Is retail trade evil?

  • Thread starter Thread starter fakename
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

fakename

Guest
I was only glancing through Aristotle’s politics and I noticed his justifiable enough stance in favor of autarky and against selling retail items.

So do you think that he was correct that selling for a profit is basically unnatural because it makes people pursue money instead of goods (people make things for money instead of making things for use)?

I think that the conclusion is correct and yet not, since if it were definitely and unequivocally right, then Catholics could never approve of profit making and yet we do.

But there are some other problems about being anti-retail: if it is true that retail sales are evil then free-trade would be evil and protectionism good. But if that’s true, then when people sometimes pay others to make something for them for their future needs (perhaps because they are too tired to presently make it themselves), that would be wrong. And also, even when someone can provide something better for themselves, but they subsequently pay someone else to make it for them (perhaps to gain extra leisure), then that would be wrong too. But this seems absurd in both cases (what’s so evil about wanting extra leisure or what seems so virtuous about making everything yourself)?
 
What is the role of prices?
  1. Transmission of information
  2. Incentives
  3. Distribution of income and/or a rationing mechanism
Prices and profits are an efficient way to allocate scarce resources. Socialism gums up the works and causes a misallocation of resources. That is one of the reasons Winston Churchill said that the philosophy of socialism was failure, the creed of socialism was ignorance and the gospel of socialism was envy. Unfortunately, the government of the United States is a socialist government with a socialist president.

Theory of Bureaucratic Displacement, as proposed by Dr. Max Gammon? “In a bureaucratic system an increase in expenditure will be matched by a fall in production. Such systems will act rather like ‘black holes’ in the economic universe, simultaneously sucking in resources, and shrinking in terms of ‘emitted’ production.”
 
I don’t know much about the theory behind it all but having worked in retail for many years now yes…yes it is a great place of evil.
 
What’s really the difference between making something for profit or making something for its use? In both cases our primary motivation is to improve our personal well-being (the morality only comes into play when we are improving our own well-being at the expense of another’s).

What would be the difference between person “A” spending a day designing a can-opener to make his life easier, or person “B” spending that day sewing a T-shirt that she then sold at market value for money that she used to buy a can-opener to make her life easier?
 
People have different skills, talents, and training, so I would not have a clue how to MAKE a can opener, but I can sew tshirts. Likewise others have the skills to grow food, some know how to build engines, and yet others can safely construct buildings. Instead of bartering or trading for goods and services with other goods and services, we trade money for goods and services.
 
Its evil when its used to gouge consumers unfairly - the gas industry is a great example of this - gas went up recently because Iran cut export but the Saudis said they would make up the short coming but on the chance of making a profit the market is manipulated to pretend there a shortage when there really isn’t - long weekends the price goes up - you can say it supply and demand but I don’t believe it - its manipulation for profit - when have the oil companys ever taken a loss - another simple one is wiper fluid - etc - what can you say - it is what it is and its abused for the almighty profit margin when its not required.
 
No, retail is not INHERENTLY evil. It is not NECESSARILY evil.
It can be morally good even.

