target just sugar coats slavery, unlivable wages, etc. with some really COOL stuff.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nice article overall, though not exactly news or particularly surprising. Did everyone think that Wal-Mart was pure evil and other big box retailers were not -- or didn't engage in similar business practices? Why wouldn't they, in a modern American in the thrall of consumption and corporate feudalism?

What's irritating is the very premise of the article, which relies on a tired and distorting device of modern American journalism: the "false binary" question. We're all too familiar with the false binary (e.g., "GMO Food: Miracle Technology or Environmental Timebomb?") as it used with increasing frequency to frame most current television news stories, much of the stuff on NPR, and a lot of print articles, including this one.

To ask, "Is Target As Bad As Wal-Mart?" is essentially to ask which one is worse -- or, in other words, "Target: Wal-Mart's Better Rival or Its Evil Twin?"

That might work on local TV news, but that is not really the question (or the issue), nor should we really be concerned with the answer. The fact is, both are bad, as is the vast majority of modern corporate retailing. To get into a fine-grained discussion over which is marginally better or worse is to miss the much larger and salient point, which is that we must boycott and ultimately dismantle big box corporate retailing as a model for distributing (and, by extension, producing) goods in our society.

Asking whether Target or Wal-Mart is worse is like asking whether Coke or Pepsi is better for your health. One may have marginally more sugar or preservatives, but that's not the point: All corporate-produced, empty calorie soft drinks are bad for people's health. Who cares which company makes them the slightly less bad one?

Lydersen's article ends with another (albeit implied) false binary, which is the last subhead in bold: "Could It Be Different?" The implied binary is, of course, could it be different or must it stay the same? (i.e., is there no other way to sell things to people?). That's such a ridiculously offensive question that it should not even be posed. Would Lydersen and the crack Alternot editorial team really have us believe that there's no other way to sell products at the retail level?

Instead of wasting the readers' time with paragraph after paragraph of stuff we either already know or at least suspect (or should) -- interspersed with insipid questions that insult our intelligence -- they should be elaborating on exactly what the alternative models are. The brief mentions of unionized grocery stores and Costco begin to head in that direction, only for the article to promptly end.

Asking and then answering a question that few readers could possibly have entertained is hardly a service to one's audience. That kind of navel-gazing, tail-chasing, time-wasting fluff may satisfy the Beltway mandarins who read the Washington Post, but we expect better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Target & Walmart are not that bad when it comes to employers here in America. THe worst employers BY FAR are actually the smaller employers, especially the family owned businesses. They will work you to death if you give them a chance.

Of course this article is nothing but overclass propaganda. The overclass, in this article, is trying to put the focus on some particular evildoer and trying to build the impression that the problem with American labor market is just one or two employers. Focus your attention on one or two suspects and pay no attention to the overclass manipulations going on behind the curtain.

One of the strategies behind the overclass manipulation of America through propaganda is the creation of a PseudoLeft that distracts American leftism from a true Left agenda. This all started decades ago, when the plutocrats founded the large nonprofit foundations. This really started about 100 years ago, with the first and biggest plutocrat of them all, Rockefeller, who started the Rockefeller Foundation> From wikipedia:
The overt is to give us the philathropic view of the foundations as promoters of humanitarian causes and ideals,while the second is used to channel funds to clandentine causes which further American Foreign Policy, of course it looks even better if they are seen as being funded by a charitable organisation. Prior to founding the Rockefeller Foundation Ivy Lee (public relations consultant) adviced JD Rockefeller to use the foundation not only to evade income tax but to also use it as tool to influence academic circles through research grants. By way of funding academic studies into sociology and other research projects

Then Henry Ford and the CIA and the FBI got into the propaganda biz a few decades later using the Ford Foundation to subvert leftism.

From James Petra's article on ratical.org:
One of the Ford Foundation's first Cold War projects was the establishment of a publishing house, Inter-cultural Publications, and the publication of a magazine Perspectives in Europe in four languages. The Ford Foundation's purpose according to Bissell was not "so much to defeat the leftist intellectuals in dialectical combat (sic) as to lure them away from their positions"


Bisell went from the CIA to the Ford Foundation.

THe vast monies the overclass poured into these nonprofit foundations are what is used to subvert leftism by diverting leftists from the causes and ideas that would hurt the overclass. What are the overclass trying to distract us from? Populist Leftist economics is what they want to distract us from. In Europe, populist leftist economics rules. The Europeans force ALL employers to behave. They focus on the big picture--the minimum wage in Europe is about 10 dollars an hour! Universal healthcare for everyone--paid for by taxes, independent of employers. And most European countries mandate a max of 40 hours a week or even less.

