Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You are NOT an owner. You hold a share of stock in the company. A silent partner. You can get your money out if and when you choose. Daily operations are not your concern as you have no decision making authority.Still insisting something not factualNo. It isn't. Stock holders may only vote or sell their shares. There is no stock holder that has any say in day to day operations. For obvious reasons there is a wall of separation between the two. If you are unhappy, your only recourse is to sell your shares. Other than that, you are pissing into the wind.
Again, I am an owner. It is my business.
Sorry but owning a stock makes you an owner. Being an owner makes it your business. It is really quite simple.
What is the point which you are trying to make?
Yes I am an owner. And the value of my stock is effected by what the ceo does. So yes it is my business. Again it is very simple. Stop embarrassing yourself.
Well you said a mouthful right there. Jobs nobody wants. Well, too bad. That's why we don't support a higher minimum wage. There are jobs out there--good paying jobs, but people would rather work at Walmart and collect taxpayer dollars. People would rather sit home than to trouble themselves to get off their asses and learn a new career.
So starve. See if I care. Because the country is getting sick of supporting loafers while the rest of us get up to go to work every morning. When we get a Republican President, watch how they slash this welfare state in half. Then people will have no choice but to support themselves and do anything possible to try and crawl out of that hole they made for themselves.
Yes, truck driving is in the top ten most deadliest jobs, but is that any reason nobody should have those jobs? Think I want to get up every morning and drive a truck? No, but I have to keep a roof over my head. I have to put food on the table. I have too much pride to let somebody else support me; pride we don't see much anymore in this country thanks to liberals.
Yes there are jobs with decreasing wages and people would have to pay for training if they have the money. And if they have kids it's probably an impossible job for many.
With such shortages why are wages not going up? Seems like somebody is really hosing drivers.
Much of it has to do with all the foreigners taking the jobs. You can't get Americans like you to work, so somebody has to do it. Plus they work for just about nothing, so industry loves those people but it keeps them from offering better money.
And again, you dig up articles portraying the worst of the worst. In trucking, there are good paying jobs and not so good paying jobs like any other industry. The not so good paying jobs go to drivers with a questionable driving record or beginners who are likely to get into some mishaps because that's quite normal when first starting out. Our industry has a lot of people like that because there are more jobs out there than ever before.
Yes, there are people with children where such a job is not practical, but why did those people have kids they couldn't support in the first place? Nobody should have children until they have a stable income and a secure career where they don't have to worry about where they are going to work the next day.
Guess trucking needs more immigrants with all these unfilled jobs.
What choice do they have? Americans are too obsessed with their Obama phones and SNAP's cards. You can't get these people to work, and even if you could, they wouldn't be able to pass a drug test.
I know, right? My company just had a job fair. I can't tell you how many people heard about it, then said to me, "I was thinking about going, but do you know if they drug test?"
I have never in my life had to ask or even think about whether or not a prospective employer drug-tests, much less decided against applying because they did.
My brother in law is a dedicated freight driver. His income exceeds $75k per year....You make a lot of claims without backing them up, pretty much every post. Show there are good paying jobs waiting to be filled. Link?
Allow me:
6 industries that can’t find workers fast enough
By Catey Hill
Published: Dec 20, 2014 12:11 p.m. ET
6 industries that can’t find workers fast enough
Employers can't find enough skilled labor to fill jobs
Hundreds of thousands of U.S. high-tech factory jobs are not filled because employers can't find qualified people
Employers can't find enough skilled labor to fill jobs
ATA: ‘Driver Shortage’ Likely To Reach 48,000 By The End of The Year
OCT 7 • NEWS • 896 VIEWS • 14 COMMENTS ON ATA: ‘DRIVER SHORTAGE’ LIKELY TO REACH 48,000 BY THE END OF THE YEAR
ATA: ‘Driver Shortage’ Likely To Reach 48,000 By The End of The Year
By Catey Hill
Published: Dec 20, 2014 12:11 p.m. ET
Yes you keep going on about drivers. But what we already determined is that they are a bad area to go into. First you have to pay for training. Wages in trucking are going down, not up. Impossible for many with families. Very questionable safety....
You are so full of shit. OTR and Regional drivers can make six figures. Independent O/O's twice that.
So what if a person has to pay for their training?. Have you a problem with funding one's own education? Or are you in the "free tuition" camp.....The one that lives in a fantasy world of "gimme my free shit"....
You don't even have to pay for the training. There are companies that will hire you, train you, and get you your CDL. Yes, they pay less to start with, but hey, not a bad trade-off for no initial training cost outlay.
