Economics Questions

Re: Unenforced rules and property rights.

K.C. Farmer — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 15:55:05 GMT

The "20 Items or Less" sign must have just been a suggestion.

Re: Unenforced rules and property rights.

mikachusetts — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 15:51:15 GMT

I bring it up to the cashier and she says that they don't enforce the rule. (As in they won't refuse service to those that have more than 20 items in this specific lane.)

Most people in retail want to fulfill their role the best they can, a big part of that is customer satisfaction. The fact that a lot of customers have no respect for each other is a problem that wal-mart wouldn't be able to fix even if they enforced the rule.

Re: Unenforced rules and property rights.

Autolykos — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 15:17:08 GMT

I've violated the "20 items or less" and "10 items or less" rules before, but only when I was maybe a couple items over the limit. However, I readily admitted this to the cashiers, none of whom ever minded.

That said, I agree with Brutus that Wal-Mart's property rights weren't violated. At most, there may have been a violation of the employment contract (if any) between Wal-Mart and the cashier, or the contract (if any) between Wal-Mart and that specific store's manager.

Re: Unenforced rules and property rights.

Frederique Bastiao — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 06:04:21 GMT

You should call out these uncivilized individuals. I've done that many times and have had success quite a few times. Do it politely but do it.

Re: Unenforced rules and property rights.

DanielMuff — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 05:51:08 GMT

What was contract?

Re: Unenforced rules and property rights.

Brutus — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 05:03:25 GMT

Scrooge McDuck:

I'm in the "20 items or less" lane at Wal-Mart. The sign specifically says "20 items or less only." The lady ahead of me has 30-40 items. After the woman leaves, I bring it up to the cashier and she says that they don't enforce the rule. (As in they won't refuse service to those that have more than 20 items in this specific lane.)

Did the woman that brought more than 20 items to that lane violate Wal-Mart's property rights? I certainly felt violated.

I wouldn't say they violated any rights but rules. Rules need to be enforced, and if Wal-Mart chooses not to, then it's their loss and it reflects poorly on them b/c you don't believe they are a well run business and may take your business elsewhere. May I suggest Publix? I realize Wal-Mart is the cheapest, but dang, if I don't have to look at the ringling brothers cast while I'm buying my crackerjacks at Wal-Mart, I'll be happy to pay an extra $0.75 or so at Publix. Case-in-point: http://www.truecrimereport.com/People-of-Walmart.jpg Do you ever think you would see this at Publix?

Now if Wal-Mart property were stolen, broken, et cetera, then yes, property rights would have been violated.

Re: Unenforced rules and property rights.

Eric — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 04:54:41 GMT

Man I hated being a cashier.

Unenforced rules and property rights.

Scrooge McDuck — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 04:52:07 GMT

I'm in the "20 items or less" lane at Wal-Mart. The sign specifically says "20 items or less only." The lady ahead of me has 30-40 items. After the woman leaves, I bring it up to the cashier and she says that they don't enforce the rule. (As in they won't refuse service to those that have more than 20 items in this specific lane.)

Did the woman that brought more than 20 items to that lane violate Wal-Mart's property rights? I certainly felt violated.