Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 112

Thread: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

  1. #51
    Featured Member rusdancer's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Europe/NYC
    Posts
    1,511
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 198 Times in 96 Posts
    My Mood
    Flirty

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Very interesting discussion!You know,there are no Wal-Marts in DC.In MD and VA,yes,but not here.

  2. #52
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    It's important that the blue collar workers and retirees who hold WalMart shares in their 401k's and pension funds to get their 2.6% payout.
    No it isn't. It's not Walmart's responsibility to provide for the pension funds of others or 401k plans. If investors are looking for stocks with dividends, there are plenty of others besides Walmart.


    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    A. every 'poor' American will be worse off if WalMart raises prices for basic foods, clothing etc.
    Again, Walmart can raise employee's pay without raising prices.


    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    B. some REAL WORLD US 'poverty' statistics ...

    (snip)"The following are facts about persons defined as "poor" by the Census Bureau, taken from various government reports:

    Forty six percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a threebedroom house with oneandahalf baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

    Seventy six percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

    Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two thirds have more than two rooms per person.

    The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)

    Nearly three quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars.

    Ninety seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.

    Seventy eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.

    Seventy three percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

    As a group, America's poor are far from being chronically undernourished. The average consumption of protein, vitamins, and minerals is virtually the same for poor and middleclass children and, in most cases, is well above recommended norms. Poor children actually consume more meat than do higher income children and have average protein intakes 100 percent above recommended levels. (snip)

    from http://www.heritage.org/Research/Rep...rty-in-America
    According to the site, these figures are from 2001. Things have gotten much worse for the poor since them. I'm also skeptical of how accurate these statistics are. I don't think it's likely that many poor people own a house worth $86,000.

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    Well in global economic terms, they don't !!! The business definition of the 'economic value' of an employee is the amount of additional revenue they can generate for their employer. In more than a few cases, $7.50-$8.00 an hour US minimum wage pay rates ( plus mandated employee salary based worker's comp, disability, employer SSI tax etc. which the employer must also pay ) cost the employer more than the minimum wage employee is able to generate in additional revenue for their employer. This is why WalMart continues to add 'self-check out' automation !

    ~
    I have yet to see a Walmart with a self check-out line. The store I've been to that have self checkout lines haven't eliminated any cashiers, they just added more checkout lines.

  3. #53
    Newbie Hungryeyes's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    14
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Originally Posted by Melonie
    Well in global economic terms, they don't !!! The business definition of the 'economic value' of an employee is the amount of additional revenue they can generate for their employer. In more than a few cases, $7.50-$8.00 an hour US minimum wage pay rates ( plus mandated employee salary based worker's comp, disability, employer SSI tax etc. which the employer must also pay ) cost the employer more than the minimum wage employee is able to generate in additional revenue for their employer. This is why WalMart continues to add 'self-check out' automation !

    ~
    Nooo, its b/c they are cheap and greedy!

  4. #54
    Featured Member minnow's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,003
    Thanks
    242
    Thanked 519 Times in 315 Posts
    Blog Entries
    10
    My Mood
    Twisted

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    Personally, I'm amazed that some people have no problem at all requiring a billionaire Walton heir to give up their inherited wealth or WalMart stock dividends, while at the same time giving fellow billionaire Steve Jobs or Bill Gates a pass. Where WalMart employs hundreds of thousands of US workers ... albeit at low pay rates ... Apple and Microsoft have ELIMINATED US jobs by the tens of thousands in favor of <$2 an hour outsourced labor writing code in Mumbai or assembling I-Pads in China. Where WalMart must set prices at levels below their competitors, Microsoft and Apple have a de-facto US gov't sanctioned 'monopoly' market where they can charge whatever they choose knowing that they are legally protected from direct competition. Where WalMart must pay US corporate taxes on virtually every dollar earned from US sales, Microsoft and Apple are provided with a legal loophole that allows them to transfer 'ownership' of their software / intellectual property to a division in a low tax country like Ireland thus escaping billions in US corporate tax liability.

    But nobody seems to be calling for Jobs or Gates ( or their stockholders ) to make a 'sacrifice' in order to restore former US jobs or to collect US corporate taxes on software sales. Remember that every US job that Microsoft and Apple eliminated is one more underemployed / unemployed American that may be eligible for those expensive taxpayer funded social welfare benefits.