Liberals don't want to trouble themselves with training. They want to work at Walmart sweeping floors for what they consider a livable wage.
This is America, and in America, people shouldn't have to go out to find a good job. The good jobs should come knocking at your door.......you know, like those CEO jobs.
Brainless posted earlier that government has nothing to do with this issue.He's arguing just to argue....Note how none of this has anything to do with a few whiners who want to be grossly overpaid to do menial tasks.Still trying to figure out your malfunction here. If the public has decided the direction of the company where's the problem?Your ceos shouldn't have gone public and sold lots of stocks I guess.
And when they're not, use it as an excuse to get or stay on a government program.
I reminded the empty headed one that these whiners are attempting to compel government to create mandates to give them what they feel entitled to.
It's a difficult argument because conservatives are blessed with more logic than liberals. It's difficult for them to understand logic.
For instance, in an earlier debate, Brainwave and others stated that Wal-Mart put people on welfare. How can Walmart do that? They haven't done it to me!! But this is what I'm talking about: you can't explain that to them. You can't get through that people are responsible for their own plight in life--not Walmart. They simply can't grasp the concept that people end up at Walmart for making bad choices in life. They believe Walmart made bad choices for them. People are not responsible for their choices, so it's Walmart's duty to compensate those who chose failure.
People don't kill people, guns kill people. Again, logic dictates that guns can't do such a thing. You need somebody to get a gun and kill people. Their second argument of course is that if we make it harder on good people to buy guns, the bad guys won't be able to get them. How can anybody but a liberal follow logic like that????
No...And who's fault is that?Most feel white Republican dudes are bad people? That's not what the elections showed.
Elections with really poor turnout?
It doesn't matter if the elections were 50,000 or 50 million. The point is what the majority thinks.
Yes it does. Did a majority even vote?
Beats me. But you can't claim is shows what the majority thinks if it was not a majority who voted.
My brother in law is a dedicated freight driver. His income exceeds $75k per year....Allow me:
6 industries that can’t find workers fast enough
By Catey Hill
Published: Dec 20, 2014 12:11 p.m. ET
6 industries that can’t find workers fast enough
Employers can't find enough skilled labor to fill jobs
Hundreds of thousands of U.S. high-tech factory jobs are not filled because employers can't find qualified people
Employers can't find enough skilled labor to fill jobs
ATA: ‘Driver Shortage’ Likely To Reach 48,000 By The End of The Year
OCT 7 • NEWS • 896 VIEWS • 14 COMMENTS ON ATA: ‘DRIVER SHORTAGE’ LIKELY TO REACH 48,000 BY THE END OF THE YEAR
ATA: ‘Driver Shortage’ Likely To Reach 48,000 By The End of The Year
By Catey Hill
Published: Dec 20, 2014 12:11 p.m. ET
Yes you keep going on about drivers. But what we already determined is that they are a bad area to go into. First you have to pay for training. Wages in trucking are going down, not up. Impossible for many with families. Very questionable safety....
You are so full of shit. OTR and Regional drivers can make six figures. Independent O/O's twice that.
So what if a person has to pay for their training?. Have you a problem with funding one's own education? Or are you in the "free tuition" camp.....The one that lives in a fantasy world of "gimme my free shit"....
You don't even have to pay for the training. There are companies that will hire you, train you, and get you your CDL. Yes, they pay less to start with, but hey, not a bad trade-off for no initial training cost outlay.
Liberals don't want to trouble themselves with training. They want to work at Walmart sweeping floors for what they consider a livable wage.
This is America, and in America, people shouldn't have to go out to find a good job. The good jobs should come knocking at your door.......you know, like those CEO jobs.
Or better yet, just pay them to sit home and breathe in and out in front of "Oprah", just because they're such special snowflakes.
What incredibly important profession combines horrible hours, bad pay, and a poor lifestyle? Truck driving. This is a job that destroys so many lives that it could soon become unsustainable. Here's why.
Why truck driving is one of the deadliest jobs in America
Fast food kills way more.What incredibly important profession combines horrible hours, bad pay, and a poor lifestyle? Truck driving. This is a job that destroys so many lives that it could soon become unsustainable. Here's why.
Why truck driving is one of the deadliest jobs in America
I have noticed a disconnect when it comes to deserving high paying jobs. The real world expects a prospective employee to demonstrate competency in order to get paid a high salary. The leftists seem to think that's unfair....You keep chanting, "Wages are stagnant", like it's some talisman that excuses anything. We're talking about minimum wage, which is stagnant because those jobs aren't worth more, and because there's no shortage of people who can and will do them for what they pay right now. If someone is sitting around in one of those jobs much longer than they should, expecting it to someday become a well-paying career, that's HIS problem, not the employer's.
