Shops to open every Sunday :-)

[jas_rho]

Yeah and that's a bad thing? I think the end consumer should be happy about that because that brings costs down which then means the products are cheaper Kesko stores are still owned and run by entrepreneurs in sort of a franchise sort of way. Many of the small K stores do really well and some struggle, is it because of larger stores? No, its because of bad business decisions from the owners and/or bad service/products. I know of stories where a place was doing really bad, then the owner changed and it turned around and did awesome. I would be interested in running one of those stores, of course I would rather have a larger one

Concept of reduced competition does not come to your mind? And where such thing leads...
While less corrupt as society compared to some others, we still have had gentlemen's agreements between dominating businesses to ensure maximum profit at expense of customer.
I recall Lemminkäinen for one being involved in one. 7 big players in asphalt manufacturing making deals on road pavements. Just what we want to our shopping experience.

Corporation knows best mentality...

You make me laugh... can I ask where are you from? let me guess, Cuba? North Korea?

[Upphew]

You make me laugh... can I ask where are you from? let me guess, Cuba? North Korea?

Finland

And I would bet that those are not the only ones, just the most blatant cases, so if you don't get too greedy you don't get yourself investigated and busted.

[luckykitty]

Ps. Does anyone else think Siwa is more expensive than Valintatalo, even though they belong to the same company or something? Is it because Siwas are in more remote places or what? I actually prefer the selection in Valintatalo :s out of these smaller supermarkets.

[Tiwaz]

You make me laugh... can I ask where are you from? let me guess, Cuba? North Korea?

What do you think corporations exist for? Moral behavior?
You are naive. Corporations are for profit. Competition cuts profit, as you have to settle for less to get the deal. No competition, no reason not to go for higher price.

I have noticed americans have common tendency to put faith in corporations, as if they were moral operators. When in reality, corporation is not moral. It is not sentient being, and each minor boss there can always say to themselves that it was out of their hands.

CEO thinks that he did not do anything immoral, stockholders demanded and he had to comply. Stockholders think that they did not do anything immoral, they did not tell CEO how to raise profits, they just demanded more profits. Minor bosses do not have moral issues, they just follow orders. So, nobody does anything that would fight against their moral values. Thus, corporations acts without moral issues.

[jas_rho]

You make me laugh... can I ask where are you from? let me guess, Cuba? North Korea?

What do you think corporations exist for? Moral behavior?
You are naive. Corporations are for profit. Competition cuts profit, as you have to settle for less to get the deal. No competition, no reason not to go for higher price.

I have noticed americans have common tendency to put faith in corporations, as if they were moral operators. When in reality, corporation is not moral. It is not sentient being, and each minor boss there can always say to themselves that it was out of their hands.

CEO thinks that he did not do anything immoral, stockholders demanded and he had to comply. Stockholders think that they did not do anything immoral, they did not tell CEO how to raise profits, they just demanded more profits. Minor bosses do not have moral issues, they just follow orders. So, nobody does anything that would fight against their moral values. Thus, corporations acts without moral issues.

Hehe, I don't put my faith in corporations. I put my faith in the freedom to choose what I want to do, when I want to do it, and to be able to go where I want, when I want. (hehe, I just realized that sounds really american, well I guess it can since I am american ) I want that for myself so who am I to deny that from someone else? These small stores you keep referring to are already owned or partially owned or controlled by larger corporations. It's the only way they can keep their prices down. They don't do it to raise their prices. And these stores still have lots of freedoms and choices to what they sell, how they sell it and how things are done in their stores. Are you saying that if it was your choice, you would have tons of small stores all over Finland, but closed on Sundays, and all privatly owned and not have anything to do with any of each other?

And if we get back to the topic of shops being open on sundays, I still think they should be allowed to do whatever they want.

It sounds to me like you'd like to get rid of corporations as well. I guess you want the government to just take over everything and have them run all stores do things the way they see fit. I thought Finland fought so hard in the war so that they could be free and not controlled in such ways. Anyway, I don't care that you feel the way that you do and am not trying to change your opinion but you haven't brought any new arguments to really prove your side any more than what your own opinion but it sure has been interesting

[Rabs]

What do you think corporations exist for? Moral behavior?
You are naive. Corporations are for profit. Competition cuts profit, as you have to settle for less to get the deal. No competition, no reason not to go for higher price.

Things have changed... you belong to old school of thoughts in this case... corporations do have business ethics, moral responsibilities, corporate responsibilities etc. I can write pages on this...but i am less interested in doing another assignment for the subject .

anyway, point is even big daddies of big corporations have been brought down to their knees by consumers, law of justice, governments because their behaviours were unethical.

thing is in today's world, corporations cannot totally neglect its business ethics, corporate responsibilities and focus only in profits! Do you know any such known corporations without corporate responsibilities/business ethics at all?

[Pursuivant]

KESKO?

[Rabs]

KESKO?

http://www.kesko.fi/index.asp?id=C473A9 ... 8539ECA0FE

lip service is there....

[Upphew]

KESKO?

http://www.kesko.fi/index.asp?id=C473A9 ... 8539ECA0FE

lip service is there....

