WalMart, the great saviour of small format filmmaking...

[ccortez]

There are millions of children's toys and hand-me-down clothes out there. It would surely be more socially responsible to reuse existing products than to buy new. Think of the social costs of new production!

See, NOW you're catching on!

My wife and I tell everyone who might give us gifts that we prefer second-hand, ESPECIALLY toys, since they're going to be used for such a short period of time. There's even a little store here in town that functions as an exchange of sorts. And there's a "toy library", where you can check things out then return them when you're done for another kid to play with them.

My point is exactly that I DO think of the social costs of new production.

Think of it when you go to the bathroom too. There is sufficient newsprint out there to make the purchase of toilet paper socially irresponsible.

That's pretty nasty. But we do use a toilet paper product made by "seventh generation" that is supposedly much better from an environmental standpoint.

What strikes me about all of monobath's and kubota's replies is that they assume some sort of pride or self-righteousness on my part, when all I've really done is answer questions that have been asked of me. I'm not self-righteous about my choices, I simply recognize them as choices, and all choices have consequences and repercussions.

All in all, I think my choices have a very small impact on the big picture, as the polluting, wasteful, destructive world marches on. So I don't take any pride in them really as far as that goes. But I do get to hang on to my integrity.

On the other hand, you guys all sound super-defensive. ;)

[ccortez]

"Very very few. About 15 if I counted (quickly) right."

Is this supposed to be some mark of pride? Nothing's wrong with having a large DVD collection (not that mine is huge - probably 30-40 at last count).

Look jerko, you asked me a question and I answered it honestly. "Mark of pride"? Talk about misconstruction, and putting words in people's mouths. Your skills in this conversation are so inept that I've completely lost interest in continuing.

But I'll finish this response. You have 30-40 DVDs only, but 9 of them consist of 2 4-packs of kung-fu b-movies and freakin' "Panic Room"? Movie night at your house must suck eggs.

If you bought it used, the person you're buying it from probably got it from a large discount retailer to start with :lol: That just makes you someone who pretends to avoid the 'stain' associated with buying things from 'evil capitalist megacorporations' but in reality still owns products that were purchased there.

Why put 'stain' in quotes? It's your term, not mine. Same with 'evil capitalist megacorporations'.

And you've completely lost the plot... I'm currently discussing waste, overproduction of plastic crap, overfull landfills. If I buy things used, I'm not adding to the demand for new plastic shit like you are.

Ever hear "Reduce, reuse, recycle"? The ORDER is important b/c that's the order of effectiveness. If I buy a DVD used, that means it doesn't have to be produced AGAIN, and at the end of its' life it represents one unit of plastic crap in a landfill rather than two. If that same DVD gets passed around several more times, the additional reuse means even less waste.

Besides which, my purchasing it used doesn't put additional profits in WalMart's coffers, does it?

One of the classical arguments against capitalism is that eventually people will have all the truly useful, necessary products they need. Then marketing and other artificial differentiation tactics are required to CREATE "need". And when you get there -- and we are surely there -- that's a sure sign that capitalism is in decline.

But you don't understand that, and won't, because you've never read anything and therefore don't have any background for discussing these topics. And thus, your arguments fly and flounder all over the place.

You're either very young, or not very bright; but I haven't dismissed the possibility of a combo meal of sorts that combines the two. (Smiley withheld.)

[ccortez]

This was brought up before and I asked the same question then: What were these people doing for insurance before they worked at Walmart? If they were working at another low paying job that had benefits, why would they leave to work a different low paying job without benefits at Walmart?

Take grocery stores for example. Historically, many private grocers were unionized, many others were not but paid higher wages and benefits anyway. Mega-chains selling produce are a relatively new phenomenon.

There used to be several grocery stores in my hometown; some big like Kroger and Brookshires, some small like Smitty's and Dennis's. Now there are two -- WalMart and Kroger. Krogers says they can't compete on price with WalMart anymore and will probably close their doors.

WalMart comes in to your town and puts up a grocery megastore with prices that nobody else can match -- often by taking a loss on products to get customers in the door. Once the competition is gone, the prices slowly rise, removing the loss-leader price constructs and increasing their margins. Once their prices rise, there's an opportunity for other stores to step into the marketplace to compete -- except for the fact that WalMart guarantees that the minute they try, they'll drop their prices back down again.

All those grocery stores had employees. Now that the stores are closed, the employees have to find other jobs. Since nobody can compete with WalMart, they become the only employer in town. If they choose to only give employees 30 hours a week instead of 40 so they skirt the laws about offering benefits to "full-time" employees, have store lock-ins where folks are forced to work off the clock, pay crap wages that keep people below subsistance living standards... where else are those employees supposed to go?