There are better jobs out there that don't have enough people to fill them, and they do pay better. Those people lagging in MW jobs could apply for them, if they bothered to become qualified for them. They don't, and that's not anyone's problem but theirs.
You make a lot of claims without backing them up, pretty much every post. Show there are good paying jobs waiting to be filled. Link?
Allow me:
6 industries that can’t find workers fast enough
By Catey Hill
Published: Dec 20, 2014 12:11 p.m. ET
6 industries that can’t find workers fast enough
Employers can't find enough skilled labor to fill jobs
Hundreds of thousands of U.S. high-tech factory jobs are not filled because employers can't find qualified people
Employers can't find enough skilled labor to fill jobs
ATA: ‘Driver Shortage’ Likely To Reach 48,000 By The End of The Year
OCT 7 • NEWS • 896 VIEWS • 14 COMMENTS ON ATA: ‘DRIVER SHORTAGE’ LIKELY TO REACH 48,000 BY THE END OF THE YEAR
ATA: ‘Driver Shortage’ Likely To Reach 48,000 By The End of The Year
By Catey Hill
Published: Dec 20, 2014 12:11 p.m. ET
Yes you keep going on about drivers. But what we already determined is that they are a bad area to go into. First you have to pay for training. Wages in trucking are going down, not up. Impossible for many with families. Very questionable safety....
See? Excuses. "If I have to put out effort to do it, then it's too much. You should just GIVE me what I want without my having to do anything!"
Brainless posted earlier that government has nothing to do with this issue.He's arguing just to argue....Note how none of this has anything to do with a few whiners who want to be grossly overpaid to do menial tasks.Still trying to figure out your malfunction here. If the public has decided the direction of the company where's the problem?
And when they're not, use it as an excuse to get or stay on a government program.
I reminded the empty headed one that these whiners are attempting to compel government to create mandates to give them what they feel entitled to.
It's a difficult argument because conservatives are blessed with more logic than liberals. It's difficult for them to understand logic.
For instance, in an earlier debate, Brainwave and others stated that Wal-Mart put people on welfare. How can Walmart do that? They haven't done it to me!! But this is what I'm talking about: you can't explain that to them. You can't get through that people are responsible for their own plight in life--not Walmart. They simply can't grasp the concept that people end up at Walmart for making bad choices in life. They believe Walmart made bad choices for them. People are not responsible for their choices, so it's Walmart's duty to compensate those who chose failure.
People don't kill people, guns kill people. Again, logic dictates that guns can't do such a thing. You need somebody to get a gun and kill people. Their second argument of course is that if we make it harder on good people to buy guns, the bad guys won't be able to get them. How can anybody but a liberal follow logic like that????
I personally like the assumption implicit in "WalMart puts its employees on welfare" that those people weren't on welfare before they went to work at WalMart, and wouldn't continue to be on welfare if WalMart canned them.
WalMart didn't put them on welfare. They put themselves on it, and WalMart was generous enough to offer them an opportunity to start working their way off of it. And instead of giving WalMart credit for doing this share of lessening the drain on the nation's social programs, they get excoriated for not singlehandedly fixing these assholes' lives for them for very little return value.
He's just pissed off because he's realized all his friends have moved on to nice jobs and homes and soon they will no longer need a 'potato fryer specialist' at work.Only because people like Brain are too dumb to understand not to stick their heads in the deep fryer. Or piss their co-workers off enough to push it in.Fast food kills way more.What incredibly important profession combines horrible hours, bad pay, and a poor lifestyle? Truck driving. This is a job that destroys so many lives that it could soon become unsustainable. Here's why.
Why truck driving is one of the deadliest jobs in America
Brainless posted earlier that government has nothing to do with this issue.He's arguing just to argue....Note how none of this has anything to do with a few whiners who want to be grossly overpaid to do menial tasks.
And when they're not, use it as an excuse to get or stay on a government program.
I reminded the empty headed one that these whiners are attempting to compel government to create mandates to give them what they feel entitled to.
It's a difficult argument because conservatives are blessed with more logic than liberals. It's difficult for them to understand logic.
