I am not impressed with buyblue.org

[corkhead]

http://www.buyblue.org

The list consists entirely of big corporate in nearly category. Although some may very well be good companies, there seems to be little supporting evidence on why any of them should be considered "blue". For example, I would like to see more about their treatment of employees, or whether they use overseas sweatshops, etc.

I'll just pick one company I saw on the list. E&J Gallo is a company I consider to be evil; So what that they gave more money to Democrats than they did to Republicans. They are single handedly trying to ruin the wine industry. Look at the list of their crappy wines on the buyblue site if you don't believe me. I'll call it the "Budweiserfication" of wine. Their MO is to buy a reputable family winery, like Mirassou for example, ramp up volume using all their own extra mediocre juice, pressure their distributors to push it into EVERY possible retail location, sell as much as they can of it before the unsuspecting public finds out that it is an inferior Gallo product, and ride the previously independent winery's reputation like an old horse until it drops to the ground. They then look for another hapless small winery with a good reputation to exploit and repeat the process. See the movie Mondovino for more information on how big corporate is ruining the wine industry.

In another category, "Big Box" stores are wiping out "Mom & Pop" retail stores, coffee shops, bakeries and their downtown locations everywhere. I don't see that as being "Blue" IMHO.

I think the buyblue list is not anything to get excited about, and I would even contend that it might be just a bunch of PR hyperbole.

I don't doubt that some of the companies listed are good ethical businesses, but maybe I don't understand how to use the site; I personally don't see enough supporting evidence for why any of the listed companies are considered "blue".

I am coming from a personal belief that "Blue vs Red" is tantamount to "Good vs Evil". Is it that I don't get it?



Ok,I am now ready for your flames...
thankyouverymuch...

[snowbear]

1. Go Costco Go !!

Buy Blue!

I won't flame you! :hug:



oops :o

[corkhead]

5. I would definitely choose Costco before Sams

but I personally consider any big box store a menace.

Thanks for the :hug: anyway.

[DoctorMyEyes]

11. I disagree

At least in part. But, first I should disclose that I work at Costco, say I may be "biased".

Costcos are Big Boxes, and are not the most aesthetically pleasant thing to look at - but thankfully we seem to usually find a location that's not too disruptive.

Other than that, we're not squeezing out the mom and pop stores at all. In fact we support a lot of them. I can't even tell you how many local coffee houses, restaurants, caterers etc count on us to get their supplies of produce, baked goods, eggs, etc, etc ETC! lol Hell, even the local video store owner shows up every Tuesday to stock up on new release DVDs. In addition, members who upgrade to executive level memberships receive discounts on services they may use for their own businesses, such as payroll prep, tax prep, shipping discounts and hotel, rental car and travel discounts. We're a "price club". Think of it as a large scale co-op.

Also - the kinds of goods we carry don't really compete with small local businesses. We don't provide "atmosphere", "personal attention" or any of the services that people crave from smaller cozier retailers. We don't have the selection that people expect in a mom & pop specialty store. We have ONE waffle iron. Either you like it or you don't. We have ONE bath scale. Our book selection doesn't compete with the bookstore, selection-wise and we don't discount our new release books, cds or dvds on their release day. They're there, and they're what they are. We won't deliver your TV and we won't set it up. We won't service it either. Same with your computer.

I think we even leave plenty of business to the regular chain grocery stores too. We don't carry the diversity of products that they do - and sometimes you just don't need or want a 36 pack of eggs - no matter what the price. I know I still have to stop at the supermarket once a week for things I can't get at Costco or can't get in a size that's manageable for my needs. I'm no exception. I've talked to members in line who are on their way to, or just finished up at another grocer. I've run into my own supervisor more than once at the local Acme Market - neither of us think that the other one is being "disloyal".

I know this was long, but I hope it prompts anyone who thinks all big boxes are "menaces" to reconsider. We're just big and ugly. :)

[proud2BlibKansan]

25. I am probably the only DUer who doesn't just love Costco

for many of the reasons you just stated.

When I want to buy aspirin, a bottle of 20 or 30 suits me just fine. I don't want 200 in a mega bottle.

I also get frustrated that when I see something I like there, it's not in stock anymore the next time I go back.

I also think their clothes SUCK. As much as I detest WalMart and Sam's, they have Costco beat in the clothing line.

And I can never find stuff in there. They are always changing their displays.

