yes, walmart benefits heavily from government assistance…
Their workers would not be able to survive without the earned income tax credit, Food stamps, and medicaid…
Walmart also gets tax credits for hiring disadvantaged employees who live below the povery line.
Kmart is owned by eddie lampert…and i honestly don’t think he really cares about kmart at this point lol…
whereas the waltons are in this business for life…This is just a failed investment for eddie…
There is a quote from one of the Walton Children up on the wall of my local Sams Club. It reads “It’s not about what you gather, but how much you scatter.”
I really dislike this quote. It’s stupidity should be obvious. Clearly it comes from someone who has never had to work for and earn a living.
[quote]JEATON wrote:
There is a quote from one of the Walton Children up on the wall of my local Sams Club. It reads “It’s not about what you gather, but how much you scatter.”
I really dislike this quote. It’s stupidity should be obvious. Clearly it comes from someone who has never had to work for and earn a living. [/quote]
I know how disgustingly Altruistic
[quote]nickj_777 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
I’m reading Sam Walton’s autobiography. Dude was one hard worker.[/quote]
I reas that bio many years back. Sam Walton was, and still is an inspiration to all who want to begin their own business. He made it much bigger than most of us will and that’s why the idiots hate Walmart. All you have to do in American in 2012 is succeed for someone to hate you. Obama has made class warfare and hating the rich popular. [/quote]
This is not why people dislike Sam Walton. They dislike Wal-Mart because its business strategy is to enter small markets in small communities and push all the differing Mom and Pop shops out of the market. Walton’s strategy was to avoid large urban areas until later after he profited heavily in small communities and then pursue a grand urban market approach. People dislike him because he altered the community identity which was once based on local businesses. This strategy was mostly his wife’s idea.
People should not hate success in America people just feel saddened by the loss of community identity when a Wal-Mart enters a market because they watch their friends and neighbours go out of business because Wal-Mart can flood the market with cheap products.[/quote]
Those mom and pops had the same opportunities he did to grow their businesses. Lest not forget people choose to frequent his business over their local stores. If he would have kept the same business philosophy as those mom & pops he would have gone out of business as soon as some other smart person like himself came in. Business is all about adapting to the changing economic environment.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Walmart succeeds by fucking over its workers. The low prices and big dividends are squeezed from some schlep living in a trailer park or some little kid in China or Vietnam.
They don’t want unions because they want to keep the serfs under control. Unions do not set company strategy, or remove management’s opportunity to succeed - they just force management to treat employees like a supplier - rather than a bunch of serfs.
Fuck Walmart.
[/quote]
Please name me one major US business that employs as many formerly retired or age of retirement workers.
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Walmart succeeds by fucking over its workers. The low prices and big dividends are squeezed from some schlep living in a trailer park or some little kid in China or Vietnam.
They don’t want unions because they want to keep the serfs under control. Unions do not set company strategy, or remove management’s opportunity to succeed - they just force management to treat employees like a supplier - rather than a bunch of serfs.
Fuck Walmart.
[/quote]
Please name me one major US business that employs as many formerly retired or age of retirement workers.
[/quote]
Why do these people need to return to work?
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Walmart succeeds by fucking over its workers. The low prices and big dividends are squeezed from some schlep living in a trailer park or some little kid in China or Vietnam.
They don’t want unions because they want to keep the serfs under control. Unions do not set company strategy, or remove management’s opportunity to succeed - they just force management to treat employees like a supplier - rather than a bunch of serfs.
Fuck Walmart.
[/quote]
Please name me one major US business that employs as many formerly retired or age of retirement workers.
[/quote]
Why do these people need to return to work? [/quote]
Planning to live on a fixed income isn’t easy. Nor is the economy all that wonderful the last 4-5 years.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Walmart succeeds by fucking over its workers. The low prices and big dividends are squeezed from some schlep living in a trailer park or some little kid in China or Vietnam.
