This story is not funny [Updated].
A 70-year-old man attacked an 81-year-old man with a pricing gun inside the Belvedere Road Wal-Mart Sunday, according to an arrest report.
Dennis O’Brien and John Esposito began arguing and O’Brien swung at Esposito with the tool in his right hand, the report says. Esposito suffered a swollen left eye and cuts on his nose and mouth.
Esposito said both he and O’Brien worked at Wal-Mart.
No, this is not some kind of “news of the weird”/isn’t that funny blog post. I would genuinely like to know what kind of society makes (and yes Bob, I mean makes) an 81-year-old man go to work at Wal-Mart, because we all know he isn’t doing it for rest and relaxation.
And come to think of it, what kind of company hires him?
Update: Man, can I pick ‘em or what? The Consumerist makes a joke out of this and teh station in Florida they link to has this under “Strange & Unusual” news. I predict soon we’ll be seeing this about as often as we see stories about that Wal-Mart cake.
I don’t only have a problem with the word “makes”, but also the idea that society is responsible. If *all* the 81-year-old men were working at Wal*Mart, then you might have an argument. It seems to me though, there are plenty of 81-year-old men who *don’t* work at Wal*Mart and are retired, living off their savings that they earned while they were younger (or mooching off their children, which, I suppose, is a type of retirement savings and investment as well…
Jonathan, would you take a bet on if this 81-year-old man held stable employment and made financially sound and responsible decisions during his lifetime (including saving for retirement)?
>”And come to think of it, what kind of company hires him?”
Follow up: would you prefer companies refuse to hire men because of their age? I’m not really sure what other point you could be driving at with that question. “You’re old, so go away. We don’t care if you need the money, you’re SOL.”
I just knew you were going to blame the 81-year-old, Bob. How much of your enormous paycheck are you stocking away? Suppose you lose it all in the coming crash, have a health emergency, or God forbid get hit by a semi-truck?
To paraphrase Hubert Humphrey, we are only as good a society as we treat its weakest members. I don’t care what decisions he made earlier in his life. Everyone should be able to retire. Everyone; even Wal-Mart workers. And no, I’m not pro-age discrimination, but some jobs are suitable for 81-year-olds (assuming they want them) and some aren’t. Clearly, this guy isn’t a greeter, working at Wal-Mart part-time because he loves people.
>”I don’t care what decisions he made earlier in his life.”
And that’s the major difference between you and I. I believe in personal responsibility, you don’t.
Bob, Bob, Bob:
You have no idea whether this man made responsible decisions or not when he was younger. You are simply assuming that he didn’t because you (like most libertarians) are extraordinarily selfish and are looking for an excuse to withhold compassion since it might threaten your ability to accumulate more stuff.
I’ll bet Debbie Shank made many responsible decisions before she got hit by a truck. Look where she is now. That could be you Bob. That could be anyone.
I say the lawyer Mrs. Shank picked wasn’t a responsible decision. Or, at least, the lawyer her husband picked (the husband she decided to marry, knowing that in such a situation, he’d be in charge of what happens). Additionally, do you think choosing to work at Wal*Mart is a responsible decision? What about having Wal*Mart health insurance?
My ability to accumulate more stuff? Aside from my video games (which I’m a tight*** about and don’t buy a lot of it full price), I’m not much of a “stuff” person. Sorry.
Now, why I don’t know if this man made responsible decisions or not, I assume he did – yes. More often than not, when someone is in a bad situation, it’s tied directly to the decisions they made in life. Yes, there are exceptions – but the odds are in my favor.
You, on the other hand, stated that you simply don’t care if this man is responsible for his situation. You’re not concerned in the least bit with why he’s working for Wal*Mart at 81 years. You talk about compassion – that’s the least of your concerns. If this story had happened at Best Buy or Ma and Pa’s Kettle Shop, it never would have made it on here. You’re not out for compassion for this older man, you’re out to make Wal*Mart look bad for giving an old man a job. “[W]hat kind of company hires him?”, indeed.
Sorry, the third section should read “I assume he didn’t”
Actually, Wal-Mart was the least of my concerns. This post is about America. If there was a real welfare state in America, working at Wal-Mart, Best Buy or Ma and Pa Kettle’s place would be unnecessary for people who are 81 years old.
Without adequate old-age pensions and without medical care for everyone, all kinds of companies can exploit desperate people. One of them is Wal-Mart.
In the extraordinary circumstances where someone made all the right choices and still lost*, then I don’t mind helping them out on an individual basis. However, I don’t think it’s the government’s place to be collecting money at gunpoint and redistributing it how they best see fit. Private charities (be they Wal*Mart’s charitable arm or your local soup kitchen) can do a better job collecting money and getting it where it needs to go – and cutting it off when they’ve given enough. All without forcing people to give. This is real charity and this is where humanity shines. The idea that because Libertarians don’t want the government forcing money from citizens to redistribute blindly however they want to means that Libertarians are greedy and don’t care about others is bullocks. Most people who have don’t mind giving – when they know the money is going to someone who deserves it or the money will make a difference.
Government doled out pensions and medical care simply is not a good idea, as a.) It’ll be of low quality and low standards (check out Canada’s government provided health care system) and b.) it’ll be subject to redistribution of funds from one account (say, Social Security) to other, non-related accounts (“War on Drugs”, etc…). Meanwhile, as the honorable Congressmen rob the Social Security system, we can’t do crap about it. Now, if we give to private charities and we find out they’re screwing around with our charitable donations, not only do we have legal recourse to go after them, but we could simply choose to stop giving to that charity and find one that suits our beliefs.
Anyway, your argument hinges on the idea that this guy is somehow being forced to work at Wal*Mart. How do we know he doesn’t work there just for something to do during the day? We have an older lady that works at our store for that very reason. She’s been there 15+ years, doesn’t need a dime of money (has a healthy retirement fund) but she does work there because she enjoys the job (well, not so much the job, but the people). Again, just like the Deborah Shank case, I want to know the details, you want to make blanket decisions and assumptions.
*I’m on a roll today. I meant to put a foot note saying that I don’t mean this literally, that someone has to make “every right decision”, but there’s a concept that I do truly believe in that, sometimes it doesn’t matter what you do, there’s no winning outcome (“The only winning move is not to play”, etc., etc…). This line is meant to reflect that, not that I expect people to never make a mistake.