Replies

Walmart's lawyers apparently don't see the same problem Target does.

Which is exactly why I have such a problem with Targets actions. Despite the ninnying of their lawyers, there was simply no need for them to boot the SA from their property. Other retailers have found ways to deal allow them on their properties while keeping other soliciters at bay, but Target simply couldn't be bothered.

My refusal to shop there is more practical than symbolic though. To be honest, my Mervyns card only had an $18 balance on it and I haven't regularly shopped there in a few years, and my Target card only had a tiny $150 balance, so paying it off and closing it really wasn't a big deal. As for the boycott, I spend $50 to $60 a month in Target on household stuff, and several hundred yearly buying Christmas gifts. I'll just shift that to another store the same way I did when I began boycotting WalMart a few years back for their support of the Chinese Communists (I can count on one hand the number of times I've visited a WalMart in the past two years). We have a decent selection of large retailers in this area, so shifting my purchases from one to the other shouldn't be too difficult.