have to buy equal amounts of TP, but she used twice as much because he just used shit paper. I told him he should get really anal and put his name on the roll.
 
bail quoth:
since this thread has already derailed, might as well take it further!:D

this information about amazon and other companies brings up an interesting dilemma for me. i try to be socially conscious and to avoid patronizing companies that treat their employees unethically. but we're also a single income family, and price point is a huge factor in where i buy.

how does one maintain a social consciousness on a very tight budget?
there's an old saying that principles are a luxury. the simple truth is that not everyone can buy local organic produce cuz it's either a serious PITA to get to, or just plain expensive (e.g., whole foods) or both. i suspect a whole lot of hipsters are gonna find mason jars and mustache wax a lot less of a priority when supporting a family, FWIW.

look: i made a choice that i can afford cuz i don't buy much from amazon anyway and have found alternatives that i find acceptable. there will likely come a time when the price difference is significant. that's where my principles will conflict with my consumerism.

pmann quoth:
everyone i know (practically) whines about their cost for electricity, despite the fact that they have a near perfectly reliable source of energy every time they flip a switch. they also want to bitch about the harm that it does to the environment and call for greener power and cleaner energy. yet, no one wants to pay the price and suffer in reliability for the inferior green energy.
honestly, i think that happens a lot cuz people simply don't investigate their alternatives--but i get the broader point you're making here.

pmann quoth:
but sadly, these large employers, hate them or love them, do provide jobs. lots of them. so, i would ask, where would these employees work if they did not work at amazon? i would assume an amazon factory provides jobs for more than a few hundred people. walmart probably does the same.
in point of fact walmart is the world's largest (non-government) employer.

but where would the currently-employed work? elsewhere. they'd move: people go where the jobs are. middle-of-bumfuck-nowhere is pretty reliably not a jobs haven, and that's where they locate these warehouses.

ed
 
Pmann, I'm a little confused. You say on the one hand, if people don't like their working conditions, they shouldn't work there - slave days are over. You also say that if it weren't for these large companies, where would people work?

So, in short, people may not feasibly be able to leave their workplaces which have poor work conditions. As governments listen (more and more?) to big businesses, that increasing influence could lead to a worsening of conditions. When you get worsening conditions and people who are stuck in those jobs... :( Eventually there'll be some push-backs, (I hope), but I'm not sure if we're at that stage yet.
 
Pmann, I'm a little confused. You say on the one hand, if people don't like their working conditions, they shouldn't work there - slave days are over. You also say that if it weren't for these large companies, where would people work?

So, in short, people may not feasibly be able to leave their workplaces which have poor work conditions. As governments listen (more and more?) to big businesses, that increasing influence could lead to a worsening of conditions. When you get worsening conditions and people who are stuck in those jobs... :( Eventually there'll be some push-backs, (I hope), but I'm not sure if we're at that stage yet.

I don't know what's hard to understand about my stance.

I'm not vilifying Walmart or Amazon. It sounds like Amazon sucks. Maybe they do. But they still provide jobs, presumably within OSHA requirements.

Walmart offers millions of jobs to people with the requirement of little to no skill to start. They have benefits and retirement. What kind of evil are they doing?

People are saying this: "If they live in a small town they have no choice but to stay there as it's hard to leave." Well, what if Amazon didn't exist? What would they do? They would work somewhere else or move. The only difference is that Amazon supplied them with a (possibly shitty) option. No one forces them to stay and they can move their happy asses elsewhere if they don't like it.

I just don't understand the hatred for all the companies that provide massive amounts of jobs and keep prices lower.
 
No one forces them to stay and they can move their happy asses elsewhere if they don't like it.

Aaaannnd we're back to where we started.

I agree with you, in theory. In practice, it's not that simple, Pmann. As pointed out earlier, there may be situations where people feel as if they're trapped by their circumstances into keeping the job they have, regardless of whether or not they like it.