You think they got where they are now by focusing their attention on one or two big employers?

The articles that you read on Alternet and other Leftist sites are actually PseudoLeft articles that borne out of the PseudoLeft political culture created by these large nonprofit foundations. This started decades ago, and is carried on now without even knowing how or why things are the way they are today. This is the Cargo Cult effect that creates the PseudoLeft cultural momentum that we see on the front page of Alternet today. All these articles on Alternet, Salon, DKOS, DU, Mother Jones, etc. are for the most part, distractions from our real causes. They are less harmful to the overclass than populist leftist economics.

This is not conspiracy. This is strategy.

Pay no attention to the overclass behind the curtain!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

These two corporate giants are in the news more often, but don't forget the entire corporate world that's taking over the country, eliminating most (all) manufacturing jobs, outsourcing tech jobs and destroying what used to be a solid community minded country. Mom & Pop stores are almost non existant, the government in bed with coporations are pushing the shrinking middle class into poverty. It's time for change !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Expect the rightwing loonies like cry0fan to play the victimization game all the time. Local stores may be more expensive but they don't do the kind of practices Walmart and Target do.

Also, Target gave 70% of its donation to Republicans in 2004 alone and will probably give an even greater percentage to the GOP this year.

Target may be next to my state of ND but to tell the difference between Walmart and Target is as easy as telling the difference between the humans and the pigs in Orwell's Animal Farm !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is America's gluttonous consumerism and the enormous tax breaks corporations receive that are at the root of this form of 'evil'

Only 'we the people' can change our spending habits-
we the people have it in our power to shop or not to shop;
to spend; to save; to give it away...

'We the people' are stuck with the government/tax laws we have until we wake up and rise up/itifada and actively work v for change and that means we must vote and hold leaders accountable.

In Washington DC from May 17-20 TIKKUN [Hebrew for heal, repair and transform the world] will be having it's 2nd Conference for Spiritual Progressives and a Teach-In to Congress about;

"Seeking a New Bottom Line in the Western world so that institutions get judged efficient, rational or productive not only to the extent that they maximize money or power, but also to the extent that they maximize love and caring, kindness and generosity, ethically and ecologically sensitive behavior, and enhance our capacities to respond to other human beings as manifestations of the sacred and inherently valuable and to be respected."-Rabbi Michael Lerner


If you have had enough of complaining and want to do something then attend the conference and be a part of the solution.

DETAILS: http://www.tikkun.org/

Eye witness report on the first Spiritual Progressives Conference is on WAWA:
http://www.wearewideawake.org/

Chapter 2: The Revolution has started now...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When applying for a position at any of the Target stores you must complete a "personality test".

I have applied for a few different positions within the coroporation from an individual store location to corporate headquarters and have been rejected due to the result of my "personality test". But, even if I had passed, I would refuse the manidory drug testing anyway.

For those of you in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area you will understand the reference to Target taking a page out of the Carlson Marketing Book of Brainwashing. One of the requirements to being a "good" employee is being a Corporate Cheerleader.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Both Target and Wal-Mart are in the discount department store business, beyond that they could not be more different. Wally World is the sleaziest, slimiest mess to have ever uglied up the American landscape. If you cannot see the difference between the companies I can refer you to a good Optometrist. If you cannot figure it out I can help you find a Psychiatrist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've seen it first hand, when you've got loads of product to push, and an army of low-wagers standing around with their fingers up their butt having to be told every single step. Why should they be paid more??

Target does tend to throw a bunch of people at a problem, tell them little, and see who shakes out as Team Leader material, but what Target expects from Team Members is no different from any other well-managed operation. Target actually backs up these people with a consistent, review process, reasonable promotion possibilities, and fairly clear chains of command - things other companies only talk about...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

According to Buy Blue, out of a total of $217,439 in political contributions, Target donates $181,060 (83%) to the GOP, and only $36,380% (17%) to the DNC. See Target's political contribution breakdown.

Further, Target's Labor & Human Rights record is equivalent to Wal*Mart. Like Wal*Mart, a Target pharmacist refused to fill an emergency contraception prescription, and the "national headquarters of Target has not responded to three PPFA attempts to clarify its policy on pharmacist refusals.". Further, their employee policy is every bit as bad as Wal*Mart's.