[DoctorMyEyes]

27. It's not for everyone

It's not for everyone, and I don't think there's anything "wrong" with anyone who prefers to not shop in a warehouse. I do think that we're the best in our class (big boxes), and I admire my companys business model. But, that doesn't mean that it's the end all be all of shopping.

Oh, and as far as the clothes... I wouldn't even know if they suck or not. I've never bought any clothes there. For whatever psychological/emotional reason I can't shop in "piles" of clothes. A lot of people who have a better hunter/gatherer instinct than I do seem to be very happy with their finds.

And you're not alone in being upset about items that are discontinued. I'm still mourning the loss of the portabello mushroom dip - and I could kick myself for not nabbing a Dora the Explorer Talking Kitchens for my granddaughter when I had the chance.

[proud2BlibKansan]

29. Yes, I agree Costco is the best big box store

and there are a few things there I like to buy. They have these frozen Chinese dumplings that are awesome. And if I want a big ticket item, I look there first. I bought our digital camera there.

I don't like shopping in piles either. Sam's doesn't sell a lot of clothes like that; most are hanging on racks. But I imagine there are space considerations.

[NorCalDem]

2. why would someone flame?

you're logic makes absolute sense. I agree with your definition of a "blue" company. That being said, if you really really need something, you're still better off "buying blue" than getting it at Wal-mart ;)

But you are absolutely correct in your assessment. :D

[corkhead]

3. Thanks

I can think of a lot of examples of problems with their site. They pick Shell Oil as the best place for gas. Why? Why not Citgo? There are lots of other examples. The selections seem to be arbitrary. Maybe they are the companies in a mutual fund the people running the site have ownership in for all I know.

[NorCalDem]

8. I suspect that you are correct in your assessment

;)

[applegrove]

4. I don't know them that well but it seems the research they are doing

to start with is based on what their board of directors gives to which party.

That tells you a bit.

I think most big companies are buying things made around the world. Pretty hard to get away from that. Anything you buy that is cheap is pretty much made somewhere else.

[Ian David]

10. The only way to really Starve The Beast...

is to live "off the grid" like Ted Kazinsky.

[0007]

12. Are you referring toTed Kaczynski the Unabomber? Is so

Eric Rudolph the Abortion bomber lived off the grid as well, 'eh?

[Ian David]

14. And those guys at Ruby Ridge. n/t

[0007]

15. Ruby Ridge was a real custer fuck.

[applegrove]

18. That would be starving yourself. Ted was nobody to look up to. Plus,

this Xmas - the discount stores (Walmart, Costco, etc.) are the ones doing well. And the rich stores (no kidding - they got an $80,000 tax cut) are doing well. Medium priced stores are tanking.

So though 65% of Americans don't like Bush and are unhappy with Iraq - they do shop at the stores that outsource. Could be that the stores buy blue lists - they will be going under.

Ousourcing for civil goods will have to happen as cost of oil rises. So your government is making it happen early. So your kids don't end up as tool & die makers or some factory type skill.

[tanyev]

6. Your point is well taken.

There are many other things besides where the company directs its political contributions to consider when deciding where to spend your money. But until BuyBlue came along, I had no idea that so many of those businesses were big Republican donors. I am grateful for the research they have done, and have made a lot of changes in my purchasing decisions. One example is that now hubby and I hardly ever go to any of the red restaurant chains. We seek out locally owned as often as possible and don't miss the chains a bit.

[Caution]

7. You are basically missing the point

Obviously the bets thing to do is to buy from local businesses, but barring that which is becoming more and more the case for those who live outside of major metropolitan areas there is no longer the choice. So instead of working with companies that support Republicans and Republican policies they can at least buy from companies that support politicians who push policies they believe in.

You also are missing the point that buying "blue" means buying from companies that support Democrats, not necessarily from companies that are large corporations or are necessarily "progressive" in their business practices.

I'm not a fan of Gallo myself but the fact is that they are a business in a capitalistic society and they are doing what is necessary to be profitable and succesful in such an environment. Is this the right method of doing business? That's an entirely different question and a different debate. But the buyblue.org is basically creating a mechanism for those of us who do not wish to patron the businesses of those who support Republicans to instead reward businesses which support Democrats.

[Ian David]

9. Well...

1) Buy Blue has a blog on their site. You can post your thoughts there. And they are good thoughts. And the admins there have always been very responsive.

