"Warren" wrote in message
news:0oRNc.177875$IQ4.133533@attbi_s02...
wrote:
I don't want to buy Nike sneaks since I don't want to subsidize low
wage labor for factory workers and high wages for athletes, but I
can't remember if its better for people to have a low paying job any
job and if Nike has improved conditions any.

And when enough people stop buying Nike products, Americans in the
Beaverton, Oregon area start to loose their jobs.

When people boycott Home Depot and WalMart and all those other stores,
those people working in those stores "one paycheck away from being
homeless" (as someone else described them) become unemployed. The store
you shifted your business to may be operating on a tighter margin, and
won't be hiring extra people.

Seldom are things as simple as that first level of cause and effect. And
too often people don't think beyond that first level.

Does this mean you need to support Nike to save jobs in Beaverton? No.
It just means your decision isn't a one-dimensional thing. Phil Knight,
and the Nike stockholders are not the only people who will feel the pain
of your boycott, and when the whole picture is looked at, they're
probably the least harmed of those affected.

A boycott of Home Depot to the level that it even attracts the attention
of the CEO is going to hurt many, many working Americans long before it
has any effect on the CEO, or his political beliefs. I hardly think
that's the desired affect.

Don't buy from Home Depot if the stuff they have is junk. Don't buy from
Home Depot if they're too expensive. But if you're not buying from Home
Depot because the CEO is a Republican, you're not accomplishing
anything.

BTW... There already is a boycott of Home Depot happening by fans of the
TV show Trading Spaces who don't like the direction the show has taken.
(Home Depot is a major sponsor of the show.) You can see how much this
has hurt Home Depot. lol

Think things through before boycotting. What are you *trying* to
accomplish, and how does this fit in with what you *could* accomplish if
you're successful, and what *will* happen if you're only partially
"successful". Also consider that calling for boycotts has become so
prevalent that these calls are now falling on deaf ears. Calling for a
boycott is now like calling wolf. If a successful boycott really has a
chance of getting the desired results before causing too much collateral
damage, then do it right. Organize. Spend some money promoting it. Be
professional. Don't think that "send this e-mail to all your friends" is
going to be a useful tool to promote your boycott.

--

I don't consider it a boycott as much as making an informed decision taking
into account both tangible and intangible factors. I wouldn't totally avoid
HD, but it has become the store of last resort for a number of reasons.
Same with Wal-Mart. There are so many choices that considering things like
political contributions helps to narrow the field of contenders. I don't
expect it to hurt either store, but it makes me feel a little better and it
is my money after all.