Quote:
Originally Posted by Dom1
Wal*Mart should have backed off. Maybe the best thing for both parties to have done from the start is for Wal*Mart to have been satisfied with a verdict in their favor while not actually taking any of the money back. That way both parties could have won. The Shanks get the money and Wal*Mart doesn't get the bad press and they still get to claim that legally they were right in order to protect in further cases.
|
Does this really make you not want to shop at Wal-Mart? You think bad pres is gonna matter to Wal-Mart? Not really, they do too much good for so many people in America and just happen to have strict policy when it comes to benefits. After all, you want to pay fucking Target Prices for Chinese made crap? hell no, thats why they hold their ground on this.
__________________
"It is the Right of the People to alter or abolish the Government"
Declaration of Independence
"Never trouble another for what you can do for yourself."
Thomas Jefferson
"If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand."
Milton Friedman