They don’t want unions because they want to keep the serfs under control. Unions do not set company strategy, or remove management’s opportunity to succeed - they just force management to treat employees like a supplier - rather than a bunch of serfs.
Fuck Walmart.
[/quote]
Nobody forces these people to work at Wal Mart…this is not China, is it?
They can walk down the street and apply at another store, right?
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Walmart succeeds by fucking over its workers. The low prices and big dividends are squeezed from some schlep living in a trailer park or some little kid in China or Vietnam.
They don’t want unions because they want to keep the serfs under control. Unions do not set company strategy, or remove management’s opportunity to succeed - they just force management to treat employees like a supplier - rather than a bunch of serfs.
Fuck Walmart.
[/quote]
Nobody forces these people to work at Wal Mart…this is not China, is it?
They can walk down the street and apply at another store, right?[/quote]
But nobody asked me if Walmart could open a store near me, create an eyesore where once there were trees and traffic issues that need to get resolved using tax payer money. Does Walmart see itself as being part of the society that allows it to exist or above it?
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Walmart succeeds by fucking over its workers. The low prices and big dividends are squeezed from some schlep living in a trailer park or some little kid in China or Vietnam.
They don’t want unions because they want to keep the serfs under control. Unions do not set company strategy, or remove management’s opportunity to succeed - they just force management to treat employees like a supplier - rather than a bunch of serfs.
Fuck Walmart.
[/quote]
Nobody forces these people to work at Wal Mart…this is not China, is it?
They can walk down the street and apply at another store, right?[/quote]
But nobody asked me if Walmart could open a store near me, create an eyesore where once there were trees and traffic issues that need to get resolved using tax payer money. Does Walmart see itself as being part of the society that allows it to exist or above it? [/quote]
I’m sure nobody asked if they could build a new Toyota plant in Tennessee…but it creats jobs and tax revenue.
Does Toyota see themselves as being part of society or above it?
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Walmart succeeds by fucking over its workers. The low prices and big dividends are squeezed from some schlep living in a trailer park or some little kid in China or Vietnam.
They don’t want unions because they want to keep the serfs under control. Unions do not set company strategy, or remove management’s opportunity to succeed - they just force management to treat employees like a supplier - rather than a bunch of serfs.
Fuck Walmart.
[/quote]
Nobody forces these people to work at Wal Mart…this is not China, is it?
They can walk down the street and apply at another store, right?[/quote]
But nobody asked me if Walmart could open a store near me, create an eyesore where once there were trees and traffic issues that need to get resolved using tax payer money. Does Walmart see itself as being part of the society that allows it to exist or above it? [/quote]
A logical person would then blame the person who sold the land and the city government for approving a building project that replaced your pristine scenic wonderland with an ugly building that merely provides many jobs and low priced goods.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Walmart succeeds by fucking over its workers. The low prices and big dividends are squeezed from some schlep living in a trailer park or some little kid in China or Vietnam.
They don’t want unions because they want to keep the serfs under control. Unions do not set company strategy, or remove management’s opportunity to succeed - they just force management to treat employees like a supplier - rather than a bunch of serfs.
Fuck Walmart.
[/quote]
Please name me one major US business that employs as many formerly retired or age of retirement workers.
[/quote]
Why do these people need to return to work? [/quote]
Not even sure if serious… Which is cheaper in terms of public money: supporting pensioners or keeping them contributing positively to the economy?
I don’t understand the ridiculous amount of specific hate for Wal-Mart. Sure, they’ve done some questionable stuff. JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION. I don’t hear people bitching about all the horrors of child labour, bloody disputes over natural resources, supporting morally shaky groups, etc. that many of these corporations do in other countries. Instead, let’s all bitch about Wal-Mart because it outcompetes local businesses, and thus has a direct effect on North Americans.
They attack Walmart because they do things like not offer full time work when they can make full time positions. They don’t do this so they can pocket that money, on top of paying people wages that are best described as poverty wages.