2) The reason they have the big chains and stuff listed is because those are the ones that are all pervasive and also donate the most money. They have a national audience and stores available to national audiences are most relevant to them. Plus, telling people to boycott Joe's Shoeshine on your street corner because he once donated $10 to John McCain is less important than worrying that Outback Steakhouse donated six hundred bazillion dollars to Rick Santorum and flew him in a private jet to Terri Schiavo's hospital.

3) Buy Blue.org is getting local, so eventually Joe's Shoeshine will get what's coming to him.

4) They're working on adding other criteria, such as environmentalism, equality, etc.

5) There are opportunities for you and others to volunteer time to submit data to Buy Blue.org about what companies and issues are important to you.

[corkhead]

26. Judging by your avatar, I sense you don't entirely agree with my POV,

and your loosely veiled comparison of me to the Unibomber aside, I appreciate your comments. I was excited about buyblue when I first heard about it, but when I looked into it, I didn't see enough in my mind to influence me to change my buying habits. What led to me writing this post last night was my seeing another thread about buyblue.org,
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2285096&mesg_id=2285096

where most of the comments went along the lines of "Woo Hoo!, I love this big box company" with those people interpreting the list as a set of endorsements. I think you would agree that whether a company is good or evil is a much more complicated equation and not black and white. I think posting a list like was on this thread distills it down to such and IMHO wrongly steers the reader toward the those listed, at the expense of those not on it at all, whether red or blue. That is unwittingly promoting big box, Big corporate and chains, at the expense of smaller companies.

I would really like to see a site that does what I believe buyblue.org wants to do, and I will look more at how I can participate in the process to make it a more effective website

Peace

[Ian David]

28. Dude, your comments are good and I wasn't comparing you to anyone

I think you're 100% on the right track.

Somewhere, burried in BuyBlue.org's mission statement they say pretty much everything you just did.

[DinahMoeHum]

13. Hey, if you don't want to buy from corporate stores, try this site. . .

www.coopamerica.org

The Green Pages:
http://www.coopamerica.org/pubs/greenpages/


Happy shopping.


:smoke:

[Doctor_J]

16. It's not supposed to be an argument against local buying

But, IF you're about to buy something at Wal-Mart, go to CostCo instead.

[Deja Q]

17. Or small businesses rather than large ones.

The big fish can live on their own fat.

The small ones have no fat.

Maybe that's why the big fish eat the smaller ones. Meatier and tastier. :9

[RoyGBiv]

19. Interesting thoughts ...

I have to say you have more courage than I have exhibited. Since I first found the site and joined their mailing list I've had little gripes here and there, which finally led me to start questioning the whole model on which their red/blue formula is based. I think I understand it, but I don't really like it because of personal experiences.

The company that employees me is listed as a mostly red company, and this seems to be based on a corporate donation to Bush's 2004 campaign. Okay, I get that, but here are some other facts. (Sorry that I have to be vague with some details.)

One of the top officers of this company is a personal friend of John Kerry and donated the maximum to his campaign. The regional VP that controls the portion of the company I work for also donated the maximum to his campaign and had donated previously to Wes Clark's primary campaign. That same VP, in direct response to the election in which same-sex marriage was officially declared unconstitutional in our state and the questions about it raised by employees, issued a memo with corporate backing clearly establishing that domestic partner benefits would not only continue but increase in the coming year. All employees' insurance benefits were increased this last quarter, adding vision insurance and expanding drug coverage. My department manager, while enacting an incentive plan offered by corporate that I won't bother to detail, expanded it to offer options that directly benefit progressive causes. The company gave 1 million dollars in direct cash donations to Katrina relief, donated labor provided by employees to assist in repairing certain types of infrastructure within the realm of the company's expertise, while still paying the employees who worked their full salaries including overtime, paid for the logdings and meals of displaced workers they employed along the Gulf Coast who were affected, and paid full wages to all those employees even though the business was not operating for several weeks.

I could go on.

Is this a blue or red company? Does the corporate donation trump everything else? According to what I see said about my company on BuyBlue, it does. So, I'm hesitant to accept the formula wholesale.

[lostnfound]

23. My company also..

is 'red', and unlike yours, the top positions have been mostly Republican, I think. However, it's a labor-driven industry, and our company far and away treats its employees like human beings, much better than our competitors.

[Kickin_Donkey]

20. While I think the buyblue list is somewhat flawed ...

I don't share your view that it is PR hyperbole.

Buyblue.org is trying to quantify whether a company leans Democratic or Republican, based on the declared political donations of the companies' top executives. One way to gauge this with "objective" data is by examining the legally mandated lists of politcal donations to, I think, the federal and/or state elections commissions, which is what buyblue does.

