Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 77

Thread: The cost of WalMart Nation

  1. #51
    God/dess Casual Observer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boston MA
    Posts
    5,670
    Thanks
    35
    Thanked 144 Times in 74 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    I've missed this thread somehow and couldn't possibly address all the living wage fantasy/globalism-is-bad/corporate-profiteering-is-evil nonsense that's been bandied about, but Melonie has really hit the bulk of the high points in this regard and PC has noted some trends that show progression of our economic base rather than the oft-touted regression, though for the interested, I'll point you back to another more definitive post I made regarding the fallacy of the living wage and how labor markets really work.
    Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.

    William F. Buckley, Jr.

  2. #52
    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: The cost of WalMart Nation

    Oh, just in passing, those high tech firms which make the California economic 'anomaly' possible aren't above exploiting 3rd world business principles either, and are arguably even worse than the relocated manufacturing operations (who are at least nominally following local 3rd world country laws)!

  3. #53
    madmaxine
    Guest

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    I live in a ghetto segment of California, and yeah, we have a Wal-Mart that clears at least million in sales a week. Due to urban sprawl, we also have several competing comparable stores that are pulling business away from that Wal-Mart.
    My family doesn't shop at that Wal-Mart because it's too "downmarket." Wal-Marts are susceptible to the same business rules that any other business is. The company may be too big for its own good someday. I'm sure no one ever envisioned Sears and K-Mart having to merge to survive. Well, it happened.

  4. #54
    Featured Member discretedancer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,004
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    Mel, for the life of me I don't see what point
    http://www.economist.com/markets/big...ory_id=3503641
    is out to prove.

    The point seems to still stand that if it costs X to live at a base standard in America, and people need to live in order to work for any company, then those people need to have X in income. Otherwise, we're deciding some people don't get to live at a base standard OR that the government will supply the base. If we don't want (I sure don't) the government underwriting our workforce, then the company has to pay THE FULL COST OF THE LABOR FORCE IT REQURES FOR PROFIT.

  5. #55
    God/dess Mr Hyde's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Tampa
    Posts
    4,035
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 586 Times in 346 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    Quote Originally Posted by discretedancer
    I agree..but the challenge is they are an EASY solution for people. Everything in 1 place, cheap, cheery, colorful, it becomes easy to ignore the underlying issues.
    Holy crap, cheery and colorful? Have you been in a Wal-Mart? It's a frigging eyesore, inside and out.

  6. #56
    God/dess Casual Observer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boston MA
    Posts
    5,670
    Thanks
    35
    Thanked 144 Times in 74 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    Mel, for the life of me I don't see what point
    http://www.economist.com/markets/bi...tory_id=3503641
    is out to prove.
    We see this in your continued efforts to promote the fallacious living wage theory.

    The point seems to still stand that if it costs X to live at a base standard in America, and people need to live in order to work for any company, then those people need to have X in income.
    Again, I direct you to a presentation that simply and accurately illustrates how real labor markets work.
    Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.

    William F. Buckley, Jr.

  7. #57
    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: The cost of WalMart Nation

    then the company has to pay THE FULL COST OF THE LABOR FORCE IT REQURES FOR PROFIT
    That's exactly what the Big Mac Index was meant to illustrate - that companies ARE paying the full cost fo the labor force it requires for the company to be able to make a profit, and also paying enough to provide a justifiable standard of living for those employees compared to the value added those employees actually produce - in China an Singapore and Korea - but no longer in the USA!

    This has already been the result of the direct taxes, indirect gov't mandated costs (i.e. everything from OSHA to HR to Environmental Compliance), and artificially high labor rates (i.e. competing against the labor rates the gov't effectively pays to people who choose to sit at home), which companies employing unskilled workers have been forced to pay within US borders. The only significant difference is that, in the retail sector, it's much more difficult to relocate the point of sale to US customers than it has been to relocate the point of manufacture.

    Two bottom line points. First, companies who cannot turn a reasonable profit do not stay in business and their employees wind up out of a job. You can ask the ex-Sears and ex-KMart employees after the last gasp merger is completed ! Gov't can mandate that companies continue to operate at a loss until they go broke (as would be the case with your proposal), but when the company is broke it is gone. Most prudent managers would choose to shut down or relocate the company before it goes broke if faced with such a burdensome gov't madate !