    Why is that ? ( hint - check political contributions made versus the recipients of those contributions @! ). Obviously compared to WalMart's 3.89% net profit margin, Microsoft's 31.8% profit margin or Apple's 24.3% profit margin, the latter ( and thier stockholders ) are in a far better position to make such a 'sacrifice'.
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    OK, Mel, I'll do it: I think that Bill Gates could (should) have forgone ~ $10B or so of his ~ $50B fortune made over several decades in the form of price reductions on his software passed on to Microsoft customers. Furthermore, I doubt that having net worth of "only" $40B would cause anyone to pack up their marbles and "go John Galt" on everyone.
    I'll also correct my earlier post- erroneously transposed ~$2K figure per Walmart store worker into cost per taxpayer. My bad. Actual cost per taxpayer for supporting low WM wages is probably more like $20/taxpayer. I've likely saved a few Benjamins per year with my WM purchases. Myself (and others) shop at WM for reasons other than low prices, especially the 24/7 store hours. This likely improves WM bottom line in ways that several other stores with more limited hours don't do. As for my 401K, ONE of my funds (conservative stock fund) has WM comprising just 0.4% of fund total holdings. So, many retirees aren't that dependent on WM for retirement income.
    That said, I don't think its a terrible ammount of skin off peoples bones to improve the lot of WM workers somewhat.
    I'm right 96% of the time. I don't sweat the other 5% .......................

  5. #55
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    I think that Bill Gates could (should) have forgone ~ $10B or so of his ~ $50B fortune made over several decades in the form of price reductions on his software passed on to Microsoft customers
    Yes ... but ! Thanks to a de-facto US gov't monopoly 'license' for Windows and other software, Gates could charge high prices and achieve a 31% profit margin with little or no risk of losing market share to a competitor. This is NOT true for WalMart.


    I have yet to see a Walmart with a self check-out line. The store I've been to that have self checkout lines haven't eliminated any cashiers, they just added more checkout lines.
    Apparently they started implementing self-checkout automation in states that have an above federal level state minimum wage and/or above average costs of state unemployment / comp coverage for employees. Every WalMart in NY has them already. And while the original number of 'human' check out lines may still be in place, half or more don't have 'human' check-out clerks available unless it's 'black friday'. Don't worry because wherever you are your local WalMart store will get them eventually.

  6. #56
    God/dess rickdugan's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,570
    Thanks
    4,406
    Thanked 7,481 Times in 2,715 Posts
    My Mood
    Amused

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by eagle2 View Post
    No it isn't. It's not Walmart's responsibility to provide for the pension funds of others or 401k plans. If investors are looking for stocks with dividends, there are plenty of others besides Walmart.

    Again, Walmart can raise employee's pay without raising prices..
    Nor are the poverty statistics in America Wal-Mart's responsibility. Nor, for that matter, is it the responsiblity of Wal-Mart to pay more for a particular job than the market deems it is worth.

    But Wal-Mart's shareholders, including the mutual funds held in my kids' college plans as well as my retirement plan, would probably disagree with your assessment as to who Wal-Mart is responsible to. Company management reports to a board of directors, who is elected by the shareholders. If Wal-Mart starts placing personal or social goals over financial ones, management may be replaced by the Board. And if the Board is not doing its job in overseeing the company's management, it may be replaced with one that will through the shareholder proxy voting process.

    Quote Originally Posted by eagle2 View Post
    According to the site, these figures are from 2001. Things have gotten much worse for the poor since them. I'm also skeptical of how accurate these statistics are. I don't think it's likely that many poor people own a house worth $86,000.
    And how is this relevant to a discussion of Wal-Mart? Wal-Mart is not responsible for poverty in America.
    Last edited by rickdugan; 05-16-2011 at 07:20 AM.

  7. #57
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    It's ironic that Eagle posted those poverty stats. Under Obama, one in six Americans now gets Food Stamps. Obama has become the "Food Stamp" President.

  8. #58
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    It's ironic that Eagle posted those poverty stats. Under Obama, one in six Americans now gets Food Stamps. Obama has become the "Food Stamp" President.
    Because there aren't as many jobs now courtesy of outsourcing and H1-B visas (and all the other visas). That's not the only reason there is an increase but many people now getting any form of assistance were people that in the past had jobs, including SKILLED jobs.

  9. #59
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    It's ironic that Eagle posted those poverty stats. Under Obama, one in six Americans now gets Food Stamps. Obama has become the "Food Stamp" President.
    All you're doing is repeating idiocy from that ignoramus Newt Gingrich. I don't know how anyone can take him seriously. It's obvious to most Americans that Bush and the Republicans are the ones responsible for wrecking the economy.

    http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/06/news...poll/index.htm

    Despite the amount of time Obama has been in office, 55% of Americans say that former president George W. Bush and the Republicans are more responsible for current economic problems than Obama.

