Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (2292)	10/4/2006 5:15:29 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10087

I think my boycott of Citgo affects Citgo like my boycott of Charmin (not actually a boycott You apparently agree that boycotting Costco does not impact Charmin. If you do, then you must see that your boycott of Citgo doesn't impact Chavez. If you're want to boycott something, you must directly boycott it, like Charmin or Costco or Proctor and Gamble. You don't affect Charmin by boycotting Safeway. you call it "feel good," I call it scruples. It's more like the denial of tax dollars for stem cell research. Sure, you can feel good, or exert your scruples, if you prefer, knowing that not a dime of your money goes toward embryo-destroying research, but the research gets done anyway. There's a great demand for that research and plenty of other ways to fund it. If folks want to exert their scruples on that basis, they're entitled. But it doesn't validate the notion that they're saving any embryos. Folks are entitled to their own set of scruples and the assertion thereof. But they don't get their own set of economics. Nothing changes for the embryos or Chavez. I'm not arguing against boycotts. I'm only saying that there are sound boycotts and then there are figments.