    Second, a subsidy is still a subsidy whether it is collected from US citizens in the form of taxes and handed to low income employees directly by gov't agencies, or whether it is collected from US citizens in the form of inflated prices and then handed to medium income employees through the company's payroll system. The only significant difference between the two approaches is that the gov't tax and benefit scenario is 'honest' and sustainable and arguably shares the costs equitably between rich and poor, whereas the inflated prices scenario is 'dishonest', unsustainable in the long term, and disproportionately passes the costs onto the poor rather than the rich. Both approaches are bad IMHO, but the former is perhaps not quite as bad as the latter because at least the 'subsidy' is implemented in a somewhat 'open' and equitable manner.

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 03-28-2005 at 05:10 AM.

  8. #58
    Featured Member discretedancer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,004
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie
    , a subsidy is still a subsidy whether it is collected from US citizens in the form of taxes and handed to low income employees directly by gov't agencies, or whether it is collected from US citizens in the form of inflated prices and then handed to medium income employees through the company's payroll system.
    Is it a subsidy if it's handed to big profitable corporations in the form of free roads, tax breaks, financial support to the company's employees (in order to keep kids healthy and fed)?

    How about if military and political efforts are used to protect international political structures that support existing industries, tax and other laws allow companies to buy products from unsafe, polluting overseas factories and avoid most US laws and taxes..in order to lower the cost of the products sold at any cost? What about ?

    that companies ARE paying the full cost fo the labor force it requires for the company to be able to make a profit, and also paying enough to provide a justifiable standard of living for those employees compared to the value added those employees actually produce - in China an Singapore and Korea - but no longer in the USA!
    SO US companies should pay based on what it cost to live in Singapore and China? THat's just dumb...apples and oranges, especially since overseas workers usually don't have reasonable safety/environlmental/labor laws (the reason these companies are going there)

    If your theory is fair...then US companies should charge what those products sell for in thse countries (far less than they charge here! Bye bye profits!

    Tell you what, why don't you apply that rule yourslf today...charge what a dancer in China gets for the same service - would certainly change your standard of living.

    ov't can mandate that companies continue to operate at a loss until they go broke (as would be the case with your proposal), but when the company is broke it is gone.
    WM profits are in the 9 BILLION range, the article suggests that (at worst) the gov't is picking up a few hundred million in what should be their expenses as welfare and other programs. Wheres the going broke?

    :"If revenue generated from hiring one more
    unit of labor is greater than the cost, the
    firm should hire the additional unit of labor."
    You see I corrected this statement - the wage should not be artifically lowered (as it is now, by subsidizing with gov't programs) so profit is produced - companies should charge what it COSTS for an employee or don't hire them. If it is true no company can stay in business under those circumstances (mom and pop businesses did fine for decades, as did factories) then the market will fix the problem...but most likely, companies will innovate and solve it first.

    The only significant difference between the two approaches is that the gov't tax and benefit scenario is 'honest' and sustainable and arguably shares the costs equitably between rich and poor,
    So it's fair that I (as a consumer that doesn't ever shop at companies with unfair labor practices) pay to subsidize the profits of companies, not those that CHOOSE TO SHOP THERE instead of elsewhere. THat's free market?

    Both approaches are bad IMHO,
    You keep talking about what is bad, but I've asked you for a counter solution...and all you seem to have is

    Eliminate OSHA, Environmental, and Safety rules - bring us back to the labor market of the 20's and 30's and the pollution levels thereof

    eliminate social programs without providing a balanced economic solution -"anything for profit" isn't balanced.

    ~[/QUOTE]

  9. #59
    God/dess kitana's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    3,582
    Thanks
    49
    Thanked 60 Times in 43 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    Well I don't know about other areas of the USA, but I do know that I have quite a few friends who work at the Wal-Mart here in this area, and LOVE it!