This may give some indication of the political orientation of the company, as the donations of the top executives often are "coordinated" to give the most impact to benefit that company. Admittedly, this is only one set of criteria, which may not tell the whole story. Buyblue.org readily admits this point, saying that their data is limited and that they don't have the resources to research and quantify labor or environmental practices (at least that's what I read the last time I went to the site, which was several months ago).

That's why Wal-Mart, one of the worst companies in America, got only a pale red rating, which Target, which reportedly has better management and labor practices, and was founded by the Democratic Dayton family, is dark red (the last time I looked; apparently the current ownership donates more to Republics).

I have always thought this to be flaw of buyblue -- but the buyblue people admit this shortcoming and hope to eventually add other criteria. But at least buyblue is trying to quantify it by using empirical evidence, rather than anecotal evidence or reputation. It is based in SOME reality, which is better than nothing.

[RoyGBiv]

30. Better than nothing ...

I disagree with the implications of that rather profoundly. Decisions or recommendations based on incomplete data can be worse than those based on no data because they have an air of legitimacy in the way they are presented and can lead to the wrong conclusion. Disclaimers notwithstanding, BuyBlue makes some fairly direct recommendations about what companies to avoid, and the e-mails they seem to have started sending recently are active advertising *against* certain companies. If those recommendations are based on false conclusions using incomplete data, I have a problem with that.

In the example I mentioned previously, the corporate donation in my company's name was orchestrated by the company's founders. What's notable about this is that these individuals play absolutely no part in the day to day operations of the company, nor have that had any input into policy for well over ten years. That's not to suggest they couldn't, but as long as the company is profitable for them, they seem content to let it be run by people who know how to do so. The company is actually managed by a mix of people with varying political ideologies, but the direction of its policies toward labor in particular is very progressive. In the marketplace its positions on public policy would probably be judged more conservative than progressive overall, but relative to other companies in the same business, it is among the more progressive.

By constrast, one of our competitors has one aspect of its labor force that is unionized. The company management has been actively seeking to bust that union's influence for decades and has succeeded in steps by supporting political candidates that promote positions hostile to labor generally, not just the unions. It openly supported the redefining of overtime rules, for example, and even though it has few, if any, minimum wage employees, strongly resists attempts to raise the minimum wage. My company has never taken a position on the latter because it has no bearing on its operations, and it opposed the former. Our competitor has also outsourced tens of thousands of formerly union jobs across the nation to Asia. The unionized section of its labor force now accounts for approximately 1/10 of all employees whereas at one time it was almost entirely union, yet they use the union as a scapegoat for raising prices when they do so, which is fairly often. They have also spent millions just in my state to try to dismantle the system of regulation that oversees one aspect of our industry in direct opposition to our company's position. (Disclaimer: Our company wouldn't exist in this state without regulation, which prevents the competitor from establishing a legal monopoly.)

Both of these companies are listed as red companies by BuyBlue, but obviously some stark differences exist. If a consumer were trying to choose one over the other, what help is the incomplete data to that consumer in making a decision?

All this said, I do think the basic idea behind BuyBlue is a good one, but poor methodology can ruin good intentions fairly quickly. I'd like to see them spend more time and resources on updating that methodology than making their website look fancier, the latter being the only real advancement I've noticed since it first came online.

[Vinca]

21. L.L. Bean is on the list. It's been my favorite place to shop

by catalog and in person for decades. Unfortunately, if you browse their stuff today you're hard pressed to find anything that is made in the U.S. That depresses the hell out of me and when I'm depressed I don't buy.

[lostnfound]

22. It's a good point, but maybe there's ways to help buyblue get better

For example, to the extent that there are better alternatives to the companies listed, it would be helpful to advise buyblue of those alternatives. One problem is that for smaller companies, they often make little or no political contributions (frankly, it's a good thing that they don't) so I'm not sure buyblue would list many of them.

But maybe buyblue could also be encouraged to put a front-end or some hotlinks on their site that would tie people into the websites that have small businesses listed or cooperatives etc.

In other words, if it said Instead of buying from big corporate Republican donors, buy from: cooperatives...small business...or big corporate Democratic donors like those listed here. And for the cooperatives...small business it could show a link about where to find them.

[spinbaby]

24. Perhaps we could start a directory?

Lord knows, we have enough stuff on this site that we could start somewhere a directory of worthwhile small businesses organized by state and/or metropolitan area.