For instance, in an earlier debate, Brainwave and others stated that Wal-Mart put people on welfare. How can Walmart do that? They haven't done it to me!! But this is what I'm talking about: you can't explain that to them. You can't get through that people are responsible for their own plight in life--not Walmart. They simply can't grasp the concept that people end up at Walmart for making bad choices in life. They believe Walmart made bad choices for them. People are not responsible for their choices, so it's Walmart's duty to compensate those who chose failure.
People don't kill people, guns kill people. Again, logic dictates that guns can't do such a thing. You need somebody to get a gun and kill people. Their second argument of course is that if we make it harder on good people to buy guns, the bad guys won't be able to get them. How can anybody but a liberal follow logic like that????
I personally like the assumption implicit in "WalMart puts its employees on welfare" that those people weren't on welfare before they went to work at WalMart, and wouldn't continue to be on welfare if WalMart canned them.
WalMart didn't put them on welfare. They put themselves on it, and WalMart was generous enough to offer them an opportunity to start working their way off of it. And instead of giving WalMart credit for doing this share of lessening the drain on the nation's social programs, they get excoriated for not singlehandedly fixing these assholes' lives for them for very little return value.
Well what do you expect? Brain is an expert on stock investments and the trucking industry as well. He seems to know so much more about these things than we do.
I used to do deliveries for two companies. Each had an employee that unloaded my truck that got a job at Wal-Mart part-time for extra money. They both told me of opportunities to move up at their part-time job, and were considering a full-time position because the healthcare benefits were better than their current full-time job.
They both eventually left their companies to pursue those Walmart opportunities. Walmart does offer the best opportunity to move up if you're aggressive enough like those employees I mentioned. I don't know what the one did, but the other moved up to part-time assistant manager, and they wanted him full time as the manager. Apparently he accepted because when I went there one day for a delivery, he was long gone.
There's no way I would want to drive trucks with all the idiots on the road, I'm afraid I would turn into Mad Max.Brainless posted earlier that government has nothing to do with this issue.And when they're not, use it as an excuse to get or stay on a government program.
I reminded the empty headed one that these whiners are attempting to compel government to create mandates to give them what they feel entitled to.
It's a difficult argument because conservatives are blessed with more logic than liberals. It's difficult for them to understand logic.
For instance, in an earlier debate, Brainwave and others stated that Wal-Mart put people on welfare. How can Walmart do that? They haven't done it to me!! But this is what I'm talking about: you can't explain that to them. You can't get through that people are responsible for their own plight in life--not Walmart. They simply can't grasp the concept that people end up at Walmart for making bad choices in life. They believe Walmart made bad choices for them. People are not responsible for their choices, so it's Walmart's duty to compensate those who chose failure.
People don't kill people, guns kill people. Again, logic dictates that guns can't do such a thing. You need somebody to get a gun and kill people. Their second argument of course is that if we make it harder on good people to buy guns, the bad guys won't be able to get them. How can anybody but a liberal follow logic like that????
I personally like the assumption implicit in "WalMart puts its employees on welfare" that those people weren't on welfare before they went to work at WalMart, and wouldn't continue to be on welfare if WalMart canned them.
WalMart didn't put them on welfare. They put themselves on it, and WalMart was generous enough to offer them an opportunity to start working their way off of it. And instead of giving WalMart credit for doing this share of lessening the drain on the nation's social programs, they get excoriated for not singlehandedly fixing these assholes' lives for them for very little return value.
Well what do you expect? Brain is an expert on stock investments and the trucking industry as well. He seems to know so much more about these things than we do.
I used to do deliveries for two companies. Each had an employee that unloaded my truck that got a job at Wal-Mart part-time for extra money. They both told me of opportunities to move up at their part-time job, and were considering a full-time position because the healthcare benefits were better than their current full-time job.
They both eventually left their companies to pursue those Walmart opportunities. Walmart does offer the best opportunity to move up if you're aggressive enough like those employees I mentioned. I don't know what the one did, but the other moved up to part-time assistant manager, and they wanted him full time as the manager. Apparently he accepted because when I went there one day for a delivery, he was long gone.
I used to be a truck driver, and WalMart runs were among my favorites (yes, they have their own company drivers, but as I'm sure you know, they also contract out with individual firms to get complete coverage). Their warehouse nodes were always clean, in good repair, and staffed by efficient, knowledgeable people with easy, comprehensible systems. And back before the DOT cracked down on driver work hours and some companies *cough*KMart*cough* were too cheap to pay the insurance for lumpers to unload the trucks, WalMart always had them. And never once did I drive up to a WalMart store, take one look at their loading dock area, and say, "Are you fucking kidding me right now? I'm a truck driver, not a miracle worker."