    They have awesome benifits for this area, and pay over $7 an hour. That's $1.85 move an hour than minimum wage, and they always have people waiting for new jobs when they advertise them.

    I personally LOVE Wal-Mart myself. Where else can you go to get jeans, a TV, movies, food, and gas in one place?

    I guess I am more of a low mantainence person. I HATE the mall with it's OVER PRICED stores and SUB-STANDARD goods. I mean really now, why in the world whould you wanna pay $150 for a purse, when you can buy one for $14.97?

    I guess labels just don't intrest me as much as some of the posters on here.

    *Gasp* I don't own ANY Louis Vuttion purses. I don't have any Abercrombie jeans. I haven't ever owned any designer undies.

    The VERY FEW "labels" I do own are from the local thrift store. Why pay over $80 for a sweat shirt when you can buy the SAME shirt at the Goodwill for $3.50?

    I guess I'm just a cheap ass. I LOVE WAL-MART!!!!!!!!!

    Kitana
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Quote Originally Posted by ExoticEngineer View Post
    Feel like a damn salt lick at the goats petting zoo!
    <08SM>

  10. #60
    Featured Member discretedancer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,004
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    K, if they didn't destroy fragile habitats, have sooo many labor issues, import 90% of the products from overseas sweatshops, purposely target local businesses and accept so many types of government subsidies...I probably would love them too!

  11. #61
    God/dess kitana's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    3,582
    Thanks
    49
    Thanked 60 Times in 43 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    Dancer, everyone is destroying fragile habitats just by being alive. So for me, that defense doesn't fly.

    As for the other stuff, I don't know about it.

    I just like to shop there. I mean I like being able to get a 27" color TV for under $250.

    Kitana
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Quote Originally Posted by ExoticEngineer View Post
    Feel like a damn salt lick at the goats petting zoo!
    <08SM>

  12. #62
    Featured Member discretedancer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,004
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    Quote Originally Posted by kitana
    Dancer, everyone is destroying fragile habitats just by being alive. So for me, that defense doesn't fly.
    1. it doesn't have to be that way...at least we don't have to be as destructive as we are. Without changing ONE THING you do in your life, but changing A LITTLE about how you do it, you could have a HUGE positive (rather than negative) ecological impact, spur on the economy, save yourself money and make a real difference.

    Yes, it's nice paying only $250 for a TV, but when your taxes go up to pay for health risks due to pollution from that unregulated overseas factory that made the tv, when people die because the workers in that TV factory fight back against unfair practices, when an entire city is gassed because simple control measures weren't in place (since they impact the final price of the set) is it really that cheap?

    Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the lowest price. I simply say we should set some standards OUTSIDE OF PRICE, and then pick the lowest price that meets those other standards. If our country, state, or town (most of this is too big for the latter two) only allowed businesses who met the standards, consumers wouldn't have to think at all - the options in the store would all meet the standards...and price could be the remaining factor.

    BONUS to this would be the American workforce would have a better chance to remain employed, since at least some of the incentives to outsource (the lack of safety and environmental controls/costs) would nolonger exist.

  13. #63
    God/dess Casual Observer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boston MA
    Posts
    5,670
    Thanks
    35
    Thanked 144 Times in 74 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    I guess I am more of a low mantainence person. I HATE the mall with it's OVER PRICED stores and SUB-STANDARD goods. I mean really now, why in the world whould you wanna pay $150 for a purse, when you can buy one for $14.97?
    Damn woman! Where were you a few years ago?

    Last handbag I bought for a girlfriend was a $700 LV Monogram Musette.

    Strippers are so much more affordable than girlfriends.

    Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.

    William F. Buckley, Jr.

  14. #64
    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: The cost of WalMart Nation

    In regard to this supposed economic theory that the US economy can survive the levels of (direct or indirect) taxation necessary to maintain some arbitrary minimum standard of living, 'last decimal point' pollution controls, 'closed' markets etc., as a last resort I'm going to fall back on the old adage that 'those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it'. My specific historical reference is to the Roman Empire from Diocletian through Justinian, which takes on more and more of an eerie similarity to todays economic and legal trends with each new regulation enacted.


    chapters 2 and 21 for anybody who is remotely interested ...

