Thursday, May 13, 2010

New legislation would prevent shoppers from changing retailers without documentation ! !

I spend a lot of money at Home Depot. 
When I give them my money, it's proof that I value ceiling fan pull chains, deck lumber, weed eater string, fertilizer and the expertise of Home Depot employees more than I value my money. 
When the group at Home Depot gives me their merchandise and their expertise in exchange for my money, it's proof that they had rather have my cash than their inventory of chains, lumber, string, fertilizer, or their free time. 

Each party in the exchange believes that they're getting the better end of the deal.  Otherwise, no exchange would be taking place.  

I'm no longer happy with the Home Depot closest to my home.  I want to start swapping my money with a Lowe's Home Improvement Center. 

Unfortunately, Congressman Alan Smithee (R-California) has introduced legislation that would require me to give my neighborhood Home Depot a series of documented verbal and written warnings prior to spending my money at Lowe's.  Plus, in some cases, the burden of proof would be on me to prove that I didn't stop purchasing time and materials from Home Depot because of the race, religion, age, sexual orientation, or political views of their employees.

Should I fail to follow the letter of the law, I could be required to pay unemployment compensation to the Home Depot employees who are affected by my shopping decision.  My attorney has told me that making the switch probably isn't worth the risk. 
 
And that's not the worst part....all I want to do is walk into a freakin' Home Depot, find an electrical department employee who can explain how to wire a multi-speed ceiling fan, buy a pull-chain from him, and get the hell out.  But the Smithee Bill would make me responsible for the electrical department employee's health insurance ! ! ! !   I don't want to be the employee's mother, I just want to purchase some of his time, his work, his opinions, and a pull chain. 

Please help lobby to kill the Smithee Bill, and all legislation similar to it. 

If you know what I mean. 

7 comments:

Mr Civil Libertarian said...

I lol'd, and I'm pretty sure at one point I fell for it too.

Nick Rowe said...

Your posts are getting better every day. Did you hire Hillary Clinton's ghost writer?

I'm still not sure what bill you're talking about though. There are so many illegal and unwise laws in the air.

The Whited Sepulchre said...

Nick,
y'know, there is such a thing as parody....
Do you ever think about what it would be like if all consumers, and not just employers, had to abide by the current employment laws?

realisticspeakers said...

Did I realize this was parody? No.
I read the whole thing with blood boiling.
Better than Joselyn.

Nick Rowe said...

Oh, I recognized it immediately as parody. I was just wondering if there was a particular bill which it parodied.

I have often posed a similar question regarding health care. Suppose you go to a store and buy a loaf of bread. The proprietor says, "Sir, if you buy bread you are required by law to also buy milk, peanut butter, and jelly."

To which you reply, "But I'm lactose intolerant, allergic to peanuts, and diabetic. I can't eat any of those things and wouldn't want to even if I could"

"Sorry, sir, but the law is the law and besides, you don't get to eat them anyway, I do."

That's the same as an employer purchasing your labor and then being required by government to also purchase insurance, retirement benefits, and other goods for you.

Nick Rowe said...

BTW, the Clinton part was a joke. I was truly complimenting your writing. It was an excellent story. Sorry if that didn't come through clearly.

Dr Ralph said...

Since I often read your posts with a certain amount of (shall we say) willing suspension of disbelief, the only thing I found surprising was that you actually acknowledged this as crazy talk.

The Alan Smithee bit was the tip-off to me. Us creative types are quite familiar with Alan.