An Introduction to Naomi Klein's "No Logo"

[richievegas01]

No-one cares about this bollocks anymore. In the age of the iPod and mobile phone technology, more consumer goods are sold than ever before and this stuff is quaint.

[Lustigerel]

sometimes I think she has a speech impediment becaus she can't talk properly

[BestKEpt578]

@Lustigerel I just don't think she's good at public speaking lol

[olivialephard]

evil.

[THEcontinanza]

This centery will be known in history as the centery of corporatism

- benito mussolini

[MoneyIsSilver]

Naomi Klein is a good argument why women shouldn't vote. A female economist is an oxymoron.

[khlynov]

gad - what's wrong with the store before walmart going bankrupt? It obviously was not able to provide the goods people wanted at the prices people wanted. So the people spoke wth their wallets and voted it out of existence. People who work at Walmart and don't like it are free to leave, they are not chattle.

By the way, the 'real' value of a good is what the buyer is willing to pay for it. If your costs are higher than that, you go out of busienss.

What alternative do you propose?

[khlynov]

Walmart can spend its way out of competition, undermining plucky little rivals and leaving people - particualrly poor people - with no real choice.

"Real Choice" - what does that mean? They can always go to the more expensive competitors. Which would be foolish. Walmart is successful because it provides people with what they want at lower prices than anybody else.

"Spend its way out of competition" - and where does it get the money from to do so? Obviously, from selling goods people want.

[gaddjodilo]

there's no hoice beacouse supermarkets decides what is in the store

and corporation can afford to sell under real price of the goods until all the shops around are closed and only wall-mart left

read "No logo"

and besides do you realize that in my country when i want to buy let's say soup in powder - i have three diffrents brands that are owned by two foreign companies - unilever and nestle - what choice is this?

[khlynov]

I read no logo, it's tosh.

If you think people would want to buy an alternative brand, maybe make one, or go to a different store.

Supermarkets sell what people want to buy. If people wouldn't buy it, it wouldn't be sold.

[ClickChristopher]

You're just a bit thick...

[hollywoodartchick]

Or he has a lot of Wal-mart stock.

[gaddjodilo]

"They can always go to the more expensive competitors. "

well if there are any left

"Walmart is successful because it provides people with what they want at lower prices than anybody else. "

and you really belive in that old fairytale that in neoliberalism best wins and you always have a chance to get on top and if you don;t blame yourself?

please

[khlynov]

I'm not sure what old fairy tale about neoliberalism you are talking about. I have no idea whether the 'best' wins, but what is obvious is that walmart does not force anybody to buy their stuff. If you don't like it, don't buy their stuff. If you don't like cheap stuff, don't buy it. Millions, however, like Walmart and vote with their wallets. You, however, would love to impose your preferences on other by shutting walmart down. Who's anti-freedom?

[gaddjodilo]

I do not claim that you should close Walmart

I do not shop in supermarkets because I still have a choice

what if there is no choice?

what if there is no alternative only Walmart?

And Walmart does not win because of quality but it has enough money to lower the prices,and when all shops around dies - there is no alternative

There's no walmart in my country but other shit like Lidl,real,carrefour

and it ias also increasing poverty by not paying people enough wages

it is immoral and wrong simply

[khlynov]

There always will be alternatives, simply because Walmart does not target 100% of the market, but only about 60%. Many things Walmart cannot do well,, like specialty foods and niche goods. Walmart and others lives off volume. I am sure in your country (Europe), there are many, many very affordable small grocery stores, often run by immigrant families.

Walmart and others succeed because of low prices - which is good for people with little money.

[gaddjodilo]

ok,60% is a lot,so what happened to the shops that provided this 60% before Walmart?

Bankrupcy.Walmart,as any mall is able to sell before real value.People from area are working there on low wages,without any perspectives,treated meanly,ripped of their dignity (often).Now the ones who are producing food also have to low their prices below real value so they cut wages and quality.And that is how you create cheap junky food and poverty

[khlynov]

Ms. Klein has, if anything, fed back to you the prejudices we have been brought up on (Corporations - bad, the State - good). Please have a look at what happened to countries that restrict the market, and where property rights are not respected. You may want to look up the youtube videos by Milton Friedman.

[andreatui]

"The prejudices we have been brought up on"??! Where were you brought up, Communist China?! The mainstream media broadcast messages of the state being bad, reds under the bed, burn the Commies etc.... God forbid anyone should question Capitalism, lest they be termed a Communist or anti-liberty or anti-American!! Naomi Klein provides a breath of fresh air in this environment of consumer-lust.

[Guncriminal]

Nah. The mainstream media haven't produced anti-communist messages since the collapse of the USSR. Besides, when communism did collapse, we found out that the workers paradise was nothing more than a slave state where no one had any rights. Other attempts at communism have proven this to be the rule.

Let it go.

[arguingplentifully]

What?! Marxism-Leninism was a BAD thing?!?11

My God, are you some kind of political genus or something?!!1111!!?

The fact that the USSR was nasty obviously means there is no alternative to exactly the kind of capitalism we have now.

And yet the fact that capitalist states are nasty (Pinochet's Chile springs to mind) means that there is no alternative to Marxism-Leninism. What do we do!?!??!?!!!!!1111

[khlynov]

Yes, there is an alternative to the mess we have right now: free markets. No state subsidies to suburbs, no zoning laws favoring politically well-connected businesses over others, no regulations that limit competition in favor of rent-seekers. Pinochet was not a proponent of market economics, but of corporatism/fascism.

[khlynov]

What tosh. In Capitalism, a company can only ban products in its OWN outlets. In Socialism, the State bans products and ideas everywhere. You don't like Walmart? Don't buy there. You don't like Nike? Don't buy their stuff (I don't). But under Klein-style Socialism, you don't like it there - you better pack your bags and leave.

[j1a2k3o4b5]

I am just done reading her new book, the Shock Doctrine, and I think it unfair to brand her socialist. She definitely seems to be left wing, but economically she seems to be closer to Stiglitz then to Marx; A midway approach. The problem is that even this midway approach is being termed socialist by right wing fundamentalists like Friedman. And this extreme right position has become common nowadays.

[arguingplentifully]

A: You're confusing state socialism with libertarian socialism like a big idiot.

And B: All those big monopolistic corporations mean capitalism isn't particularly competitive any more. A business is an island of planning in the sea of free markets: the bigger the businesses, the more the free market is squeezed away. Walmart can spend its way out of competition, undermining plucky little rivals and leaving people - particualrly poor people - with no real choice.

Thanks for playing, though.

[prayfertrey]

Worse, it works the other way around. Walmart, et al. notices that anti intellectual, destructive music sells, so that's what the producers make more of.