English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I am troubled that this might be a selfish act. I get a better product at the expense of someone else. If everyone acted this way, wouldn't it corrupt the system?

2006-11-02 04:29:46 · 24 answers · asked by cmsb705 5 in Society & Culture Etiquette

24 answers

It's not morally wrong because you have a choice between two products, and the store is offering both products. You are making a rational economic choice (that matters to you... as some people noted the extra 10 seconds it takes to root through the milk might not be worth the extra 5 days' freshness when you drink all of it in one day). If the store sells one brand of milk for $1.29 and another for $1.59, and you know the milk is the same quality, is it wrong to buy the cheaper brand? No. This is just another characteristic upon which you base your item purchasing choice. It's the store's responsibility to shelve fresh product and not to over order (so that they have too much old milk when the fresh milk comes in). No moral dilemma.

2006-11-02 08:05:26 · answer #1 · answered by Perdendosi 7 · 0 0

I don't see anything wrong with it. If I'm planning to use it right away, then I'll go ahead and pull from the front, but with just my husband and I in the household, I may need to keep the product for a while, and I will pull for the later expiration date toward the back of the shelf. Just makes sense to me. Don't know if everyone follows this code or just automatically reaches for the stuff in the back, but I don't feel selfish, just as though I am shopping to meet my needs. And the product is the same price, if you're paying for it, why should you feel selfish for taking one that's more fresh, anyway?

2006-11-02 12:50:23 · answer #2 · answered by JenV 6 · 0 0

I look at it this way. I live by myself, so a gallon of milk lasts me a bit longer than most people. I need all the time I can get on an expiration date. Usually, when milk gets close to its date, the store will mark it down to sell it. This gives someone who may be having financial difficulties the opportunity to get a healthy product at a reduced cost. Everyone wins.

2006-11-02 12:39:15 · answer #3 · answered by Christina D 5 · 0 0

If you don't use milk a lot, then I don't have a problem with you taking it from the back of the shelf. I have two very young children and I babysit, so I use a gallon of milk in a couple days. I always take from the front, because milk never has a chance to expire around my house. Before I had children, it could take a couple weeks to finish a gallon, so I would always take from the back.

2006-11-02 12:32:42 · answer #4 · answered by Jennifer F 6 · 0 0

I don't think it is morally wrong mainly because i do it to not bread just milk, sour cream, dips. Naah we won't corrupt the system just the people that use the products faster can get a great deal when the nearing the expiration date items go on clearance, my brother thanks you he drinks 2 gallon of milk a day.

2006-11-02 12:40:17 · answer #5 · answered by jo_jo_baby2004 4 · 1 0

I think that once a product, with or without an expiration date, is placed on the shelf it is available for purchase. If the store does not want to sell a certain product, it mustn't be on the shelf. Period.

2006-11-02 12:41:03 · answer #6 · answered by Whimsy 3 · 0 0

Not selfish, besides there are plenty of ppl who dont care as long as it is not expired they will consume it. for single person buying half a gallon of milk which expire in a 4 days does not make sense. but for a family with growing 3 or 4 growing kids they will go through that half gallon in one day.

How long it the milk stay fridge is the real issue after you buy it, so go ahead be selfish.

2006-11-02 12:37:07 · answer #7 · answered by entelectual h 3 · 0 0

Morally??? What's that got to do with morals? It's the store's responsibility to provide fresh products to customes and the customers responsibility to provide themselves with the best quality goods. If the next customer comes and can't find fresh milk, he will complain to the manager and receive a fresh product. It's how the market should work.

2006-11-03 04:57:22 · answer #8 · answered by veroniki 2 · 0 0

I think there should not be anything called "morally wrong" (vs. legally wrong). Right or wrong is subjective.

To me there can be two ways to look at it.

1) What you feel - these are independent of any objective standards. If you desire to get fresher milk triumphs over your concern for fellow shoppers, this practice shouldn't be wrong in your mind

2) What the law says - No the law is the only enforcable standard in society. Since you have to obey the law to live in a society it becomes important that you follow it.

2006-11-02 12:40:48 · answer #9 · answered by Existentialist_Guru 5 · 2 0

No. It is morally wrong to sell milk that will expire sooner for the same price as fresher milk. You're fine - the grocer will have some explaining to do, though.

2006-11-02 12:38:54 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers