a) switching the pants on a suit/pant combo so they'll fit you. or, switching shoes so you'll get 2 diff sized shoes for your feet so they'll fit you. Sure, this isn't immoral. I just ask them if I can get the pants or the shoe, instead of the one that comes with the combo. That's why we have suit separates. b) switching tags on items, so that you can purchase something for a lower price People who do this deserve to be shot. They justify getting their freebies at the ultimate expense of others. c) using someone's Â employee discount, which you did not earn, to puchase something I have no idea, but I can say this: If I didn't earn it, I wouldn't use it. Same goes for everything in life. People who use what they don't earn are leeches by definition. d) hiding something before a sale, so that you can come back later and purchase it for the sale price. We're assuming that the store doesn't have pre-sale. You can hide stuff before a sale? I don't know if it matters. Hell, if I don't get something I want this year's sale, there's always next year, and my wallet will probably thank me for delaying my purchase. e) wearing fur. I know this isn't popular in men's fashion, but let's say those full length fur coats from the Harvard-Yale games became popular again. Depends on which kind of fur. Minks are nasty little animals. Tiger/leopard/large wild cat fur, on the other hand, makes me violent (and no, I'm not affiliated with PETA.) There's something different about using fur bred in captivity and using fur that's obviously coming from protected species. f) buying clothes from a country that is repressive, so that this money helps to prop up a dictorship. Or, buying clothes from a region where you know that the working conditions are very exploitative and that workers get paid just a pittance. I think this is referring to probably to every non NATO country. You mean China? I dig what the Chinese government does, sometimes: in America, with its willy-nilly free market economy, you have execs doing all sorts of things, especially when it comes to influencing politics. In China, whenever executives get too ambitious, the government arrests them, tries them, and shoots them. I think America has had during its history quite a few top-ranking business officials that deserved to be shot. Still, clothes-buying doesn't factor that much into "political oppression" for me. After all, sweatshops do exist in the United States. Even worse sweatshops exist south of the border. If anything, if you buy clothes that come from one of these countries, you are not directly supporting the regime: You are supporting the company that chose to rake in more money by spending less on production. And that makes me angrier, because it's one thing for some guy to buy something Made in China, and it's something else for Coach to make its bags there. The latter example almost tries to rationalize the whole bad labor thing. It makes me sick. So do I buy things that go to offensive regimes? Depends on your definition. America was none-too-great of an advocate of worker safety a hundred years ago. Now, America is wealthy enough to channel funds into improving worker safety, and putting in a base wage. Other countries might not have this luxury. When it comes down to "brass tacks," so to speak, I would prefer if what I bought came from either Europe or North America, because I would rather spend more on a product I can believe was made with expertise, rather than spending more for cheap labor, the excess of which just ends up in the company's pockets. h) how about buying products from companies that use child labor. Didn't nike have that problem. All i remember is that Air Jordan said Â that it wasn't his problem. Imagine if Kathy Lee Gifford had said that. Hell no. I would never buy anything made by children. But the sad thing is, some countries don't have a choice. Some families are so poor they make their children go to work. The problem is far greater than simply "CHILDREN MAKE NIKE SHOES." And yes, it wasn't Jordan's problem. He was just an advocate of Nike's products. He didn't have any sort of managerial or decision-making position with the company. Yes, he could have decided to withdraw his support of the company, but what's an athlete to do without the extra millions of dollars coming from it? (I'm being sarcastic with the last part.) i) Selling, buying 2nd hand items like on EBay. Before downloading, weren't singers complaining about how they weren't getting paid for their CDs sold by stores for used CDS. I think Garth Brooks made a fuss about this when he was the King. Can you use that same argument for when we buy clothes on Ebay. No. Buying used-anything is legal. I don't know what the singers were complaining about, if what you said is true, although music piracy is definitely a greater and much more valid problem. People buy used cars. People can buy used clothes. And, much of it comes from closeouts, so in some cases, they're new. But hey, all these answers here won't help you develop your own moral compass. That comes with life, not the Internet.