If at all possible, I recommend all Alternet readers boycott both Wal*Mart and Target in favor of CostCo. Out of $222,303 in political donations, CostCo donates 99% ($220,303) to the Democrats and $2,000 (1%) to the GOP.

Costco's progressive employment policies reveals an employee-friendly corporation that deserves support.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Most of us have heard that Henry Ford used to say he wanted to pay his workers enough so that they could all buy Ford cars. WalMart pays it's employees enough so that they all HAVE to shop at WalMart.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If you look at all private companies now they all follow the same principle which is the fundation of the capitalism: to pay as less as possible, to buy as cheap as possible, and sell as much as possible in searching for the highestes prifit for the owners. When you invested in a stock market in search for a higher return you are participate this too. The only difference is that Walmart does it better than a lot of other guys. GM and Ford are not any different as they force their suppliers to reduce the price by 5% every year, so they are forced to cut people and outsourcing to oversea. Wake up it is not just Walmart and Target. Everyone participated as this country has been built on those principles.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I work for a large specialty retail store, and I love my job, because I love the product and my coworkers. Thankfully, my husband has a job that more than pays the bills, so I can afford to work 40 hours a week at a job that pays peanuts and remain financially comfortable. The largest benefit of my job, though, is the affordable health insurance. It's surely not the best insurance, but it sure beats trying to buy health insurance for ourselves.

And, yes, employees need to be cross-trained so they can move throughout the store as needed if others call in sick or need to take breaks. And yes, we all get paid like crap, with the possible exception of our store manager. And we have contests for how many store-specific promotions we sell, but no one really cares. We just try to keep the managers happy and corporate off our backs.

The point is that low wages are a reality we all need to look at - and it's not just Target and Wal-Mart. Retail doesn't pay enough for people to live off. Period.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I live in San Francisco, and there's a Target in Daly City. I went there once to look for dining table chairs. The chairs this Target had were the cheapest-looking, most poorly made things I had ever seen. I looked at a few blonde wooden chairs, and they had stains on them. We tried to wipe them off, but they wouldn't come off. One chair had a leg that was higher then the other legs, and when you sat on it, the chair rocked.

This store also had a lot of things you can buy at Walmart or any convenience store: video games, trashy books, cheap stationery.

Target may have a more "upscale" image, but it's only just that: an illusion. Their products are just as shoddy as Walmart's.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm sorry, but the woman who is complaining because she has to pick something up off the floor? Uh, sorry? That's the nature of the retail beast, lady. Hell, you'd have to do that in a normal office, too, if you didn't want the place to look like a pigsty. In a retail job like this, you're put in one section of the store, and you're pretty much there for the duration unless you switch departments. That means that someone in childrenswear, for instance, is going to have to clean up dropped items, straighten racks, talk to customers, watch out for theives, and several other things. That's the job, folks!

I don't see how you could complain about having to be on your feet all day, either, since I've yet to go into a Target and see anyone working from a chair. Sitting is what your lunch break is for in that type of environment.

I guess what I'm saying is that a good part, but not all, of the employee stories here are things that could be the problem of that one store. STORE management is supposed to do incentives; those are seldom done on the corporate level. This is why store managers and dept leaders have budgets and petty cash. If they don't use them, take it up with them- but that doesn't mean that the company is the twin sister of Wal-mart. Also, the woman complaining that the prize for signing someone up was only some candy or a soda? You get something for even ONE discount card signup? You're doing better than the Vicky's Secret girls, I'll tell you that, and they have to meet thier application numbers or get FIRED after about 3 misses. So, once again, stop the bitching.

Some of these articles are very adept at cherry-picking things that can easily be fixed at the store, or even the department, level. People are incompetent, and that's that. I'm not seeing much proof here that transgressions are institutionalized like they are at Wal-Bitch. I'm seeing regional and local probs.

As far as big companies are concerned, us progressives sitting here saying that mom-n-pops will save us all really need a reality check. MNPs don't pay well overall- if you're looking for $15 an hour in a local boutique, good luck with that. They often don't offer benefits. Vacatoin time can be pretty rare, considering how many people are on staff. The business is way more vulnerable to the personal foibles of management, too (trust me, a nasty owner can kill a business, even if you're working your ass off and people like you). We need to get out of this mindset of small=perfect. That's not the case, and society has progressed past this whether we like it or not. We have to fine-tune what we have in the present, not fall prey to useless reactionary thought patterns. That was then, this is now.

Let's talk about change, but keep it realistic at the same time!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nice comment. It is good to see at least one sensible comment in the bunch.

