Do people have a moral obligation to diversify their purchases so nobody goes out of business?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

Poll question: Do people have a moral obligation to diversify their purchases so nobody goes out of business?

If my neighborhood has grocery stores X, Y and Z, and I decide to buy either at store Y or store Z because I just don't like store X, am I unfairly harming the poor employees of store X?

[Statistical]

1. No just don't think you are doing anything to reduce sales of store x.

If they can put store x groceries in store y, z, or any other store. :)
Also when store X isn't even owned by company X it makes even less sense.

Nobody is saying you have to go store X rather than it won't accomplish anything other than putting some small business owners out of business.

Exxon is the worlds large oil company today.

[KonaKane]

2. Bingo. These things tend to hurt the wrong people.

But this point has been belabored in three other threads, and I don't expect any minds will change on the matter.

[TexasObserver]

8. That's silly and incorrect.

BP is being hurt by the boycott, your lack of understanding notwithstanding.

Do I need to remind you of your BUY BP thread of April 30th: buy BP stock at $52! It's a great deal! Worth way more than that!

Your meme that the boycott doesn't hurt BP and only hurts small business owners is simply incorrect.

[Hannah Bell]

3. i think some folks missed the point of the poll.

[damntexdem]

4. I think the poll missed the point ... of anything rational.

It was asked in such a broad way that a "yes" would mean, for example, that consumers needed to buy rightwing books so rightwing publishers wouldn't go out of business.

[treestar]

5. No, it does not matter

Different people purchase different things anyway. Some businesses have to go out of business (poorly run or not meeting need or becoming obsolete.)

[nyc 4 Biden]

6. k&r

[TexasObserver]

7. NO, not even if it is BP.