  10. #60
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    ^^^ that must be the 47% of American tax filers who don't actually have to pay income taxes, plus another 8% of unionized gov't workers whose paychecks are being paid for via Obama stimulus spending of money borrowed from our children and grandchildren !!!

    At any rate, this entire discussion boils down to one basic point ... in a 'free market' absent gov't protections and subsidies, no corporation can survive in the long term if it pays its workers more money than those workers are able to produce in terms of 'added value' / additional revenue for that corporation. WalMart's financials indicate that the corporation is already close to the tipping point with a 3% profit margin and a 3% stockholder dividend payout rate.

    And in every highly publicized recent case of new WalMarts posting job openings for 'unskilled' labor at minimum wage pay rates, there have been far more applicants lining up than job openings available. The pay rate is 100% legal. The job applicants are willingly accepting that pay rate.
    It's ironic that Eagle posted those poverty stats. Under Obama, one in six Americans now gets Food Stamps. Obama has become the "Food Stamp" President.

    Because there aren't as many jobs now courtesy of outsourcing and H1-B visas (and all the other visas).
    This is a permutation of my earlier point about Bill Gates and Microsoft or Steve Jobs and Apple eliminating US jobs altogether in favor of outsourcing hardware production to China and software support to India. At least WalMart is still providing US jobs ... albeit that the media hue and cry about minimum wage pay rates is prompting them to automate some of those US jobs out of existance. Thanks to their HUGE profit margins, Microsoft and Apple could have easily afforded to retain US electronics assembly jobs and/or software support jobs without jeopardizing the profitability of the corporation. But the same media that rides WalMart about minimum wage pay rates is strangely silent about Microsoft and Apple.

  11. #61
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    ^^^ that must be the 47% of American tax filers who don't actually have to pay income taxes, plus another 8% of unionized gov't workers whose paychecks are being paid for via Obama stimulus spending of money borrowed from our children and grandchildren !!!

    At any rate, this entire discussion boils down to one basic point ... in a 'free market' absent gov't protections and subsidies, no corporation can survive in the long term if it pays its workers more money than those workers are able to produce in terms of 'added value' / additional revenue for that corporation. WalMart's financials indicate that the corporation is already close to the tipping point with a 3% profit margin and a 3% stockholder dividend payout rate.

    And in every highly publicized recent case of new WalMarts posting job openings for 'unskilled' labor at minimum wage pay rates, there have been far more applicants lining up than job openings available. The pay rate is 100% legal. The job applicants are willingly accepting that pay rate.


    This is a permutation of my earlier point about Bill Gates and Microsoft or Steve Jobs and Apple eliminating US jobs altogether in favor of outsourcing hardware production to China and software support to India. At least WalMart is still providing US jobs ... albeit that the media hue and cry about minimum wage pay rates is prompting them to automate some of those US jobs out of existance. Thanks to their HUGE profit margins, Microsoft and Apple could have easily afforded to retain US electronics assembly jobs and/or software support jobs without jeopardizing the profitability of the corporation. But the same media that rides WalMart about minimum wage pay rates is strangely silent about Microsoft and Apple.
    I don't know why the media talks about Apple and Microsoft outsourcing but I blame them for doing that. They are all to blame for what is happening in this country.

  12. #62
    God/dess rickdugan's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,570
    Thanks
    4,406
    Thanked 7,481 Times in 2,715 Posts
    My Mood
    Amused

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by Kellydancer View Post
    I don't know why the media talks about Apple and Microsoft outsourcing but I blame them for doing that. They are all to blame for what is happening in this country.
    I actually share your frustration with this. I am your age and have been watching our manufacturing base close down and move overseas for as long as I can remember. Where I grew up, shoe, clothing, hat and other manufacturers moved overseas and closed down factories that had been major contributors to the local job bases. The small cities that they once occupied are, to this day, destitute and crime ridden, with high percentages of their populations collecting government assistance.

    But it is hard to blame these companies. They are forced to compete against overseas manufacturers paying next to nothing for labor and benefits. If they did not adapt, they would have gone out of business anyway.

    The reality is that the real "culprit" is the American consumer. We have shown no loyalty towards American made goods and almost always flock to whatever can be had for the cheapest cost. And as long as this continues, manufactureres will continue to be forced to assemble their goods wherever it is cheapest to do so.
    Last edited by rickdugan; 05-17-2011 at 09:03 AM.