The environment at the job my husband had prior to this one was what I call a soul sucking one. During the three years he was there, I saw a vast change in his attitude, perspective on life, and behavior, and not for the better. Why did he stay? He felt like he owed it to our family to try and keep us where we were. He sacrificed personal happiness for the sake of the family's happiness. You might say, well, that's a choice he made, no one forced him to stay. And you'd be correct. But it kind of goes back to what you said in an earlier post about valuing different things. And because of that, I think trying to judge the validity, as it were, of why someone stays in a shitty job is highly subjective.
 
Last edited:
Aaaannnd we're back to where we started.

I agree with you, in theory. In practice, it's not that simple, Pmann. As pointed out earlier, there may be situations where people feel as if they're trapped by their circumstances into keeping the job they have, regardless of whether or not they like it.

The environment at the job my husband had prior to this one was what I call a soul sucking one. During the three years he was there, I saw a vast change in his attitude, perspective on life, and behavior, and not for the better. Why did he stay? He felt like he owed it to our family to try and keep us where we were. He sacrificed personal happiness for the sake of the family's happiness. You might say, well, that's a choice he made, no one forced him to stay. And you'd be correct. But it kind of goes back to what you said in an earlier post about valuing different things. And because of that, I think trying to judge the validity, as it were, of why someone stays in a shitty job is highly subjective.

Right. I don't want to sound like I am insensitive to that situation at all. Because that's not the case. All I'm saying is that if we have a small town where there are very limited jobs and another company like Amazon comes to town, what have they done? They've only added an additional option. Before Amazon options are to work elsewhere or leave. After Amazon options are work elsewhere, leave or take a shitty job at Amazon.

They only add a third option to the mix.

In my eyes, your husband did a very noble thing for your family and he has my respect, for whatever that's worth.
 
I don't know what's hard to understand about my stance.

I'm not vilifying Walmart or Amazon. It sounds like Amazon sucks. Maybe they do. But they still provide jobs, presumably within OSHA requirements.

Walmart offers millions of jobs to people with the requirement of little to no skill to start. They have benefits and retirement. What kind of evil are they doing?

People are saying this: "If they live in a small town they have no choice but to stay there as it's hard to leave." Well, what if Amazon didn't exist? What would they do? They would work somewhere else or move. The only difference is that Amazon supplied them with a (possibly shitty) option. No one forces them to stay and they can move their happy asses elsewhere if they don't like it.

I just don't understand the hatred for all the companies that provide massive amounts of jobs and keep prices lower.

You yourself would not want to have to work for Amazon or Walmart, but you say the people who work in those jobs and aren't treated well (and some of them may have to keep those jobs due to their family circumstances) should just leave. That's what I don't understand.

When these large companies are capable of creating a monopoly, or participate in an ogliopoly, they are capable of driving down working conditions. Some competition is healthy. Given that the US government will work with Disney to keep Mickey Mouse under copyright, I don't see why Amazon or other large companies might not erode OSHA - or how that hasn't already occurred. When people get hospitalised with heat-related injuries because Amazon won't ventilate their building or allow them to work at a safer pace... it beggars belief that the company's response of giving everyone cooling bandannas is the best way to comply with OSHA.

I can't really speak to the tyranny of distance, but that's not the issue I'm raising. When there are health issues in the family, when someone becomes the sole breadwinner or sole carer (or both), it becomes a lot harder to leave that job and find something else, particularly if you're older. Sometimes, that job for the big company is what makes a difference. But those jobs should have a fair wage, and fair working conditions.
 
pmann quoth:
walmart offers millions of jobs to people with the requirement of little to no skill to start. they have benefits and retirement. what kind of evil are they doing?
no offense dude but if you really have to ask this question, it's gonna require a whole lot more time for this conversation than i've got: you're operating at a significant deficit of information here.

grrlfriday quoth:
you yourself would not want to have to work for amazon or walmart, but you say the people who work in those jobs and aren't treated well (and some of them may have to keep those jobs due to their family circumstances) should just leave. that's what i don't understand.
that's me in the same boat with grrlfriday. and did i not already mention how OSHA violations require that government be willing to act--which as we all know from all the sweetheart deals the wall street banks all got a few years ago is unlikely?