Values
We exceed our customers' expectations
We are the best operator in the trading sector
We create a good working community
We bear our corporate responsibility

One can read those in many ways... and go on and ask first person you get hold of what their shop's corporate values are? Ask to see his/her boss and ask about those values. I think it will take two or three steps before you get right answer. And those are merely words, most people that should work according to those values do not. Just like most christians don't act like ten commandments command.

I believe that "corporate values" have little or no meaning as long as that corporate is owned by funds and other companies. If there is few owners that have controlling stake at company, then they can make sure that those lip services are not just that.

[Sulka]

You should take a job then that lets you be home when your kids are.

So in essence, your stance in life and society is that we should just decide that there is to be a class of "miserable" workers out of necessity, who we kind of just abandon as a lost cause? Their comfort sacrificed for... what exactly? Untampered-with market forces? Will the market forces reward us in some way for this show of respect? In a way, I mean, that brings overall wellbeing to society as a whole, not in a way that gives 20% of all money to the richest 1%.

I'm sure now there are people rolling their eyes thinking I'm an overreacting leftie. But I'm not really talking about Sunday opens anymore, more of the general ideology that some posters here touch upon, of how there should be no minimums in wellbeing. I just can't understand this stance that "Yeah, we could make things more equal, but we just choose not to. But look how free our market forces are, aren't they pretty?"

It's true that no individual has to work a low-skilled job. But a good chunk of the society does have to, always. Of course we don't have to be fair in anything, we don't have to ensure anyone gets anything more than what keeps the worker pool reproducing sufficiently, but I'd rather we tried to uphold some minimum levels of wellbeing. No need to overdo anything (which also happens a lot, like with the 200% Sunday pay), but I don't believe in refusing to strive towards wellbeing on some sort of principle.

I guess I'm just a believer in the possibility to shape what society becomes through making policy choices. For example, if we want to keep a weekend tradition, if we see some socially beneficial things in it (e.g. a likely day off for most of the family at the same time), we can. If we don't see it as important, then let's not. But let's not pretend our hands are tied by the principle of "untouchable market forces".

[jas_rho]

You should take a job then that lets you be home when your kids are.

So in essence, your stance in life and society is that we should just decide that there is to be a class of "miserable" workers out of necessity, who we kind of just abandon as a lost cause? Their comfort sacrificed for... what exactly? Untampered-with market forces? Will the market forces reward us in some way for this show of respect? In a way, I mean, that brings overall wellbeing to society as a whole, not in a way that gives 20% of all money to the richest 1%.

I'm sure now there are people rolling their eyes thinking I'm an overreacting leftie. But I'm not really talking about Sunday opens anymore, more of the general ideology that some posters here touch upon, of how there should be no minimums in wellbeing. I just can't understand this stance that "Yeah, we could make things more equal, but we just choose not to. But look how free our market forces are, aren't they pretty?"

It's true that no individual has to work a low-skilled job. But a good chunk of the society does have to, always. Of course we don't have to be fair in anything, we don't have to ensure anyone gets anything more than what keeps the worker pool reproducing sufficiently, but I'd rather we tried to uphold some minimum levels of wellbeing. No need to overdo anything (which also happens a lot, like with the 200% Sunday pay), but I don't believe in refusing to strive towards wellbeing on some sort of principle.

I guess I'm just a believer in the possibility to shape what society becomes through making policy choices. For example, if we want to keep a weekend tradition, if we see some socially beneficial things in it (e.g. a likely day off for most of the family at the same time), we can. If we don't see it as important, then let's not. But let's not pretend our hands are tied by the principle of "untouchable market forces".

I never said anything about there needing to be a class of miserable workers out of necessity... where did you get that from? I am saying that if you want something, work towards getting that. I myself have worked some pretty crappy jobs in my life, evenings, nights, weekends, holidays, doing some pretty hard and dirty stuff, and it was just a means to an end. I am now in a way better place now because of it. I've worked in a grocery store (which was not hard by the way) and at that time it was the perfect job for where I was at that point in my life. I am just saying that if someone doesn't like where they are, I am living proof that with a little hard work you can change your situation. Many of those working in a supermarket are perfectly happy being there, and good for them. There are a lot more low paying, harder/dirtier jobs than a supermarket job. I also don't look down on anyone working in any job. I have respect for anyone who puts in the effort to work and not live off the money of other tax payers. Finland takes care of its people extremely well and I think that some people are taking advantage of that when in fact they are better off than they think. I guess coming from the US where the benefits aren't as good and the fact that you really do have to work in order to have a roof over your head has made me feel this way but I would think most finns would be happy about that, its one less person that their tax money needs to go and support.

[sinikettu]

Well the debate here, and at Eduskuntatalo is over...it is at last law...
http://www.yle.fi/uutiset/news/2009/11/ ... 66540.html

[Pursuivant]

Yay, my local corner store is open on Sundays

[irnbru]

Well the debate here, and at Eduskuntatalo is over...it is at last law...
http://www.yle.fi/uutiset/news/2009/11/ ... 66540.html

Welcome Finland to the late 20th century.

[sinikettu]

Well the debate here, and at Eduskuntatalo is over...it is at last law...
http://www.yle.fi/uutiset/news/2009/11/ ... 66540.html

Welcome Finland to the late 20th century.

Small modification

Welcome Finland..bit late to the 20th century