Target stores and Veterans - you decide what's what
MoveCloseDeleteAdmin

TV ClubHouse: Archives: Target stores and Veterans - you decide what's what

Whit4you

Monday, November 25, 2002 - 05:49 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/boycotts/target.htm

Meggieprice

Monday, November 25, 2002 - 06:00 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I think you should read further. I, for one, know Target to be extremely involved in their communities and also generous in their own way. If you read the whole thing you might see it differently.

Whit4you

Monday, November 25, 2002 - 06:04 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Meggie - that's why I posted the link with NO comments - to let people form their own decision.

Meggieprice

Monday, November 25, 2002 - 06:10 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Gotcha- but your topic title does have a bit of bias, you must admit!

Speaking of topics- my favorite place in the morning with my coffee lately is your A fact-or two about you! Thanks!

Whit4you

Monday, November 25, 2002 - 06:14 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
"Deny Everything" (I made a .wav that said that years ago..where the heck did I put it :)

Your welcome - I love that thread too - it's my morning wakeup-smile thingy now! :)

Pamy

Monday, November 25, 2002 - 07:00 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
This reminds me of the story about Starbucks charging the 9-11 Firefighters for coffee, when in fact only one uninformed employee had done so. Starbucks was actually giving all the rescue workers free coffee, etc. Just shows how rumors get started

Woodpecke®

Monday, November 25, 2002 - 07:30 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
One web site does not make me a boycotter. I would need much more proof than this.

Whit4you

Monday, November 25, 2002 - 07:41 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Well I didn't post a rumor Pamy - just posted a link to the situation.

I'm very protective of our Vets - and just figured I'd do my little part to make a few aware of what is going on.

I'm trying really hard to keep my personal opinions to myself on this - not easy. Every sentence I write - ends up coming across as a personal opinion so I just have to keep deleting them LOL.

Folks can read it for themselves - and take what they want from it.

Whit4you

Monday, November 25, 2002 - 07:44 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Woody the site I posted is the one that dispells 'urban legends' - because I orignally recieved this info from a vet friend who recieved it from a friend etc... so I looked into it and that's what I came up with in my attempt to confirm or deny the grant situation.

I assume there's more info about this elsewhere - but that site is so good at dispelling rumors and myths that their research into this was enough for me personally.

Perhaps it's easier to believe for me cause I did volunteer work for the WDVA and witnessed first hand the appalling way that Vets are treated and what they have to go through to get what is due them etc.... hopefully that's changed by now with the recent 'wars' we've had.

Itsallgood

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 05:39 am EditMoveDeleteIP
To each his own. I guess any company that denies certain organizations...etc. funding will run into this same situation. I fully support the right for each company to CHOOSE who to give what to.

JMHO

Conejo

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 05:54 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Itsallgood, Ditto from me!

Fruitbat

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 05:58 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I agree Itallgood. There are so many worthy causes asking for money that every corporation in America can be faulted for denying someone. They cannot give to all.

Car54

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 07:15 am EditMoveDeleteIP
When I worked in Theatre, I was the beneficiary of a number of Target's local arts grants. Their local store managers were always very caring and interested in participating in our educational projects.

I work in retail now, and we have 15 stores in small towns in our area. You would not believe the number of requests we receive daily for support for local activities and charities.
In today's economy, you cannot do everything, and you have to choose the things you think you can do well.

I think the decision is up to them. I will shop in the stores that offer the best selection, prices and service in that order.

Pamy

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 10:21 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Whit, I didn't mean to infer that you posted a rumor, sorry if I came across that way.

Calamity

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 10:48 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I think the best thing would be for people to support local and independent retailers whenever possible. Franchise and chain stores certainly have their advantages but they're also turning towns across the US into indistinguishable, dull carbon copies of each other. Okay, I realize that's kinda besides the point.

I don't have a problem with people boycotting any store if they object to how the store directs its charitable contributions. But I also think Target shouldn't be d*mned for this situation. Seems more like a bureaucratic mix-up (on both sides).

That said, may I tell everyone how much I loathe Wal-Mart?

Jagger

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 11:12 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I agree with the above posts that each corporation has the right to choose who, when, why, what and where to give their money. As well I beleive each individual has a right to choose what charities they wish to donate to.

I personally wouldn't be swayed one way or the other on shopping at a store by who they donate to. I general pick my stores by convience and price.

Dahli

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 11:25 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I for one would very much like to hear how much you loathe them Calamity... it's incredible that more people don't.

Calamity

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 01:22 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Dahli: Unfortunately, I don't think it's incredible that more folks decline to share my feelings about Wal-Mart. It's affordable and convenient. That's enough for most shoppers and it's awfully difficult to argue with those points. People love the stores, and the stores are wildly successful. I'm sure my holding out against them means nothing in the big picture.