grrlfriday quoth:
when these large companies are capable of creating a monopoly, or participate in an ogliopoly, they are capable of driving down working conditions...[snip]...when people get hospitalised with heat-related injuries because amazon won't ventilate their building or allow them to work at a safer pace... it beggars belief that the company's response of giving everyone cooling bandannas is the best way to comply with OSHA.
in legal terms, the phrasing is "pattern of behavior".

grrlfriday quoth:
when there are health issues in the family, when someone becomes the sole breadwinner or sole carer (or both), it becomes a lot harder to leave that job and find something else, particularly if you're older. sometimes, that job for the big company is what makes a difference. but those jobs should have a fair wage, and fair working conditions.
bingo.

ed
 
Wow, I thought I had squirrel moments! Did somebody say online shopping?

Since I'm constitutionally incapable of not tossing in my 2 cents--
crappy jobs will go right on existing as long as there is a labor force to fill them. Presently there are more workers than jobs so the quality (and value) of those jobs has dropped. That is most visible as the lower end where fewer skills are required.
The cold truth is that labor is a commodity. As long as there are people in line 3 deep to fill any space that is vacated those workers are not going to be valued as highly as they would be if they were scarce.

Here's a catch-22 that some of you may not have considered. Amazon or Walmart or Massive Evil Inc treats its workers badly so consumers en mass decide not to do business with them any more because of it. On the face of it that's a very good, socially conscious choice--no longer supporting a company whose practices are disagreeable. What do you suppose the result will be?
More than half the customers of Massive Evil Inc stop shopping there, stop placing orders, discontinue memberships and stop downloading from the websites.
I grant you this is wildly overstated since there are too many things in the real world to stop it happening. Consider the result if it did though.
Of course it would be all over every sort of news media. The company stock would tank, executives would be fired. The losses would be huge. The world would certainly see that the consumers disapprove of Massive Evil Inc and the way it treats its workers.
Do you think any of that would make the people who worked at the warehouses and stores that get closed feel any better while they apply for their unemployment benefits?
Will those people be writing thank you notes to the people who chose to cut the throat of the cut-throat business that paid their admittedly hard earned pay check?

Don't get me wrong--I don't mean to suggest that people don't deserve better simply because crap is all that's available. I do mean to suggest that if you want to effect (affect?) change it's best to look at how you go about it to make sure the change you get is the one you wanted. I don't think anyone wants to 'save' all those folks from those jobs and leave them with nothing.


Yes. That's 3 packs of 36. We don't always use that though. For instance, we bought 3 packs this year. However, every other year we will probably have to buy only two packs. Does that make sense? Were you thinking that amount of toilet paper was too much or too little?

The caveat to doing this is that it looks like, when you are checking out at the retailer, that you do nothing but shit yourself silly.

I buy a 12 pack every time I shop which is usually about every 3 weeks. Along with that there are a couple of boxes of tissues and a 4 pack of paper towels.*
Do you ration the stuff???

*That is doesn't count any of the emergency supply stuff (yes, we have a closet for that. We keep about a month or so worth of non perishables in case of emergencies. Spend 2 weeks with no electricity--which means the stores don't have any and you can't shop--and tell me that's reactionary.)
 
no offense dude but if you really have to ask this question, it's gonna require a whole lot more time for this conversation than i've got: you're operating at a significant deficit of information here.


that's me in the same boat with grrlfriday. and did i not already mention how OSHA violations require that government be willing to act--which as we all know from all the sweetheart deals the wall street banks all got a few years ago is unlikely?


in legal terms, the phrasing is "pattern of behavior".


bingo.

ed

*sigh*

OSHA fines are pretty easy to come by. I'm not saying that they are completely flawless and bad shit doesn't happen. Of course it does. However, it is sort of the end all, be all of working condition watchdogs.

No one is seeing the original point I made. I will go over it again, in numbered points.

