Re: Re: moral dilemma

From: Judy Seigel ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 01/30/04-04:44:55 PM Z
Message-id: <>


Dear George,

You said,
> The doctors who accept workers comp patients work for the injured but,
>in the end, are paid by Workers Comp.

My point exactly. And, being paid by Workers Comp, were in their thrall,
going along with the ploy to downplay the damage.

> My response to you is the same I would have made to a man. In >fact, I
didn't even consider your sex when writing my response. In fact you need
to lighten up on the gender issue.

If I were any lighter, I'd float away, but, in fact, "attitude" or
"patronizing" are rarely conscious. I was addressing tone and manner, the
way you sounded. If your *intent* had been to sound like that, it would
have been, not patronizing, but deliberate insult.

> Do you think the woman telling this story has an agenda and is an
objective narrator? While there are some sad stories of people who slip
thru the cracks, that is not the case in the vast majority of cases.

You speak confidently of "the vast majority of cases" but say you are not
a lawyer. That's remarkable, especially in one who seems unfamiliar with
everyday news, where such cases as a man with an injury lying helpless in
a locked Wal-Mart til the door was unlocked at 6 AM have been prominent.
Inevitably, I wonder where you get your "news" -- from that "fair and
balanced" fellow on the Fox Network whose name I forget right now? from
Dr. Pangloss? (Candide's mentor, who, whatever happened, insisted that
"everything is for the best in this best of all possible worlds" from whom
the term "panglossian" entered the language) Or possibly a radio
evangelist ?

Suggesting that this woman had "an agenda," requires that she knew somehow
that her query about a film would be referred to a previous customer who
would then ask enough to start the story, listen as it came tumbling out
-- AND remember it 5 years later when the topic of Wal-Mart and "Moral
Dilemma" came together in an online game of free association. Wouldn't a
woman of such clairvoyant talent do better setting up on Wall Street with
a crystal ball ?

> My main objection is the demonetization of Wal-Mart.

Others have done more than I can with that gaffe, except I must add, alas
and alack, the "demonetization" of Wal-Mart is not likely to happen soon
-- as the info in my next will illustrate. [Subject line: Moral Dilemma
for George]

>This is a company which lowers the cost of living for huge numbers of
lower income people. (It is expensive to be poor)
>It provides jobs for thousands of people who might not otherwise be

In fact, Wal-Mart INCREASES the number of poor. More jobs are lost in the
community than Wal-Mart hires. When it puts local businesses out of
business, it hires HALF the numbers put out of work at less than half the
pay, with few if any benefits, so that you (assuming you are a taxpayer)
and I (yes I am a taxpayer) subsidize Wal-Mart's profits by supplying food
stamps, and other aid to those who cannot scrape by on their Wal-Mart pay
alone. Wal-Mart subcontractors hire illegal aliens, and Wal-Mart buys its
goods offshore, causing further unemployment, in case you haven't noticed.
Wal-Mart is the largest employer in the world, accounting now for 10% of
entire US imports from China...

> When Wal-Mart moves into an new area it requires existing small
businesses to become customer centric, freshen up their stores and stock
and provide better service and goods. Business owners unwilling to adapt
fail. Others prosper under the challenge.

No one prospers under the "Wal-Mart challenge" except investors and
developers of strip malls, as money is siphoned out of the community to
them, center cities are wiped out, and downtowns die. There is no
competing with the Wal-Mart buying power, which both forces suppliers to
sell at barely above cost and imports from manufacturers paying slave
labor below the legal wage EVEN IN THEIR OWN COUNTRIES ! But again, if
you can consider Wal-Mart more "customer-centric" than a local business,
you're living in a world few others have seen.

So I add your lines to the roster of Great Lies of History, like the one
about the Conquistadors who massacred the Incas and stole their land and
gold, but came to "bring God to the heathen." (A memorable drawing by a
missionary shows a row of chiefs strung up by their necks roasting over a
row of fires.) And the one about "Arbeit Makt Frei" over the entrance to
Nazi slave labor camps. And the one from Vietnam about "we had to destroy
this village to save it." And too many others to mention.

>My last and final word.

I hope it's not your last and final *thought,* however. I'm not terribly
optimistic, because you seem to feel you know everything already, much of
it from fantasy land, but even a lost soul deserves a chance at
redemption. I'm hoping you'll do some rethinking and "serious fact
checking" yourself... I even bring the info right to your door. I wonder
if you can so readily dismiss all those newspaper articles as you do my
single case. (Friend said Lexis Nexis sent about 40 more , but I said


Received on Fri Jan 30 16:46:39 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 02/02/04-09:50:00 AM Z CST