You are exactly right.

I suppose that sentiment is where we fundamentally disagree. I have no desire to overthrow my boss, or have the option to do so. If he was so bad that it was unbearable to work under him, I would look for another job elsewhere. Granted other prospects are limited right now, but if you are willing to bide ones time for a few years, there will always be opportunities to upgrade if you have a good work ethic and are good at what you do.

I don’t have the same level of choice on what country’s gov’t I have to live under. Sure I could move to another country that has a culture and gov’t more in line with my beliefs. Unfortunately, if you lean towards the libertarian/conservative persuasion on most issues, you really only have one choice on a country to live in.

I’m not saying all opposition to supermarkets is based on pretentious snobbery, but from my experience on the subject in the UK, an awful lot of it is.

Union members shouldn’t take their unions or their leaders for granted. Unions are supposed to be democratic institutions. Anyone attempting to curtail that democracy should be ran out of the union. Unfortunately, working people must also fight for their interests against the very people who are supposed to represent them.

As a union member myself, when it comes down to it I’d rather have a corrupt union than none at all. I may not like my union leaders, but I will never say that makes unions inherently negative. At least I theoretically have a chance to change my union through democracy. I can at least organize and throw out my union leader. I can’t do that with my boss.

Sean, as for unionization, you have a point about jobs becoming more long term. Now if you could only convince me unions are a force for good in today’s US. The way most of them operate is a racket, as evidenced by union officials pushing to abolish secret elections of union leaders.

Тома 1–13 подготовлены Институтом Маркса – Энгельса – Ленина при ЦК ВКП(б) в 1946–1952 гг.

Тома 14–18 подготовлены и опубликованы под общей редакцией
доктора философских наук, профессора Р.И. Косолапова в 1997–2006 гг.

Алфавитный указатель и электронная версия собрания сочинений подготовлены
доктором политических наук, доцентом М.Н. Грачевым в 2002–2006 гг.

Pseudo-Dima, you are a very insightful psychologist. I’m impressed.

Ivanov, I’m afraid you are right that they’ll simply blame the pilot. It would be great if this time it doesn’t happen, though. There is always hope. As you wrote, the pilot probably didn’t have much of an option.

Tim, so here you are defending the little man against snobbish elitists. One thing is to disagree about big box stores, another is to characterize those who disagree with you on this issue are pretentious snobs. It’s amusing how often I hear similar kinds of negative stereotypes. Something worth of Gosh Darn It Palin. Recently I read from a conservative Republican that most whites who voted for Obama are secretly disdainful of African-Americans, closeted racists, who voted for Obama just to show how cool they are.

Not as bad as being racists, but I guess the fact that Sean and I oppose Walmart means that we are, you know, pretentious. Moreover, I’m against MacDonalds–those Golden Arches loved by hundreds of millions of plebeians that don’t know any better. This is probably even more of a dead giveaway of what kind of person I am.

I didn’t read anything there about suppliers being forced to do anything. If Wal-mart decides that $2.97 (or whatever) is what it is prepared to pay for a gallon of pickles, Vlasic the supplier is perfectly entitled to sell them to somebody else who may value them more highly. The value of the pickles, or indeed any product, is what somebody is willing to pay for them, not what the person who owns it decides he wants to sell it for. The real reason the pickles cannot fetch higher prices is because there are too many of them.

Saying that suppliers are forced to sell stuff cheaply is akin to saying you can force Ikea to sell you a sofa at whatever price you want.