If that type of "winner take all" capitalism makes you guys happy, good for you. You can have it.

[Billbot]

I think there should be a store called "Brainy-mart".

This will be a place where all the pseudo-intellectuals who fire off figures and statistics can go to pay inflated prices for the 4-5 consumer goods that are still made in the USA.

There will be a big chart an the wall with plenty of percentages and pie-charts to justify why Brainy-mart patrons should feel really self righteous and superior to other people who aren't as intellectually gifted. They will be lauded for their searing insight into the vast global socioeconomic landscape. And of course they'll get a little ribbon to show how much they care about the poor, underpaid chinese workers; I'm sure they've never bought ANYTHING made in China...

Of course, Brainy-mart will pay all their workers top dollar; they will have a complete comprehensive benefit package as well. After all, isn't that what all unskilled workers deserve?

Isn't it right that we disparage all the poor minorities that shop at Wal-mart? What right do they have to try and buy a little more for their families?! All those poverty level people I see at Wal-mart have no right to improve their standard of living! The very nerve of some people! Well, there just not educated an wise; they're just too stupid to understand how evil Wal-mart is... poor bastards...

or :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

[ccortez]

When one of your films makes it big and people decide they want to watch it maybe once or twice

Surely you'll let me cross that unlikely, far-away bridge when I come to it.

That's like me saying, "Maybe you'll agree with me when the whole world is a landfill and you can't leave your house without choking on the stench."

Of course, many people in other cultures whose resources we are consuming by the millisecond already live in such conditions.

[ccortez]

This will be a place where all the pseudo-intellectuals who fire off figures and statistics can go to pay inflated prices for the 4-5 consumer goods that are still made in the USA.

You sound quite pleased with the fact that there are very few consumer goods manufactured in America anymore. Congratulations. If what you seek is the dismantling of the American economy, you're succeededing at a faster rate than anyone could have possibly imagined.

There will be a big chart an the wall with plenty of percentages and pie-charts to justify why Brainy-mart patrons should feel really self righteous and superior to other people who aren't as intellectually gifted. They will be lauded for their searing insight into the vast global socioeconomic landscape.

A filmmaking forum -- this one in particular -- is the last place I'd expect to find virulent anti-intellectualism used in place of reasoning and sound argument. But here we are. And not just from Billbot, either.

BTW, I think "searing insight" and "vast global" are examples of perfectly awful writing. But maybe that's because I'm an intellectual.

I think I'll stick to film topics on this board. I like a good argument, but most of what I'm hearing isn't any good.

And of course they'll get a little ribbon to show how much they care about the poor, underpaid chinese workers; I'm sure they've never bought ANYTHING made in China...

I would like for you to see the movie
"To Live Is Better Than To Die". I don't know the Chinese title.

I hope one day compassion comes back into fashion and is no longer seen as a sign of weepy-eyed, lefty weakness.

Of course, Brainy-mart will pay all their workers top dollar; they will have a complete comprehensive benefit package as well. After all, isn't that what all unskilled workers deserve?

Actually, yes.

Isn't it right that we disparage all the poor minorities that shop at Wal-mart? What right do they have to try and buy a little more for their families?! All those poverty level people I see at Wal-mart have no right to improve their standard of living!

You don't improve your standard of living by buying cheap trinkets. That's not what "standard of living" means.

And that's a false argument, at least if you're directing any of this toward me. I don't argue that poor people shouldn't have affordable goods. I argue that working people shouldn't be poor and that our extrordinarily wealthy society should organize itself in such a way as to eradicate poverty. One of the steps to doing that is to eradicate the accumulation of ridiculous amounts of wealth, which I'm also in favor of.

WalMart makes us all poorer, not richer, with its cheap goods. Thence we return to my differentiation between "price" and "cost".

But I sense that these arguments are lost on those who disagree, so I'll stop making them. I recommend reading the work of the great economist Paul Sweezy. But I seriously doubt anybody will.

The very nerve of some people! Well, there just not educated an wise; they're just too stupid to understand how evil Wal-mart is... poor bastards...

When the Chinese decide it's no longer in their favor to continue financing the American economy by buying dollars and allowing us to continue operating at record deficits (they've already begun reducing their exposure)... when therefore the value of the yuan begins its meteoric rise (they have far more power over our monetary policy than we have over theirs)... when therefore inflation strikes hard and we have no more weapons to fight back with (such as a manufacturing base, a stable middle class, protectionist trade statutes)... when therefore Wal-Mart's plastic trinkets cost like Tiffany's crystal...

When that day comes, enjoy your job as a greeter. "Thanks for shopping at WalMart! Have a nice day!" How would one say that in Mandarin? ;)