Well, this one and the "Tikkut" comment above that talked about how we are a nation of consumers as opposed to citizens.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Target offers easy access to healthcare for PT workers and vacation pay. Target was my first job, and to date, the one I held the longest. That may say more about me than them, but as a pt cashier / cart pusher I accrued vacation time and had healthcare, and, although anecdotal in its own right, had frequent opportunities to work more hours if I choose to. Rare among retail employers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My daughter worked for a Target store in Australia, where she was encouraged to join a union, paid a decent wage, and worked conditions laid out in the award.

The problem in the USA isn't the employers, it's the antiquated labor laws and the culture of exploitation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where I live (not too far from a downtown area - which is slowly being taken over by chains), I pretty much don't have any choice but to buy at chains and box stores. I do shop at Costco and at a local co-op but there are things I just can't get from those places. Some things you just can't buy in bulk. I get very frustrated because I don't even know how to FIND a small, independent store that will sell what I need and if I can find it, I end up having to drive even further than the local Target or Bed Bath and Beyond or Walgreens or Macy's or [fill in other generic chain name]. Since they all sell essentially the same thing (which, more often than not, is NOT what I'm looking for - so much for all of the "choices" we have in this country), I'd love to be able go someplace else to shop but so far I've only had luck with speciality items (for example, lamps and lampshades - I found a great place but its double the driving distance and how often do I really need lampshades?). I feel like I no longer have a choice and I'm between a rock and a hard place. Is it really better for me to go to Ace Hardware instead of Lowe's? Is Walgren's better than Target? My solution so far ... limit my purchasing as much as possible ... but since I'm down to 2 pairs of summer weight pants and I don't have time to sew some for myself, to the mall I go!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wage issues aside, there is the topic of how big box stores force themselves upon communities. Wal-Mart seems to come in with outsiders and bully its way around. Target seems to make friends with local politicians and receive big tax cuts to open stores. I walked into the downtown Minneapolis Target shortly after it opened and was appalled to see row after row of bagged candy as one of the first products to be found in the store. This is what millions of dollars went to build.

As the downtown Minneapolis Target store was opening, Best Buy was working with politicians in a city south of Minneapolis to declare eminent domain and move out businesses so Best Buy could build a large, rambling office complex for itself.

The Dairy Queen headquarters, also just south of Minneapolis also is in a rambling office park where squat buildings rise only slightly above the sea of parking spaces.

Wages at Mom and Pop stores may not be high, if there are even non-family jobs available, but in terms of opportunity, fewer box stores offer more opportunities for individuals to create and run their own businesses in competition.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The root of the problem is the American mystique of consumer culture and the pursuit of short-term profits. Americans don't care if they are destroying the environment, or contributing to the polarization of economic classes, as long as they can buy whatever TV tells them they desperately need to buy. Corporations will pursue whatever strategies maximize short-term profits. This is the "race to the bottom" effect. And the consumer-zombies don't give a crap. They just keep buying more plastic crud manufactured in Asian sweat-shops...

I have no idea what the solution is (that Tikkun thing sounds like a start), but the problem is our culture. Until the masses start to questions their preconceptions that property and profit are to be revered over community and environment, we will continue to spiral toward the drain.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In the richest country in the world, why are we putting up with work that sucks?

If we passed a Constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right of American workers to join a collective bargaining unit, we'd all have a lot more power to determine the nature of work in general. Geez...I mean, there are more of us low-wage workers than there are managers & CEO's...can't we get together and demand change?

Here's a start: 4 weeks vacation per year, minimum. A minimum wage of at least $10/hour. Guaranteed one hour lunch break. No overtime without overtime pay. Paid maternity or paternity leave of 6 weeks.
These are things that other countries do for their workers. Why can't we?