  13. #63
    Featured Member
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,030
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked 117 Times in 78 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Someone said it already, Walmart is a lightning rod because they are so big... But get used to it, because eventually they're going to figure out how to run a Grocery Store and they'll put everyone out of business. They are already a good 10% or 15% cheaper than the lower grocery stores around here.

    They also do often pay better for equivalent jobs, than other companies do. I know a few people who got $2 or $3 an hour bumps to go work for Walmart. That said they all claimed to hate it there, and at least two of them quit in less than a year. I do generally beleive that the management in those stores actively treats the employee's pretty shittily, and probably has the tacit approval of Corporate.

  14. #64
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by rickdugan View Post
    I actually share your frustration with this. I am your age and have been watching our manufacturing base close down and move overseas for as long as I can remember. Where I grew up, shoe, clothing, hat and other manufacturers moved overseas and closed down factories that had been major contributors to the local job bases. The small cities that they once occupied are, to this day, destitute and crime ridden, with high percentages of their populations collecting government assistance.

    But it is hard to blame these companies. They are forced to compete against overseas manufacturers paying next to nothing for labor and benefits. If they did not adapt, they would have gone out of business anyway.

    The reality is that the real "culprit" is the American consumer. We have shown no loyalty towards American made goods and almost always flock to whatever can be had for the cheapest cost. And as long as this continues, manufactureres will continue to be forced to assemble their goods wherever it is cheapest to do so.
    Unfortunately, Americans would rather spend less and that is why they left, you are right. I'm not like that but most people think "hey that's cheaper". They don't realize that buying cheaper means in the long run they may not have jobs themselves because it's spiraling out of control. As much as it pains me to say this, while I blame the corporations I also blame the unions. Way too many wanted salaries far above what they deserve.

    I've seen several towns around me go from booming towns to ghetto and it's very sad. I saw the suburb my parents grew up in go this way. It went from a suburb with a few famous people to a ghetto.

  15. #65
    Featured Member
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,030
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked 117 Times in 78 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by Kellydancer View Post
    Unfortunately, Americans would rather spend less and that is why they left, you are right.
    I know this is nitpicky, but in a lot cases it's not "would rather" it's "don't have much of a choice".

    People that have a choice are not the people shopping at Walmart, and its ridiculous to even imagine a world where people spend more because in the distant future it might somehow save their job?

  16. #66
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    I know this is nitpicky, but in a lot cases it's not "would rather" it's "don't have much of a choice".
    ^^^ exactly ! Thus my earlier point that forcing WalMart to provide higher pay rates and higher benefit levels to its employees, which in turn results in a 10% price increase in order to keep stockholders from 'losing money', will directly 'harm' the poorest Americans who 'don't have a choice'


    its ridiculous to even imagine a world where people spend more because in the distant future it might somehow save their job
    For better or worse, this same economic 'truth' effectively dooms the future of any US 'goods' industry ... where the US producer is forced to pay higher taxes, higher energy costs, higher environmental and worker safety compliance costs etc. than their offshore competitors are able to pay. In this situation, as was pointed out earlier, the only way that the US 'goods' producer can remain economically viable in the long term is if gov't uses its authority to restrict foreign competition via tariffs and/or quotas on lower cost imported 'goods'. This is essentially already the case for imported trucks, for imported tires, for imported ethanol etc. In essence the US gov't is forcing Americans rich and poor alike to pay higher than necessary prices for all of these items in order to protect the economic viability of US producers, albeit often without the direct knowledge of the American rich and poor consumers.

  17. #67
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by jester214 View Post
    I know this is nitpicky, but in a lot cases it's not "would rather" it's "don't have much of a choice".

    People that have a choice are not the people shopping at Walmart, and its ridiculous to even imagine a world where people spend more because in the distant future it might somehow save their job?
    The people at the bottom of the income need cheap so they go to Wal-Mart. Many of them don't even realize that when they do it hurts people they know by costing more American jobs. I know for me I'd rather spend more on American products.

  18. #68
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Another classic from Paul Krugman. Or as those of us who love the the little retarded munchkin like to call him : "Krugie".

    In this month's Playboy Interview Krugie outdid himself with probably his loopiest statement ever. Ready ? The government should mandate that workers at Walmart get paid on a par with workers at GM including all the benefits. I am NOT making this up. Read it for yourselves. I can't think of a better way to assure that Walmart cuts its workforce and raises prices so high that nobody will shop there anymore.