    "(snip)But the chief cause of the scarcity was the drain of gold to the east in exchange for the Oriental wares which the Romans required. In the first century A.D. the annual export of gold to the east is said to have amounted (at the least) to a million pounds sterling. The Emperors resorted to a depreciation of the coinage, and up to a certain point this perhaps was not particularly disadvantageous so far as internal trade was concerned, since the value of the metals had risen in consequence of the scarcity. When Diocletian came to the throne there was practically nothing in circulation but the double denarius, which ought to have been a silver coin equivalent to about 1s. 9d.), but was now made of copper, with only enough silver in it to give it a whitish appearance, and worth about a halfpenny.(snip)"

    (snip)"The decay of municipal life reached a further stage in the reign of Justinian, who describes its decline; and increased interference on the part of the central government in the local finances seems to have been unavoidable. We saw how Anastasius to the supervision of the collection of taxes out of the hands of the decurions and appointed vindices, whose administration proved a failure. Justinian stigmatises them as pestilential and appears to have abolished them, though not entirely. The rates, known as politika, which were imposed for municipal purposes and used to be altogether under the control of the local authorities, had already in the time of Anastasius been aply appropriated by the fisc. They were collected along with the other taxes, and were divided into two portions, of which one went to the treasury, the other to the cities.(snip)"

    (snip)"Justinian is accused of having made necessaries as well as luxuries dearer not only by exorbitant duties on merchandise — a charge which we cannot control — but also by establishing "monopolies" for the benefit of the government. The restrictions which he imposed in the silk trade were considered when we surveyed the commercial relations of the Empire with foreign lands, and we saw that, though his policy in some respects was not happy, he deserves credit for his efforts to solve a difficult problem. It is far from clear how he made an income of 300 lbs. of gold from the sale of bread in the capital, as he is alleged to have done. Whatever new regulations were introduced cannot be described as a monopoly in the proper sense of the term. It is, however, certain that in the years after the Plague the price everyone labour rose considerably, and in A.D. 544 the Emperor issued an edict to re-establish the old prices. "We have learned," he says, "that since the visitation of gold traders and artisans and husbandmen and sailors have yielded to a spirit of covetousness and are demanding prices and wages two or three times as great as they formerly received. We therefore forbid all such to demand higher wages or prices than before. We also forbid contractors for building and for agricultural and other works to pay the workmen more than was customary in old days." A fine of three times the additional profit was imposed on those who transgressed the edict. Justinian evidently assumes that there was no good reason for the higher rates. Unfortunately we have no information as to the effects of the edict, in which the interests of the customers are solely considered. That was a fall of credit even before the Plague is indicated by measures which were taken to protect the interests of the powerful corporation of bankers against their debtors.

    It would probably be rash to infer from the tendency of interest on loans to rise since A.D. 472 that trade had been tending to decline. The ordinary commercial rate of interest in Justinian's reign was 8 per cent. On good securities money could be borrowed at 5 or 6 per cent. Justinian paid attention to the question of interest and reduced the maximum 12 per cent, which had hitherto been legal, to 8, except in the case of maritime ventures, where 12 was allowed. But 8 was allowed only in the case of traders, and 6 was fixed as the maximum for loans between private persons. In the case of money advanced to peasants he enacted that only 4 per cent should be charged, and have forbade senators of illustrious or higher rank to exact more than 4 per cent. (snip)"


    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 03-28-2005 at 09:37 PM.

  15. #65
    Featured Member discretedancer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,004
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    You mean the society where people used slaves for jobs there was "no added value" in, did whatever they felt like at the time (if you were rich enough) and taxed everyone to support a false sense of economic security?

    Yep - I see the correlation between that and the bubble world you define.


    But I still don't see your evidence for
    arbitrary minimum standard of living, when rents and other costs are defined by what it costs UNSUBSIDIZED free market forces to do their work and grow

    'last decimal point' pollution controls

    'closed' markets etc.