The main problem I see is that Wal-Mart is so huge that most companies can't just ignore it. I dislike that Wal-Mart forces suppliers to change their product designs to Wal-Mart specifications (prime example Rubbermaid) under threat of removing their items from store shelves. I don't like that they censor entertainment multimedia, often without consumers even being aware of it. They're a nationwide retailer which means there's an ever decreasing selection of products shoppers may chose from across the country. Many of their goods are manufactured in poor countries with abysmal track records for environmental regulation and worker safety and compensation. Then there are the allegations of how Wal-Mart treats its own employees - forced overtime without pay, fights against unionization. It doesn't even provide much of a tax base for communities because of an acknowledged company policy to locate stores outside of city limits whenever possible and most jobs are only minimum wage. Not to mention the loss of small local businesses that often wilt against Wal-Mart's bulk-buying power. Wal-Mart may be legally within its rights to follow these practices but I have just as much a right to not patronize their stores because of them. I guess I just better hope the day doesn't come when I no longer have that choice. Oh and those buildings are ugly, too :) .

Sorry for taking this thread off subject but I just wanted to defend my position.

Calamity

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 02:24 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
To clarify what I meant by "no longer have that choice" - as in Wal-Mart being the only store left in my area. Living in a rural county which lost its other two department/mass merchandise stores in the past couple years since Wal-Mart came in makes that a very real possibility.

Moderator

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 04:50 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
The title to this thread has been changed to more accurately reflect the subject matter.

(c)

Mosessupposes

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 04:52 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Just remember a few things here. Target advertises that they donate a portion of their profits to local charities. These profits come from your purchases. You may be donating to a charity that you wouldn't support in a million years if you had any choice in the matter.

Also remember that instead of donating money to charities (a public relations ploy at best), Target could just reduce their overall prices by the percentage amount they donate to charity.

Would you rather have Target donate 10% to some charity you never heard of and might not support if you had? Or, would you rather have Target take 10% off of your bill each time you shop in one of their stores?

Titheing is best left to churches and their parishioners...not to large corporations.

Whit4you

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 05:01 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Well now that folks have had a chance to read it wihtout my feedback I'll try and respond without a diatribe or thesis....will try to be brief.

I totally agree they can't give to all charities - I too have owned my own business and know the # of requests made and so on. However - Target made a few million at least off of American's patriotism the past year with all their sales of patriotic items do to 9/11 - now I don't think they were taking advantage of the tragedy - but for them to make a profit off of the patriotism and yet not offer the same grants to our Vets as they do to the arts... bothers me personally.

I understand we ALL have different priorities and what charties WE feel are important - and that's often based on your life experiences etc. For some the arts are vital - for some homelessness is vital and so on. For me I have to wonder where the 'arts' would be today - if not for our vets and all they've done to allow the expression of art here in this country and so on, and many of those homless people are concerned about are war vets...hero's.... So for Target to NOT allow the same grants for Vet causes as they do to 'the arts' and so on - I personally feel is wrong.

I put the Vets - especially our Nam vets - at the top of my list of priorities when it comes to causes... others of course have different priorities and that's ok.

But for ME personally - I won't support a company that puts 'the arts' or other various causes made possible BY our vets - over our vets.

Anyhow - as I said everyone has their own opinion and a right to them... that's mine.

Little ole Whit and her few XMas dollars mean nothing to Target - but there are alot of vets upset by the situation maybe it'll make the main stream press and give business's some food for thought on their priorities.

Trust me that's the SHORT version :)

Whitney

Dahli

Thursday, November 28, 2002 - 07:18 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Oh Calamity, I couldn't have said it better myself, and you're so right, it won't change as long as most people only care about what's in it for them right now, instead of long term ramifications. My DH is with a large union and was shocked after September 11 when US flag lapel pins were prohibited by management at WM because they were distributed to the employees by a union official. Being aware of difficult staff issues, incredible mgt attitudes and all of your points, and still seeing people stream in there, really is disturbing.

Whit4you

Thursday, November 28, 2002 - 09:10 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Calamity - ya one small business here in northern Idaho has it's sign board saying

I QUIT
WALMART WINS
GOING OUT OF BUSINESS

It's a little flower shop - been there for decades. Walmart moved in across the street a few years ago.

I don't know though, I mean can you imagine how many mom and pop stores it would take to supply a community with what Walmart does, and would we have enough ROOM for that many mom and pop stores. We as a society have become glutton's and so I think we have to have this 'necissary' evil to supply our fix of material goods.

Zeno39

Thursday, November 28, 2002 - 07:23 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Whit, I am so glad that you support our military I am a widow of a 31 year service man who saw action in Korea and Viet Nam. He died at the age of 55 due to Agent Orange. Civilians do not realize what military life is all about. There are so many sacrifices, and life is hard for a lot of them. My husband was very patriotic and loved his country. I will do anything to support our veterans. On another note, I worked for Wal-Mart many years ago, and they are the hardest people to work for. Sam Walton was still alive then and came in our store and told us how great we were going to be treated. When he left, it was not how he said it was going to be. I came home with a headache every day, and was so stressed that I finally had to quit. And I was a darn good worker. But they made it so hard to stay there. I could not take anymore, and could afford to quit. My nerves were better after I quit that place. I don't know how it is now, but I am sure they probably work you like a dog like they did when I was there. Maybe somebody out there knows if it is better now.