There's no way I would want to drive trucks with all the idiots on the road, I'm afraid I would turn into Mad Max.Brainless posted earlier that government has nothing to do with this issue.
I reminded the empty headed one that these whiners are attempting to compel government to create mandates to give them what they feel entitled to.
It's a difficult argument because conservatives are blessed with more logic than liberals. It's difficult for them to understand logic.
For instance, in an earlier debate, Brainwave and others stated that Wal-Mart put people on welfare. How can Walmart do that? They haven't done it to me!! But this is what I'm talking about: you can't explain that to them. You can't get through that people are responsible for their own plight in life--not Walmart. They simply can't grasp the concept that people end up at Walmart for making bad choices in life. They believe Walmart made bad choices for them. People are not responsible for their choices, so it's Walmart's duty to compensate those who chose failure.
People don't kill people, guns kill people. Again, logic dictates that guns can't do such a thing. You need somebody to get a gun and kill people. Their second argument of course is that if we make it harder on good people to buy guns, the bad guys won't be able to get them. How can anybody but a liberal follow logic like that????
I personally like the assumption implicit in "WalMart puts its employees on welfare" that those people weren't on welfare before they went to work at WalMart, and wouldn't continue to be on welfare if WalMart canned them.
WalMart didn't put them on welfare. They put themselves on it, and WalMart was generous enough to offer them an opportunity to start working their way off of it. And instead of giving WalMart credit for doing this share of lessening the drain on the nation's social programs, they get excoriated for not singlehandedly fixing these assholes' lives for them for very little return value.
Well what do you expect? Brain is an expert on stock investments and the trucking industry as well. He seems to know so much more about these things than we do.
I used to do deliveries for two companies. Each had an employee that unloaded my truck that got a job at Wal-Mart part-time for extra money. They both told me of opportunities to move up at their part-time job, and were considering a full-time position because the healthcare benefits were better than their current full-time job.
They both eventually left their companies to pursue those Walmart opportunities. Walmart does offer the best opportunity to move up if you're aggressive enough like those employees I mentioned. I don't know what the one did, but the other moved up to part-time assistant manager, and they wanted him full time as the manager. Apparently he accepted because when I went there one day for a delivery, he was long gone.
I used to be a truck driver, and WalMart runs were among my favorites (yes, they have their own company drivers, but as I'm sure you know, they also contract out with individual firms to get complete coverage). Their warehouse nodes were always clean, in good repair, and staffed by efficient, knowledgeable people with easy, comprehensible systems. And back before the DOT cracked down on driver work hours and some companies *cough*KMart*cough* were too cheap to pay the insurance for lumpers to unload the trucks, WalMart always had them. And never once did I drive up to a WalMart store, take one look at their loading dock area, and say, "Are you fucking kidding me right now? I'm a truck driver, not a miracle worker."
You mean ceos give them to themswlves because they own the board.
No, I don't mean anything of the sort, because unlike you, I don't say stupid shit.
Well to believe ceo pay has gone up the way it has just because of the market you'd have to be a moron. That seems to be the case with you.
Well, to believe that I'm responsible for the argument you want to oppose about markets when I never said a word about markets, you'd have to be a moron . . . which we all KNOW is the case with you.
What I said was, "CEO pay is decided by the people who are paying the money, so it's no one else's business." See if you can wrap both your functioning brain cells around the concept of "none of your business".
So even you know it is a rigged game. Well that is good. But it is the business of every share holder. So that is actually a whole lot of people for most companies. Thanks for playing, you lose again.
Blah blah blah "whatever you say, I'm going to interpret as exactly what I want to hear, no matter how unrelated".
There is not enough NoDoze in the world to keep your posts from boring me to sleep.
Ah, so it isn't your business after all.Still trying to figure out your malfunction here. If the public has decided the direction of the company where's the problem?Your ceos shouldn't have gone public and sold lots of stocks I guess.
It is the board and ceo. The public is not making these decisions, sorry.
Yes every stock holder is an owner. Being an owner makes it their business. It's very simple really, why is it so hard for you to understand? I knew you were slow, but this is ridiculous.
No, dipshit. Every stockholder does NOT have a stake in the decisions of the Board, other than to decide to keep the stock vs. sell the stock. That would be why they sell voting stock AND non-voting stock.
You don't like the Board's decision? Sell. Do NOT sit around insisting that it's YOUR place to override that decision with the help of Daddy Government.
