|
|
Post by DeadpanDoubter on Jun 20, 2011 22:00:59 GMT -5
¢  CHEATER. Is that an alt code? I only know the ones for the Spanish accents. <.<; |
|
|
|
Post by Amaranth on Jun 21, 2011 7:40:04 GMT -5
only their bags though, Amaranth, at least, that's how it is with my local price chopper... and at $2+ a bag... Nope. I use dollar store bags, a couple of fancier bags that I thought were cool, and even a duffel. Granted, the fancier bags were eight bucks, but I didn't buy them to save money and use them all the time....Or did. I'm hoping I got them out of my old apartment. I don't know...All a blur. Anyway, mine allows you to use anything. Some people even reuse the plastics. It'd be a lot less appealing if it was just their bags. Especially since their bags SUCK! |
|
|
|
Post by nickiknack on Jun 21, 2011 14:18:58 GMT -5
Since this thead has derailed into talking about how much different places charge extra for plastic bags because of the environment, all I have to say, why the fuck do those places just use plastic bags that are biodegradable,they do exist...
|
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Jun 21, 2011 14:43:25 GMT -5
I assume that biodegradable plastic is more expensive than the usual stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by the sandman on Jun 21, 2011 14:45:02 GMT -5
I've read the SC decision on the Wal-Mart case and, while I'm no fan of Wallyword to be sure, I can see where the justices are coming from. More than a million plaintiffs? It's not like a faulty product lawsuit where all you have to show is that the company knowingly manufactured a bad or dangerous item. You would have to demonstrate, on a case-by-case basis, how every single one of the women named in the suit were personally and directly discriminated against in HR practices.
It would take the courts years, if not probably decades to establish that kind of individual-basis claim.
And as the case dragged on and on and on the attorneys (and I use the term loosely) arguing the case would mount higher and higher and higher fees until finally, if the suit was victorious, the lawyers would collect hundreds of millions in fees and shares while the women in the lawsuit would each net, at most, a few hundred dollars.
[/sarcasm on] And wouldn't that be justice? [/sarcasm off]
What you have here is a case where a few women brought (a probably legitimate) case against the retailer, who then wound up with lawyers who saw an opportunity to hit the jackpot with a massive class-action lawsuit against one of the deepest pockets in America. The SC specifically states that there is nothing barring those original women, or any women who feels she has a case, from litigating against Wal-Mart, just that you can't do it with more than a million plaintiffs in this case.
In order to successfully do that you would have to be able to prove that Wal-Mart has an official, articulated, documented, provable policy in place to specifically discriminate against women. If such policy or proof existed this would be a criminal matter and not a civil one at all.
I hope the original women who filed the suit get themselves a better lawyer who treats this the way it needs to be done: as a matter concerning the local management of Wal-Mart who may well have been discriminating.
|
|
|
|
Post by nickiknack on Jun 21, 2011 15:00:23 GMT -5
But I'm sure the price of it would go down, if the more companies/places decide to switch to making the bags, and it would become the new normal...its better that the whole nickel & diming folks over the bags...there really needs to be a demand for the bags, I don't know why places haven't thought about it, they should've by now...
|
|
|
|
Post by The Lazy One on Jun 21, 2011 21:23:36 GMT -5
Good god, they charge for bags now!?!?! The recession must be getting really bad...
None of the stores around here charge for bags. Is this a regional thing?
|
|
|
|
Post by DeadpanDoubter on Jun 21, 2011 21:24:47 GMT -5
In my experience, it's just particular store chains, and the lower-priced ones to boot. I dunno about elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by Amaranth on Jun 21, 2011 21:26:15 GMT -5
Good god, they charge for bags now!?!?! The recession must be getting really bad... None of the stores around here charge for bags. Is this a regional thing? It's not the economy, it's greed. They've milked all the profit from everywhere else, so now they're bumping new frontiers. |
|
|
|
Post by The Lazy One on Jun 21, 2011 21:27:14 GMT -5
In my experience, it's just particular store chains, and the lower-priced ones to boot. I dunno about elsewhere. Hmm. In that case, it's probably regional, since I've never heard of any of these stores you guys mentioned. |
|
|
|
Post by Yla on Jun 23, 2011 16:50:57 GMT -5
Good god, they charge for bags now!?!?! The recession must be getting really bad... None of the stores around here charge for bags. Is this a regional thing? They charge for bags to encourage people to bring their own and/or reuse them. Do Your Part To Save The Environment Today! |
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on Jun 23, 2011 17:07:29 GMT -5
Good god, they charge for bags now!?!?! The recession must be getting really bad... None of the stores around here charge for bags. Is this a regional thing? Save A Lot has always charged for bags. Or at least, they have for as long as I can remember. But these days they only charge for the large ones. |
|
|
|
Post by Damen on Jun 23, 2011 19:30:08 GMT -5
You know, I'm actually kind of appalled and disappointed that, with the exception of The Sandman and a few posters at the very, very beginning of this thread, none of you are actually talking about the fucking article.
One and a half million women just got fucked over after being discriminated against, and all you people can talk about is being charged for plastic fucking bags?! I'm actually disgusted that your priorities are so fucking out of whack. Honestly disgusted.
Shame on you, FSTDT. I thought you were better than this.
And I know someone will come on and make a snarky/joking reply to me; par for the course for this website. But I feel I should warn you that if you do, I will think less of you as a human being.
|
|
|
|
Post by The_L on Jun 23, 2011 19:35:25 GMT -5
I don't go to Wal-Mart or Target because of the things I've heard.
If K-Mart starts pulling shit, I'm fucked.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yaezakura on Jun 23, 2011 20:18:46 GMT -5
You know, I'm actually kind of appalled and disappointed that, with the exception of The Sandman and a few posters at the very, very beginning of this thread, none of you are actually talking about the fucking article. One and a half million women just got fucked over after being discriminated against, and all you people can talk about is being charged for plastic fucking bags?! I'm actually disgusted that your priorities are so fucking out of whack. Honestly disgusted. Shame on you, FSTDT. I thought you were better than this. And I know someone will come on and make a snarky/joking reply to me; par for the course for this website. But I feel I should warn you that if you do, I will think less of you as a human being. In all fairness, these women weren't fucked over by anyone but their own lawyers. The case, as I see it, had no merit. They'd have to prove a company-wide policy of discrimination against promoting women to have a case. No such policy exists, as the official Wal-Mart policy is that discrimination on pretty much any grounds is not tolerated. Also, pretty much every Wal-Mart in my area has women in management positions. So the problem obviously isn't on the company level. Not to say that discrimination didn't happen. But it's not being caused by the people they were trying to sue. You don't try to cut off someone's head because their ankle hurts. |
|