We have to ask for what we want.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I agree with many of you on here. It is not really the companies that are the root of the problem but the capitalistic system that has come to define American culture. We really need to re-evaluate what we consider a successful company and economy. This obsession with the percent of economic growth is not healthy. It really shouldn’t be about growth, but about sustainability. The concept of public for profit entities has really skewed our culture in the wrong direction. We are all using the same resources, but we are using them in the wrong way and as happens time and time again the resources are being horded by a select few. It boggles my mind that the same mistakes are made over and over and over. Capitalism seems to have bred a gorging consumer working for the sole purpose of consumption and an innate fear of losing job, home, and family. It amazes me how much socially we have lost in the last 50 years. How do we change this? It can’t be from a purely economic and political theoretical orientation because these repeatedly fail. What is it about the current climate that breeds so much greed and self-absorption? Why do we blindly work so hard toward our own demise? Why can’t we climb out of that Petri dish? I often wonder if we are nothing more than an evolutionary aberration and the joke is on us. Why are we so apathetic and content to be brain-washed? Are there any models from the rest of the world that provide a view of a successful solution? Does the AlterNet represent any organization for change besides the proliferation of information? I read the AlterNet daily and there really are some brilliant people on hear with varied and valuable expertise. I know we disagree on many points, but the people on all seem to be for change in how we go about our lives and how we view one another. We should at least start trying to gather and meet both locally and nationally to begin to discuss what we can do and start doing. I for one have grown tired of the current superficial change and inaction. Are we simple too small of a minority right now or is there a larger untapped power of people? When will enough people get tired enough?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The paragraph below absolutely blew me away! I was a front end team lead for Target for 3 long, brutal years, and this is EXACTLY what it was like!!! The only thing that kept me going was my coworkers that quickly became friends. It's like we had the attitude of , "Well, we're all stuck in this hell hole together, so we may as well try to have fun. It was real teamwork, but for all the wrong reasons."



"You're running around, feeling like you're being pulled in every direction," she said. "There's never enough people on the sales floor. You're getting calls to come up to the cash register, to do pulls [of merchandise] in the back room, to deal with returns at guest services, all at once. And the whole time you're constantly picking up and folding stuff, getting things off the floor. At my age it's a really hard day, on your feet the whole time on these linoleum floors. I'm aching when I get home. I have to take Ibuprofen just to be able to sleep."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've worked for Target for seven years, and I think that these team members that complain about low wages and hard work should find another job. Target will pay you what you are worth. If you're a part time cashier with no ambition, then yes, you will get paid six-something an hour. If you are a hard worker who looks for opportunities to grow and move up with the company, guess what? You'll get raises! And to the person who said they'd refuse the mandatory drug test, why apply? You won't be hired. Hence the term mandatory. And I've seen the personality tests. If you say that you always got in trouble in school, you think it's okay to take things from work, you can't count past fifty, and you only plan on working there for a month, yes, you will fail the test. By the way, those are all actual questions from the tests.
Retail is hard work. It is physically demanding. You will have to put up with rude guests, people who think you're a high school drop-out and can't find anything better. People who talk down to you. Other team members who don't pull their weight. Bosses who want more from you because they need more. If it's not for you, don't do it! I thrive on this environment, I can't imagine sitting behind a desk all day.
And remember, every business' goal is to make more money. You just notice it when you're the one spending the money. So don't pick on retailers. If you work, you are there to make your company money, no matter what line of work you're in. We all make choices. If you don't like retail, don't work in it. If you don't like mass merchandisers, don't shop them.
And finally, there is no comparison between Target and Wal-Mart. So what if we sell similar merchandise? Take the clothing, for instance. Target has famous designers like Issac Mizrahi, Mossimo, Liz Lange, Tara Jarmon. Yeah, you'll a pay a few dollars more. But the difference in quality is well worth it. And the atmosphere. Who doesn't love wide open aisles, clean floors and pleasantly arranged displays? If you'd rather maneuver around pallets dropped in the middle of the aisles, be my guest. But keep in mind that we have created this. We have fostered the growth of the super stores, the mega centers. If you don't want to be a part of it, you don't have to be.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Unions are behind this message regarding Walmart & Target. They are just angry that their services are not being used, meaning all these employees don't feel they have to pay a Union money out of what they make in order to get whatever it is the Union does (Raising prices so much that the average American consumer can hardly afford them -- Look at the auto industry) Sure, Unions were great to get us into the Industrial revolution and preventing sweat shops but all they do now is raise the wages that employers have to pay and then raise the prices of the goods and services sold to the American Consumer.

This story about Target is all about the Unions griping.

regarding Insurance: Target and Walmart both offer their associates that want it a catatrsophic insurance plan called Starbridge. Many of the employees are teenagers (who are invincible) and don't want insurance, and house wives who have better insurance through their full-time working spouses.