  16. #66
    God/dess Casual Observer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boston MA
    Posts
    5,670
    Thanks
    35
    Thanked 144 Times in 74 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    Yep - I see the correlation between that and the bubble world you define.
    You're the one continually promulgating the notion of a vacuum economy where the US can just regulate foreign competition and foreign markets out of sight and they'll not affect what goes on here. What you're continually suggesting is the further destratification of wealth and systematic anti-democratization of our economy to serve false labor wage models.
    Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.

    William F. Buckley, Jr.

  17. #67
    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: The cost of WalMart Nation

    You mean the society where people used slaves for jobs there was "no added value" in, did whatever they felt like at the time (if you were rich enough) and taxed everyone to support a false sense of economic security?
    I'm glad to see that you've discovered the Roman analogy as it applies to present day California (substitute illegal aliens for slave labor) !

  18. #68
    Featured Member discretedancer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,004
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    I do not want to destratify the economy. It would devalue the businesses I own...as I am an entrepreneur. However, I do ask:

    We examine our values and decide what our basic rules for living are going to be. PROFIT at ANY COST, or do we have standards upon which that profit must be based?

    Is polluting the environment we depend on for life OK if it increases profit? Do we want to assume that any product we choose to buy was made with reasonably little environmental impact?

    Is abusing workers, treating them like slaves in sweatshop conditions OK, or do we want to know that EVERY worker WORLDWIDE is being treated fairly?

    Should our government subsidize a workforce so profitable companies can be more profitable, or should companies survive and fail on their own merits?

    Are Americans required to make "the big mac index" equivalent of Singapore, or is it OK we have a higher standard in this nation?

    Do our rules equally apply to ALL products sold in the US, or only to those products/services that are made here - and companies which can outsource get to pay less (because other countries answered the above differently) AND get tax breaks to boot?

    All I'm saying...and I'm getting off this circle now...is that IF we had standards like:

    ~All products /services sold in the US must be made in factories which meet our guiidelines for safety, environmnetal output /input and (comparatively adjusted) base pay and worker policies

    ~If profit is made on US Activities, then that profit must be fully taxed, not hidden.

    ~No profitable corporation should receive government assistance , breaks or subsidies for programs which don't directly relate to innovation of more sustainable products. Maybe no assistance AT ALL...that's fine too

    And if we understood that:

    ~The job of making and monitoring these rules comes from ALL OF US - we all are workers as well as consumers...breathers as well as polluters - it's not the government's job to do everything for us

    It would naturally follow:

    ~anyone who is physically and mentally able to move, think and walk should have SOME JOB - even if it's sweeping the streets. And moving ahead should be encouraged and supported.

    ~those unable to work (permanent or temporary) would have some basic level of survival, and be helped to get back into the mainstream. If they chose to leave it entirely...that is their option...we would not support them unless they had a CLEAR, APPROPRIATE DISABILITY. This would be a much harsher standard than it is now.

  19. #69
    Featured Member discretedancer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,004
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie
    I'm glad to see that you've discovered the Roman analogy as it applies to present day California (substitute illegal aliens for slave labor) !
    Actually it applies to any part of our economy where we see a days work as not being worth a wage on which you could eat, feed and educate your kids, and remain hopeful and able to work for a better life.

    Seems the analogy equally applies to your world, where the existing industry get all the tax breaks, subsidies so they can underpay workers, loopholes to avoid environmental and safety rules (going overseas, rollback of environmental laws, etc), etc.

    When in a glass house...

  20. #70
    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: The cost of WalMart Nation

    well it appears that some of your overseas goals are already being achieved using clandestine means by Rainforest Action Network ... however the end result isn't as idealistic as the RAN promo sounds.



    (snip)"The World Health Organization reported in May 2002 that 5,500 children die every day from consumption of food and water contaminated with bacteria. The WHO painted a shockingly bleak picture for millions of third-world children: 1.3 million under the age of five die annually from diarrheal diseases caused by unsafe food and water; another 2.2 million die from respiratory infections caused or exacerbated by poor sanitation.

    This death toll equates to about 40 jumbo jets filled with kids crashing every day — a death toll that can only be alleviated by economic development.