If you work 40 hours a week, that should be enough to get bye, it’s the point of a 40 hour work week coupled with a minimum wage and an 8 hour day… These are things put in place to protect the worker, but the worker has to work around these ‘protections’ either because 40 hours at 8 hours a day and minimum wage still don’t cut it. Or they can’t even get a minimum wage full time job from that company because they would rather have two employees at 20 hours a week which makes two uninsured workers who have to work two part time jobs to make poverty wages without health insurance.
Thats why. Simple maths.
[quote]Severiano wrote:
They attack Walmart because they do things like not offer full time work when they can make full time positions. They don’t do this so they can pocket that money, on top of paying people wages that are best described as poverty wages.[/quote]
You are completely ignoring the fact that there are very few positions in a company like Wal-Mart that are intended to be careers.
The simple fact is, and many people like to ignore this, is that no, these jobs are not, and never were, intended to be careers or jobs that provide for families.
Well maybe, just maybe the people that “can’t get by on those wages” should find employment where they can get by on the wages provided by their 40 hour work week.
Also, lets ignore the fact that a 40 hour work week, 2080 hours a year is for chumps and “good enoughs”. Very, very few people make good money and only work 2080 a year. But let’s pretend that isn’t reality. Let’s pretend we live in a world were 9-5 monday through friday is path to riches.
[quote]Or they can’t even get a minimum wage full time job from that company because they would rather have two employees at 20 hours a week which makes two uninsured workers who have to work two part time jobs to make poverty wages without health insurance.
Thats why. Simple maths. [/quote]
Simple maths? Why do you choose to ignore the other side of your “maths”? You are only looking at this from a very narrow point of view that is blind to not only the other side of the issue, but the secondary issues on the side you are championing.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Severiano wrote:
They attack Walmart because they do things like not offer full time work when they can make full time positions. They don’t do this so they can pocket that money, on top of paying people wages that are best described as poverty wages.[/quote]
You are completely ignoring the fact that there are very few positions in a company like Wal-Mart that are intended to be careers.
The simple fact is, and many people like to ignore this, is that no, these jobs are not, and never were, intended to be careers or jobs that provide for families.
Well maybe, just maybe the people that “can’t get by on those wages” should find employment where they can get by on the wages provided by their 40 hour work week.
Also, lets ignore the fact that a 40 hour work week, 2080 hours a year is for chumps and “good enoughs”. Very, very few people make good money and only work 2080 a year. But let’s pretend that isn’t reality. Let’s pretend we live in a world were 9-5 monday through friday is path to riches.
[quote]Or they can’t even get a minimum wage full time job from that company because they would rather have two employees at 20 hours a week which makes two uninsured workers who have to work two part time jobs to make poverty wages without health insurance.
Thats why. Simple maths. [/quote]
Simple maths? Why do you choose to ignore the other side of your “maths”? You are only looking at this from a very narrow point of view that is blind to not only the other side of the issue, but the secondary issues on the side you are championing.[/quote]
I really do see the other side, quite clearly. The business is up in such a way that its employees are paid poverty wages for the sake of maximizing profits for the big wigs and big investors. They maintained power over employees via legal threats, I mean they really threatened to take a poverty wage earning guy to court because he was going to cause them to lose profits for opening his mouth and standing up for himself. They don’t care about free speech or their employees, just their investors and the bottom line.
The implications that go along with the business plan of a Walmart are not very promising either. Think about our economy and think about where our country would be if every single company practiced the same way Walmart did. Think business categorical imperative… If every business played the same way and paid the same way, we would implode as a country… It isn’t a long term good for businesses to operate in such a way. Matter of fact it’s one of the best ways to guarantee poverty… Everything from here simply follows the fact that, if every laborer is paid poverty wages, it kills the economy. All you have to do is think it forward and follow through with the business plan where everybody uses the same model. It’s quite obviously broken.
The ignorance in this thread is depressing.
But, since it is all going to hell anyway, I welcome it.
Should, should, should, should… and here I though that the market allocated scarce resources that actually did exist instead of those that should exist.