Kaili

Thursday, November 28, 2002 - 07:42 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I don't think it is. My stepdad is a pharmacist and works at Wal-Mart. He had worked at a small pharmacy but they couldn't give him the benefits and vacation time, etc that Wal-Mart does. Basically, the small places can't afford to have more than one pharmacist and one pharmacist means always having to work.

Anyway, he LOATHES the place. Absolutely hates everything about it. Being in pharmacy he obviously makes a lot more than the floor staff but he is also disgusted that he has made more in raises in the 6 years that he has been there than some of the people who have worked as cashiers for 20 years there get paid. So figure his hourly rate has gone up by $8 (I don't know what it is....ust an example)- that means these people are making UNDER $8/hour after 20 years. Either he has had HUGE raises or those people are SEVERLY underpaid.

I hate Wal-Mart. I get stressed just going in as a customer- I can't imagine being in there 8 hours. He has his employee discount card and uses it just to buy single packs of gum so they have to do extra paperwork for like 2 cents. He got in trouble one time because a co-worker bought something and didn't have her card with her- he swiped his for her and got in trouble for it. Oh yeah, and they track what they buy on their discount cards too. So if he used the discount card to buy cigarettes or beer or anything like that, they could hold it against him in terms of insurance.

Dahli

Friday, November 29, 2002 - 07:32 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Today our paper shows a local Hardware store closing after 40 years because they can no longer compete, I think that there is room for all kinds of retail, but WM doesn't The fact that it is so severely imbalanced is my point. All the reasons so well laid out above show just how ugly imbalance can be... Stephen King's book (can't remember the name of it- just the feeling of the huge building appearing out of nowhere and sucking the place dry) always comes to mind when I see that store, I do not shop there.

Jo_5329

Saturday, November 30, 2002 - 05:36 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Personally, I think Sam Walton is rolling in his grave thinking about what his dream has turned into.

I loath WalMart personally -- the super centers are nothing more than super babysitting services -- and for something w/o kids and can't stand to be around most kids and their parents, WM is a nightmare!!!!!!

It's the only store however in our area that carries the Excedrin Migraine that my hubby takes, so we have to venture in there now and again. I'd really rather have a root canel without numbing than go in there. Just shoot me between the eyes if I talk about going in there !!!

To me WM is like Microsoft -- they both want to take over the world in their respective markets. I actually spend more time and money in KMart lately -- and I can't stomach anything to do with Martha Stewart -- but at least I don't have to fight through screaming kids and parents and get run over 5 times by some dimwit that can't control her/his buggy or spawn.

Ack, I have to stop.

Dahli

Saturday, November 30, 2002 - 09:06 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Oh my goodness Jo! 'buggy or spawn' LOL!!!and your comparison of MS to WM - how very very true...

Grooch

Friday, December 13, 2002 - 11:20 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Here's a Walmart story I found on Snopes.com, so it must be true.

Claim:

Wal-Mart resold toys left with it to be donated to needy kids.

Status: True.

Origins: In November 2002, the Wal-Mart in Sterling, Colorado, was approached by a representative of the Logan County Chamber of Commerce's Toys For Tots program with a request to place a toy donation box at that location. The box was set up, and the Chamber's representative thrilled to watching the toys pile up. When she went to retrieve the toys in early December, however, she found the box empty.

Someone from the store had returned all the donated items to the shelves.

As most mix-ups do, this one came about mostly through miscommunication (albeit some misplaced zeal played a part too). The store's manager recalls telling the drive's representative all donated items had to be wrapped in Wal-Mart bags (which was the store's protection against shoppers' plucking items from shelves and tossing them in the box -- the presence of the bags would show items had been paid for). The Toys For Tots representative doesn't recall such an instruction. Without those bags, Wal-Mart personnel had reason to believe the toys had been stolen. And the location of the drop box (in an out-of-the-way area where no security cameras watched over it) made it impossible to tell if the beneficences had been given as opposed to purloined.

Why the management of this particular drop-box went so badly awry is a mystery. One would have thought the potential for a public relations black eye would have slowed Wal-Mart's zeal to return suspect items to its shelves even as it sped the removal of the box to a better supervised location. In the perilous world of public relations, it is often better to eat an undeserved monetary loss rather than risk a calumnious drop in public opinion. Reselling toys donated for the purpose of lighting up the eyes of poverty-stricken waifs is about as sure-fire a recipe for loss of good opinion as it gets.

Before anyone concludes Wal-Mart is the Grinch of all the ages, it should be pointed out that retailer is a regular benefactor to Sterling area clubs and organizations, donating more than $50,000 annually. Wal-Mart even offered a $1,000 cash grant to Toys for Tots this year.

On the national scale, in 2001, Wal-Mart contributed over $12.2 million to education programs. This included over 3,400 scholarships to deserving high school seniors totaling more than $8.5 million. America’s schools received over 3,250 Teacher of the Year grants totaling $1.7 million in recognition of their outstanding service.

The "Toys for Tots" program has been a part of America's charitable landscape since the late 1940s. Through it, more than 272 million toys have been collected and distributed to more than 133 million children.

Barbara "earning millions of smiles" Mikkelson