1. $23,500 seems like a fair wage for a factory worker, working 40 hours a week.
2. Amazon sounds like a shitty place to work.
3. If Amazon was the only place to work, I would work there rather than be unemployed. I would, however, seek employment elsewhere.
4. Walmart supplies jobs. I don't really know what the beef is with them.

The conversation has evolved so much here. My original comment stemmed from a pet peeve of mine, which was mentioned in the article, concerning their pay. It's gotten into the evils of Walmart and Amazon. My argument was based on the wage comment and I prefaced that.

I would pose this question to the anti-big business people. Let us say There is an individual who grew up in a small town and there isn't a lot of jobs. Amazon comes in. He gets a job at Amazon. It sucks. What were his options before Amazon opened? What were his options after? People bring up the idea of health issues. Well, do you think working at mom and pop shops are going to get whatever health issues sorted? I would assume healthcare is a benefit at Amazon. How is he worse off because of Amazon, now that he has healthcare?
 
Wow, I thought I had squirrel moments! Did somebody say online shopping?

Since I'm constitutionally incapable of not tossing in my 2 cents--
crappy jobs will go right on existing as long as there is a labor force to fill them. Presently there are more workers than jobs so the quality (and value) of those jobs has dropped. That is most visible as the lower end where fewer skills are required.
The cold truth is that labor is a commodity. As long as there are people in line 3 deep to fill any space that is vacated those workers are not going to be valued as highly as they would be if they were scarce.

Here's a catch-22 that some of you may not have considered. Amazon or Walmart or Massive Evil Inc treats its workers badly so consumers en mass decide not to do business with them any more because of it. On the face of it that's a very good, socially conscious choice--no longer supporting a company whose practices are disagreeable. What do you suppose the result will be?
More than half the customers of Massive Evil Inc stop shopping there, stop placing orders, discontinue memberships and stop downloading from the websites.
I grant you this is wildly overstated since there are too many things in the real world to stop it happening. Consider the result if it did though.
Of course it would be all over every sort of news media. The company stock would tank, executives would be fired. The losses would be huge. The world would certainly see that the consumers disapprove of Massive Evil Inc and the way it treats its workers.
Do you think any of that would make the people who worked at the warehouses and stores that get closed feel any better while they apply for their unemployment benefits?
Will those people be writing thank you notes to the people who chose to cut the throat of the cut-throat business that paid their admittedly hard earned pay check?

Don't get me wrong--I don't mean to suggest that people don't deserve better simply because crap is all that's available. I do mean to suggest that if you want to effect (affect?) change it's best to look at how you go about it to make sure the change you get is the one you wanted. I don't think anyone wants to 'save' all those folks from those jobs and leave them with nothing.




I buy a 12 pack every time I shop which is usually about every 3 weeks. Along with that there are a couple of boxes of tissues and a 4 pack of paper towels.*
Do you ration the stuff???

*That is doesn't count any of the emergency supply stuff (yes, we have a closet for that. We keep about a month or so worth of non perishables in case of emergencies. Spend 2 weeks with no electricity--which means the stores don't have any and you can't shop--and tell me that's reactionary.)

What a well written response.

As far as TP goes... There are only 2 people living in the house. 100 rolls is about a quarter roll a day. That seems reasonable, unless you have IBS or something.
 
What a well written response.

As far as TP goes... There are only 2 people living in the house. 100 rolls is about a quarter roll a day. That seems reasonable, unless you have IBS or something.
well aren't you sweet!

We have just the two of us but we do have two bathrooms.
Also I tend to use the stuff for everything from killing bugs to cleaning up cat yack (or as back up kleenex if we run out of that.) It just doesn't go as far as most men seem to think.
 
well aren't you sweet!

We have just the two of us but we do have two bathrooms.
Also I tend to use the stuff for everything from killing bugs to cleaning up cat yack (or as back up kleenex if we run out of that.) It just doesn't go as far as most men seem to think.

I did the math. That's more than roll every two days. :eek: It's okay if you have IBS.

And we also have two bathrooms. But we wipe our bottoms nearly half as much as you do. Or twice as efficiently, as I see it.
 
Back
Top