But the Retail INDUSTRY CAN and DOES do very evil things.
I work for a large dept store chain, a huge one, that brags in many of our meetings
about the many billions in net profit it makes DESPITE the current “recession.”
And, it DOES make those UNbelievably HUGE profits.
But how?
Simple: by gouging us hourly workers and sales associates,
by paying us as LITTLE as federal law will allow, which is minimum wage,
make us earn a “draw” for that minimum wage (mine is abour $1400 in sales a day)
BEFORE we can become eligible for 5% commission.
So, if I sell $2500 in merch today, I earn minimum wage plus $55 commission for the day
(before taxes and deductions). So thats about 61 dollar a day plus $55 commission a day, on a day that I sell $2500. Then I have a bully there who steals my sales and chases me away from customers, etc, plus some days are slow sale days, and I don’t even make my $1400 draw. So that day, I not only do not make any commission, but if I fell $300 short of my draw that day, I LOSE $15 of the $55 commission I made the previous day, so now I’ve only earned $40 commission. If I earn say, $140 commission that week, and then customers return (as our store cheerfully ENCOURAGES them to do) the items that I worked to sell to them, the company STEALS BACK 5% of the total return dollar amount from my commission. If it’s a $200 item that they return, the company steals $10 commission from me, that I worked to earn. That IS stealing, even though it is legal, because I did the work, I made the sale, and the Return Policies are THEIRS, not mine. But that’s how CORPORATE AMERICA IS (sorry, fellow Republicans, but it is true, they are greedy, malicious b*****ds): they STEAL the wages back from the Little Guy ((but they arrest a shoplifter)) that the little guy DID THE WORK to EARN, while their dept managers and higher, make $100,000 a year and up, pushing a pen and basically doing nothing but walking around and making people doing the backbreaking work,work even harder, for next to nothing, and we are supposed to feel happy and cheery about it all.
I don’t condone communism, nor do I agree with it, but being in a sales position now,
and treated the way we are, I can NOW UNDERSTAND why, in some countries, the poor people side with the communist revolutionaries (who are duping them,because Wall Street is financing the communist revolutionaries, too, and that is documented fact), and rise up and string up all the super rich from light poles. I don’t condone nor encourage that, but boy do I understand, now, the justified, 100% justified, ANGER that leads to that final
explosion of vengeance.
If the super rich would just OBEY Catholic teaching and pay ALL their non-executives a LIVING wage, they would be a little less rich, but still VERY WELL OFF, and nobody would buy into the Left’s class-warfare rhetoric. But they don’t listen until people have had enough, rise up, and try to wipe them off the face of the earth.
I hope that in America, they will start to listen to Catholic Social teaching from the popes since Leo XIII, and then things WOULD improve. EVERY full time worker is entitled to a living wage. I don’t want any $100,000 a year salary, but about $38-42,000? Yes, by my labor, my twice-normal size swollen legs, bloody feet, blood-streaked calves, purple toenails, aching back, yes, I have certainly earned such a wage.
If they paid us all a LIVING wage, as God commands (not asks) that they do,
they WOULD be a little less rich, but still VERY well off.
 
Read Masthew 6:24 Money is not evil! It is the love of money that is evil.
 
40.png
MidnightSun12:
What’s really the difference between making something for profit or making something for its use? In both cases our primary motivation is to improve our personal well-being (the morality only comes into play when we are improving our own well-being at the expense of another’s).

What would be the difference between person “A” spending a day designing a can-opener to make his life easier, or person “B” spending that day sewing a T-shirt that she then sold at market value for money that she used to buy a can-opener to make her life easier?
Click to expand...
I don’t know what aristotle would say to this, or if he even specifically discussed it.

Perhaps he discussed it earlier in his book “economics” but I can’t really find it.
 
I dont know exactly what Aristotle said, but one thing is certain that for our modern life we absolutely require the division of labor, savings for capital investment, and the manufacture and sale of products we do not ourselves need. If we ended these things we would be living rather simple lives.

One thing to keep in mind is that classically we have needs and wants. Our needs are few and are food, water, shelter, and clothing. Those are what we need for survival which is just the continuation of our life. Beyond that everything is a want. We want TV, movies, beer, a fancy dinner etc. I think if we keep this division in mind no matter what form of economy we have we will act more morally.
PeterGStanley said:
Its evil when its used to gouge consumers unfairly - the gas industry is a great example of this - gas went up recently because Iran cut export but the Saudis said they would make up the short coming but on the chance of making a profit the market is manipulated to pretend there a shortage when there really isn’t - long weekends the price goes up - you can say it supply and demand but I don’t believe it - its manipulation for profit - when have the oil companys ever taken a loss - another simple one is wiper fluid - etc - what can you say - it is what it is and its abused for the almighty profit margin when its not required.
Click to expand...
I do believe that oil companies extort money from us, but it is not through gas prices. It is through corporate subsidies, favorable laws, and the use of the US military to control oil markets. The gas market is actually the most free. Many gas stations have a competitor just across the street. Gas stations advertise their price on signs you can see from the road. They will fight over a penny difference. And if oil companies control the gas market why wouldn’t they always keep the price high?
 
The Church condemns radical materialism. That means both Laissez Faire Capitalism–anything goes to make the almighty dollar–and Socialism/Communism. Wage slaves making the junk we buy sold by other wage slaves isn’t holy, it’s hellish. Let’s do something, please God.

I condemn the Chuch–jokingly–for having us pay retail when we buy food to donate to the Food Pantry. Why are we not forming food buying clubs?!? We need to get the most bang for our charity buck and literally feed the poor, not profit the grocery chains. Why are we not using parish grounds to grow food? Plant a few fruit trees in every parish! Then we are not profiting the food supply monopolists like Con-Agra. There are only a handful of companies that control all our food! God help us now, always and everywhere to be safe, self-sufficient, united in one holy community, and obey Christ’s command to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. Thanks.
 