    CORE’s Driessen points out that 2 billion people around the world lack electricity. A billion people live on less than $200 per year; three billion live on less than $700 per year. As an illustration of the often disturbingly confused priorities of many environmentalists, a dam project in India’s Gujarat Province was halted after eco-activists pressured lenders to withdraw financial support. The dam had to be stopped because it would “change the path of the river, kill little creatures along its banks and uproot tribal people in the area,” one eco-activist smugly intoned.

    “The local ‘tribal people,’ however, don’t appear to appreciate her intervention,” wrote Driessen in his book Eco-Imperialism: Green Power, Black Death. “One resident angrily called the activists’ handiwork ‘a crime against humanity,’ because the project would have provided electricity for 5,000 villages; low-cost renewable power for industries and sewage treatment plants; irrigation water for crops; and clean water for 35 million people.”

  21. #71
    Featured Member discretedancer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,004
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    1.What goals are you referring to? I don't see anything in here supporting the US economy, lowering emissions globally or helping to change how people THINK about our environment. i see another example of companies moving in response to activist pressure...while a good move, it sends a wrong message that profit and conservation are antithetical.

    2. I resent the connection between my proposals and that of RAN or any activist group. As our website clearly states "we are about action...not activism. People working to BALANCE economy, ecology, and lifestyle

    3. poorly written article, from a very biased news source

  22. #72
    God/dess kitana's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    3,582
    Thanks
    49
    Thanked 60 Times in 43 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    Quote Originally Posted by Casual Observer
    Damn woman! Where were you a few years ago?

    Last handbag I bought for a girlfriend was a $700 LV Monogram Musette.

    Strippers are so much more affordable than girlfriends.

    LOL, probably sitting on my back porch drinking beer and listening to Black Sabbath.

    I agree we can be cheaper to maintain than GF's, you don't have to feed us.

    Don't get me wrong if I were making a Mil a year or so, I wouldn't mind having a LV everything. (I really like their 2003 cherry line ), but since I'm not I'm happy with what I have.

    Besides, diamonds are a MUCH better investment than Louis anyday!

    Kitana
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Quote Originally Posted by ExoticEngineer View Post
    Feel like a damn salt lick at the goats petting zoo!
    <08SM>

  23. #73
    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: The cost of WalMart Nation

    in case anybody doubts the political motivations behind the WalMart attacks ...

  24. #74
    Featured Member discretedancer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,004
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    This particular effort by the unions is stupid, but in no way reflects on the principle of requiring companies to pay fairly, not accept government subsidies for their profitable operations, or any of the larger issues discussed about our labor/financial/environmental/moral issues.

    Just because a union is taking a stand (in a wrong way..involving congress in something of this nature) doesn't poison the whole effort.

    Personally, I think it's laughable and wrong that ABC would highlight WM in this way...but then I don't understand the segment. Sam Walton (whose granddaughter I went to HS with) is certainly an American Success Story......the company he built should be encouraged to improve. Workign in media, I understand that when Sales gets a client, few people in the building can $ay no to CA$H

  25. #75
    Featured Member Destiny's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,355
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re: The cost of WalMart Nation

    Quote Originally Posted by discretedancer
    ...Just because a union is taking a stand (in a wrong way..involving congress in something of this nature) doesn't poison the whole effort...
    But the entire premise of your argument in this thread is a "study" done by a bunch of democratic congressional staff members. You can't acknowledge that such a "study" might have been done with an eye towards advancing unions' goals and that it might just a wee bit biased?
    Dancing is wonderful training for girls, it's the first way you learn to guess what a man is going to do before he does it. ~Christopher Morley, Kitty Foyle

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. G String Nation (gstringnation.com)
    By robabs in forum Services
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-30-2007, 12:43 PM
  2. Heatwave in much of the nation
    By PhaedrusZ in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 07-09-2007, 08:05 PM
  3. Fast Food Nation
    By trin0101 in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 04-18-2007, 10:55 AM
  4. Walmart
    By Kaylinn in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 04-02-2007, 07:54 PM
  5. Walmart
    By Deogol in forum Political Poo
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-25-2005, 10:33 AM

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
  •