Oh well.
[quote]Severiano wrote:
The business is up in such a way that its employees are paid poverty wages for the sake of maximizing profits for the big wigs and big investors.[/quote]
No, there is no Big Bad Wolf I’m sorry to say. The employees are paid market wages, and are free to work somewhere else if need be.
This is America, people can choose who they work for.
They do. They always have, and we’ve done pretty well.
[quote]If every business played the same way and paid the same way, we would implode as a country… It isn’t a long term good for businesses to operate in such a way. Matter of fact it’s one of the best ways to guarantee poverty… Everything from here simply follows the fact that, if every laborer is paid poverty wages, it kills the economy. All you have to do is think it forward and follow through with the business plan where everybody uses the same model. It’s quite obviously broken.
[/quote]
This isn’t even based in reality. If a company does pay employees enough, no one will work there, because one or two smart people will open a store that does pay people better and will get all the quality employees.
Also, there is this little thing called personal responsibility. If people don’t like WalMart, don’t shop there. If people don’t like any company, don’t use their products… Problem solved. The Chicken Little fear mongering is silly.
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Walmart succeeds by fucking over its workers. The low prices and big dividends are squeezed from some schlep living in a trailer park or some little kid in China or Vietnam.
They don’t want unions because they want to keep the serfs under control. Unions do not set company strategy, or remove management’s opportunity to succeed - they just force management to treat employees like a supplier - rather than a bunch of serfs.
Fuck Walmart.
[/quote]
Nobody forces these people to work at Wal Mart…this is not China, is it?
They can walk down the street and apply at another store, right?[/quote]
But nobody asked me if Walmart could open a store near me, create an eyesore where once there were trees and traffic issues that need to get resolved using tax payer money. Does Walmart see itself as being part of the society that allows it to exist or above it? [/quote]
A logical person would then blame the person who sold the land and the city government for approving a building project that replaced your pristine scenic wonderland with an ugly building that merely provides many jobs and low priced goods.
[/quote]
Ahhhh, so you’re saying that in a nation, a collective of people (sounds like socialism), compromises are made by everyone to insure that everyone benefits. Sort of like, if there is a war then some of us have to die in order to keep the whole thing going, even if those who die are among those who don’t get the most out of it. So it’s pretty crazy that someone who works for Walmart should ask for a decent living wage when they are from the social class that provides most of the troops who protect the nation and keep it safe so that we can have an environment in which businesses like Walmart can prosper. Why does it have to be an either/or argument? Why can’t a business take care of its employees and also make a profit (albeit a slightly smaller one)? What’s the point of having a nation if it’s going to end up looking like either pre-1917 Russia or the USSR? Why isn’t there a middle ground?
And the attitudes of some on this thread is pathetic. The whole “if you work at Walmart you deserve what you get because you are basically a loser who didn’t plan your life properly” argument. I am in awe of your greatness. The idea that you take time out of your busy days that are spent shaping the destiny of humanity to come and post on a forum (which I’m sure is read by world leaders and billionaires) makes me feel unworthy. I have to agree with you: someone who decides to work at Walmart so they can support themselves and take some pride in being a contributor to society is a real piece of uneducated trash. How dare they try and be like normal people, the good people, people like you. They’re lucky to even have a paying job because there was a time when they would have been the slaves and serfs while all of us would have been the masters or members of royalty. Let them eat twinkies.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
The whole “if you work at Walmart you deserve what you get because you are basically a loser who didn’t plan your life properly” argument. I am in awe of your greatness. … I have to agree with you: someone who decides to work at Walmart so they can support themselves and take some pride in being a contributor to society is a real piece of uneducated trash. How dare they try and be like normal people, the good people, people like you. They’re lucky to even have a paying job because there was a time when they would have been the slaves and serfs while all of us would have been the masters or members of royalty. Let them eat twinkies. [/quote]
This is not at all what anyone is saying. In fact this is insane really.