No. It isn't. Stock holders may only vote or sell their shares. There is no stock holder that has any say in day to day operations. For obvious reasons there is a wall of separation between the two. If you are unhappy, your only recourse is to sell your shares. Other than that, you are pissing into the wind.Ceos actually get paid more for worse performance. That's ok though right?
The Highest-Paid CEOs Are The Worst Performers, New Study Says
Again, unless you're paying them, it's none of your business.
I own stocks in those companies so yes it is my business.
Again, I am an owner. It is my business.
Why do I think that, at most, you own ten common shares of Microsoft or something and think that makes you Bill Gates?
That's how I start my day!There's no way I would want to drive trucks with all the idiots on the road, I'm afraid I would turn into Mad Max.
Trust me, it's not easy. I try to go with a "love thy neighbor" attitude when I get up for work in the morning. By the time I leave work, I want everybody on the road to drop dead.
There's no way I would want to drive trucks with all the idiots on the road, I'm afraid I would turn into Mad Max.Brainless posted earlier that government has nothing to do with this issue.
I reminded the empty headed one that these whiners are attempting to compel government to create mandates to give them what they feel entitled to.
It's a difficult argument because conservatives are blessed with more logic than liberals. It's difficult for them to understand logic.
For instance, in an earlier debate, Brainwave and others stated that Wal-Mart put people on welfare. How can Walmart do that? They haven't done it to me!! But this is what I'm talking about: you can't explain that to them. You can't get through that people are responsible for their own plight in life--not Walmart. They simply can't grasp the concept that people end up at Walmart for making bad choices in life. They believe Walmart made bad choices for them. People are not responsible for their choices, so it's Walmart's duty to compensate those who chose failure.
People don't kill people, guns kill people. Again, logic dictates that guns can't do such a thing. You need somebody to get a gun and kill people. Their second argument of course is that if we make it harder on good people to buy guns, the bad guys won't be able to get them. How can anybody but a liberal follow logic like that????
I personally like the assumption implicit in "WalMart puts its employees on welfare" that those people weren't on welfare before they went to work at WalMart, and wouldn't continue to be on welfare if WalMart canned them.
WalMart didn't put them on welfare. They put themselves on it, and WalMart was generous enough to offer them an opportunity to start working their way off of it. And instead of giving WalMart credit for doing this share of lessening the drain on the nation's social programs, they get excoriated for not singlehandedly fixing these assholes' lives for them for very little return value.
Well what do you expect? Brain is an expert on stock investments and the trucking industry as well. He seems to know so much more about these things than we do.
I used to do deliveries for two companies. Each had an employee that unloaded my truck that got a job at Wal-Mart part-time for extra money. They both told me of opportunities to move up at their part-time job, and were considering a full-time position because the healthcare benefits were better than their current full-time job.
They both eventually left their companies to pursue those Walmart opportunities. Walmart does offer the best opportunity to move up if you're aggressive enough like those employees I mentioned. I don't know what the one did, but the other moved up to part-time assistant manager, and they wanted him full time as the manager. Apparently he accepted because when I went there one day for a delivery, he was long gone.
I used to be a truck driver, and WalMart runs were among my favorites (yes, they have their own company drivers, but as I'm sure you know, they also contract out with individual firms to get complete coverage). Their warehouse nodes were always clean, in good repair, and staffed by efficient, knowledgeable people with easy, comprehensible systems. And back before the DOT cracked down on driver work hours and some companies *cough*KMart*cough* were too cheap to pay the insurance for lumpers to unload the trucks, WalMart always had them. And never once did I drive up to a WalMart store, take one look at their loading dock area, and say, "Are you fucking kidding me right now? I'm a truck driver, not a miracle worker."
No, I don't mean anything of the sort, because unlike you, I don't say stupid shit.
Well to believe ceo pay has gone up the way it has just because of the market you'd have to be a moron. That seems to be the case with you.
Well, to believe that I'm responsible for the argument you want to oppose about markets when I never said a word about markets, you'd have to be a moron . . . which we all KNOW is the case with you.
What I said was, "CEO pay is decided by the people who are paying the money, so it's no one else's business." See if you can wrap both your functioning brain cells around the concept of "none of your business".
So even you know it is a rigged game. Well that is good. But it is the business of every share holder. So that is actually a whole lot of people for most companies. Thanks for playing, you lose again.
Blah blah blah "whatever you say, I'm going to interpret as exactly what I want to hear, no matter how unrelated".
There is not enough NoDoze in the world to keep your posts from boring me to sleep.
Yet you keep responding and ignoring the facts.