Nah. Retail trade is not intrinsically evil.

Every producer is morally entitled to make a decent profit that exceeds the cost of goods sold.

A producer needs to have property, plant, and equipment, and labor plus the raw materials that are fashioned into a product needed by his customers. He must set a price for the finished product that will cover the costs plus whatever taxes he must pay. So it takes a considerable sum of money to get into business and remain in business. There is real financial risk he could loose his investment. To compensate him for that risk, he is entitled to a decent profit.

The retail price also includes a subjective value to the buyer. One can shop at Nordstroms or at Nordstroms Rack or JCPenney, or Dress Barn can get unused clothing that looks good. Most retail outlets run frequent sales.

The higher the retail price, the fewer buyers. But other retailers will sell good products at a lower price such as WalMart, Target, and Costco. But they too have to make a profit to remain in business.
 
user "Grateful Fred":
Nah. Retail trade is not intrinsically evil.

Every producer is morally entitled to make a decent profit that exceeds the cost of goods sold.

A producer needs to have property, plant, and equipment, and labor plus the raw materials that are fashioned into a product needed by his customers. He must set a price for the finished product that will cover the costs plus whatever taxes he must pay. So it takes a considerable sum of money to get into business and remain in business. There is real financial risk he could loose his investment. To compensate him for that risk, he is entitled to a decent profit.

The retail price also includes a subjective value to the buyer. One can shop at Nordstroms or at Nordstroms Rack or JCPenney, or Dress Barn can get unused clothing that looks good. Most retail outlets run frequent sales.

The higher the retail price, the fewer buyers. But other retailers will sell good products at a lower price such as WalMart, Target, and Costco. But they too have to make a profit to remain in business.
Click to expand...
Can it be said, that the retail trade is evil just like interest is evil, but that given certain conditions (like the need to cover costs or risks) the retail trade is essentially different and now really a legitimate trade?
 
user "Grateful Fred":
Nah. Retail trade is not intrinsically evil.

Every producer is morally entitled to make a decent profit that exceeds the cost of goods sold.

A producer needs to have property, plant, and equipment, and labor plus the raw materials that are fashioned into a product needed by his customers. He must set a price for the finished product that will cover the costs plus whatever taxes he must pay. So it takes a considerable sum of money to get into business and remain in business. There is real financial risk he could loose his investment. To compensate him for that risk, he is entitled to a decent profit.

The retail price also includes a subjective value to the buyer. One can shop at Nordstroms or at Nordstroms Rack or JCPenney, or Dress Barn can get unused clothing that looks good. Most retail outlets run frequent sales.

The higher the retail price, the fewer buyers. But other retailers will sell good products at a lower price such as WalMart, Target, and Costco. But they too have to make a profit to remain in business.
Click to expand...
Can it be said, that the retail trade is evil just like interest is evil, but that given certain conditions (like the need to cover costs or risks) the retail trade is essentially different and now really a legitimate trade?

Basically, the retail trade is intrinsically evil but what we have now is not retail trade just as interest and usury are intrinsically evil but what we have now is legitimate banking risks.
 
user "Grateful Fred":
Nah. Retail trade is not intrinsically evil.

Every producer is morally entitled to make a decent profit that exceeds the cost of goods sold.

A producer needs to have property, plant, and equipment, and labor plus the raw materials that are fashioned into a product needed by his customers. He must set a price for the finished product that will cover the costs plus whatever taxes he must pay. So it takes a considerable sum of money to get into business and remain in business. There is real financial risk he could loose his investment. To compensate him for that risk, he is entitled to a decent profit.

The retail price also includes a subjective value to the buyer. One can shop at Nordstroms or at Nordstroms Rack or JCPenney, or Dress Barn can get unused clothing that looks good. Most retail outlets run frequent sales.

The higher the retail price, the fewer buyers. But other retailers will sell good products at a lower price such as WalMart, Target, and Costco. But they too have to make a profit to remain in business.
Click to expand...
Can it be said, that the retail trade is evil just like interest is evil, but that given certain conditions (like the need to cover costs or risks) the retail trade is essentially different and now really a legitimate trade?

Basically, can it be said taht the retail trade is intrinsically evil but what we have now is not retail trade, just as interest and usury are intrinsically evil but what we have now is legitimate banking risks?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top