Mom & Pop stores buy from China too. they get the least expensive goods to sell to their customers, so those of you who think you are not buying from developing countries when you patronize these mom & pop stores should ask mom & pop where exactly do their goods come from.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I found this web site by looking into allegations that Target will not support the troops or their families and many other worth while ...US charities. Target has been labeled anti-US. They do not display any Christmas theme during the "Holiday" season. They don't want to offend any of their customers. Well they have! Emails have been going around and around! The latest is that they would not allow the families of soldiers to continue benefits while on active duty! I do not shop at Target anymore. I can tell you .. in our area of Middle Tennessee our local Wal-Mart does support charities in the community! They are proud of our troops and support them! Wal-Mart gets my support. I could not find anything proving to me that Target does support any of this countries service men. So, I will not help support Target! Here is the latest…True? You decide.

Dick Forrey of the Vietnam Veterans Association wrote.

"Recently we asked the local TARGET store to be a proud
sponsor of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall during our
spring recognition event.

We received the following reply
from the local TARGET management: " Veterans do not meet our
area of giving. We only donate to the arts, social action
groups, gay & lesbian causes, and education."

So I'm thinking, if the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall and
veterans in general, do not meet their donation criteria,
then something is really wrong at this TARGET store.

As a follow-up, I E-mailed the TARGET U.S. Corporate
Headquarters and their response was the same. That 's their
national policy.

Then I looked into the company further. They will not allow
the Marines to collect for 'Toys for Tots' at any of their
stores. And during the recent Iraq deployment, they would
not allow families of employees who were called up for
active duty to continue their insurance coverage while
they were on military service. Then as I dig further,

TARGET is a French-owned corporation.

Now, I'm thinking again. If TARGET cannot support American
Vet erans, then why should my family and I support their
stores by spending our hard earned American dollars!

And, have their profits sent to France.

Without the American Vets, where would France be today?

"They, most likely would be speaking German and trading in Deutsch Marks"

Sincerely,
Dick Forrey
Veterans Helping Veterans

What do you think?
Sincerely,
Wal-Mart Supporter

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Please go to linked text where you can search for "Target" and "French" to find the truth about Target's ownership and also the truth about the Veteran's e-mail posted above.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"...Target CEO Robert Ulrich, who earned $23.1 million in 2005"

Correction: he was PAID $23 million. Whether he earned it or not is another question.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I used to work at Target HQ (left at the beginning of 2006) and let me say the wages at HQ were a bit better than the stores, but the yearly raises were still ridiculously low. I worked there for a year and a half before getting my first raise of 15 cents an hour. There are plans in store for Tgt HQ to transfer some of its support positions to India...Bob Ulrich's told Tgt team members that the company can find people better educated for less money and that financial people in India are more creative in financial endeavors...being a finance person, I know that creative financial patterns are not a good path to go down, can we say Enron? I would have to say though I am somewhat appalled at the statements in this article about the employees experiencing racism in the stores. In my experience at training in several diverse Target stores, I haven't witnessed any blantant displays of racism. In fact, I have seen the exact opposite, there was a lot of racial reconciliation and the diversity made stronger teams. I am guessing it is a few isolated instances, I think Target has done a good job at cultivating and maintaining a diverse work force.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I meant to add this point as well. I thought the comments in the article about being pulled in several directions and having a million things to do all at once were kind of ridiculous. That is any retail job. I worked in retail part-time for many years. And to tell the truth, those things helped develop many of my time management, multi-tasking and prioritizing skils I have today. I also think a societal requirement is for everyone to work in retail for at least a year. I think it would make people appreciate the cashiers, etc. they come in contact with. It would make us a less rude society. There is nothing worse than ringing up a customer and they don't even acknowledge you...talking on your cell phone through the entire transaction is one of the rudest things you can do...I make it a point to say thank you, give a smile and at least make eye contact with the cashiers serving me...because I've been there and I know that a pleasant customer can make the hours at work thousands of times better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A quick read of this article might lead one to believe Walmart and Target are to blame for these behaviors. But neither of these companies act this way without reason. Indeed they act this way only for the very reasons that their customers have given them: the desire for low prices, at any (other) cost. Every dollar spent at these institutions is a vote to continue this behavior. Every dollar accepted by staff is yet another vote. Could these institutions continue this if we really disliked things so much that we stopped shopping there? Could they continue if the wages were uncompetitive low and no one was willing to work there?

This is what we call the market system. We can complain about it as much as we want, but unless we find a better workable solution, thing will continue the way they are. What are the alternatives? Perhaps a heavier handed government. Perhaps socialism? Americans (and I) are typically not fond of either of these ideas.

For the record, I am not a fan of Walmart or the negative impacts of the market system, but I am a true believer in the market system itself. Perhaps it is "the worst, except for all others". See my article, "Is Wal-Mart Really to Blame" for more.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]