  19. #69
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Well, if the FED goes for broke on QE3, printing up new US dollar bills at warp speed, it's not inconceivable that future $40 an hour union auto wages won't be too far ahead of a future $30 US minimum wage. Of course, this would also mean that a gallon of gasoline would cost $20, a loaf of bread would cost $8, and an ounce of gold would cost $10,000, and a bargain basement new car would cost $50,000 !

  20. #70
    God/dess
    Joined
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    6,948
    Thanks
    2,846
    Thanked 5,526 Times in 3,113 Posts
    My Mood
    Angelic

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by Kellydancer View Post
    Wal-Mart has caused many manufacturers to go overseas, which has caused many job losses.
    Right

    And unions had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!

  21. #71
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    Another classic from Paul Krugman. Or as those of us who love the the little retarded munchkin like to call him : "Krugie".

    In this month's Playboy Interview Krugie outdid himself with probably his loopiest statement ever. Ready ? The government should mandate that workers at Walmart get paid on a par with workers at GM including all the benefits. I am NOT making this up. Read it for yourselves. I can't think of a better way to assure that Walmart cuts its workforce and raises prices so high that nobody will shop there anymore.
    I don't feel Wal-Mart workers should make as much as car manufacturers. However, there is a movement where people (mostly the OWS people and the like)where they feel Wal-Mart workers and other restaurant and retailers should pay the same as a skilled job. I am opposed to this because why then go to college if you can make the same at Wal-Mart?

  22. #72
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    Again, the point remains that the lower food prices made possible by WalMart enables 'those people' to take home more food for the same number of Food Stamp / SSI dollars ... thus increasing their de-facto standard of living without calls for additional costs to other Americans ( to increase the level of Food Stamp / SSI benefits ). The very first post in this thread attempted to make the case that low WalMart wage levels allowed WalMart employees to become eligible for all sorts of social welfare programs at significant cost to US taxpayers. My point is simply that only looking at that side of the taxpayer costs equation, while ignoring the reductions in potential taxpayer costs that WalMart makes possible re ALL WalMart customers who are eligible for social welfare programs, is disingenuous.

    ~
    This to me is a "chicken and egg" thing. Are the people who are poor well served because Walmart enables them to by cheap goods alongside; how many people need to buy cheap goods because Walmart made them poor by either putting them out of business or getting them fired/reduced salary because it puts so much pressure on suppliers to lower price?.

  23. #73
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    571
    Thanks
    107
    Thanked 445 Times in 203 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Isn't this really "amerca vs america'? Or rather AMERICAN VS AMERICAN?

    Lower prices for goods=lower pay and fewer benecits
    Big sprawl buildngs= less downtown
    National chain=less local business, more $ leaves your town
    Lots of cheap,, often imported products=cash strapped vendors do what they got to = lower wages, overseas suppliers, cheaper quality. THIS MEANS FEWER GOOD AMERICAN JOBS

    But sure, saving $1 fels good if u don't think about it

  24. #74
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Bill Clinton let the global economy 'genie' out of the bottle almost 20 years ago. Wal-mart is just one of many different manifestations of the US now being open to global competition ... both in terms of relative prices of goods, as well as in terms of relative prices for labor. Arguably, the points concerning Wal-Mart are not about 'American' versus 'American' at all. Instead they are about mexican tomatoes, vietnamese furniture, chinese big screen TV's etc. simply costing far less to produce.
    Last edited by Melonie; 02-17-2012 at 08:32 PM.

  25. #75
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: WAL-MART vs AMERICA

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    Well, if the FED goes for broke on QE3, printing up new US dollar bills at warp speed, it's not inconceivable that future $40 an hour union auto wages won't be too far ahead of a future $30 US minimum wage. Of course, this would also mean that a gallon of gasoline would cost $20, a loaf of bread would cost $8, and an ounce of gold would cost $10,000, and a bargain basement new car would cost $50,000 !
    It is inconceivable. You're just randomly pulling numbers out of thin air.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Wal mart does the right thing
    By cameron_keys in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-02-2008, 02:44 PM
  2. Shooting at Wal-Mart
    By Bridgette in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 08-25-2005, 11:56 PM
  3. And this is why I shop at Wal-Mart...
    By kitana in forum Political Poo
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 08-08-2005, 11:12 AM
  4. Butt Mask: another Wal-Mart wonder
    By TigersMilk in forum Body Business
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-24-2005, 12:26 AM
  5. Wal-Mart, the bank?
    By Farrah_Holiday in forum Dollar Den
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-02-2005, 01:24 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •