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.
:Therein lies the basic conundrum of doing business with the world's largest retailer. By selling a gallon of kosher dills for less than most grocers sell a quart, Wal-Mart may have provided a ser-vice for its customers. But what did it do for Vlasic? The pickle maker had spent decades convincing customers that they should pay a premium for its brand. Now Wal-Mart was practically giving them away. And the fevered buying spree that resulted distorted every aspect of Vlasic's operations, from farm field to factory to financial statement.
Indeed, as Vlasic discovered, the real story of Wal-Mart, the story that never gets told, is the story of the pressure the biggest retailer relentlessly applies to its suppliers in the name of bringing us "every day low prices." It's the story of what that pressure does to the companies Wal-Mart does business with, to U.S. manufacturing, and to the economy as a whole. That story can be found floating in a gallon jar of pickles at Wal-Mart.
I'm done w/ you rw, Wally World- fluffers. (I'll be back in a few hours). You know the OP lost the stomach for her Wally World thread when even she abandons it.
Dr. Thomas Sowell, in Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One, challenges individuals to analyze not only their short term (Stage One) impact but to also think ahead to their long term (Stage Two, Three, etc) impact.
Politicians do not think beyond Stage One because they will be praised (and elected) for the short term benefits but will not be held accountable much later when the long term consequences appear.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Epic fail PC...
The D.C. council just destroyed Thomas Sowell's theory. They totally ignored "Thinking Beyond Stage One". The EASY, short term decision would be to cower to Malmart. The council made a "Stage Two, Three, etc" decision.
In an era when suppliers, governments, and municipalities have all been scared into acquiescing to Walmart because of its size and job-creating potential, it also took tremendous courage. D.C.'s council members knew how many jobs a Walmart could bring to town and how good creating those jobs would look on their political record. But they also knew that despite Walmart's white-washing PR campaign, those jobs were likely to be barely subsistence-wage, terribly depressing, and offset with jobs lost at local businesses. D.C. didn't prohibit Walmart from setting up stores in the district (and there will still be three, even after the abandoned ones), but it did put in place what amounted to a fairly expensive penalty for doing so.
Not all jobs are created equal. But in politics, they often get equal weight. It would have been easy for D.C.'s city council to bow to Walmart's threat, repeal or soften the minimum-wage hike, and brag to constituents about their job-creating success. Instead, they made a brave, values-driven decision about what kinds of jobs they wanted in D.C. and set policy accordingly. That's the right of every municipality, and it's an impulse that should be exercised much more often.
more
Good post. Wally Worls also demands rock bottom prices from their suppliers just to put thier product on the shelves so rw'ers & libertarians don't have to pay the full cost up-front. Google- "externalities". The externalities here are suppliers are either telling Wally World to fuck off or cutting corners to make up the diff. meaning lower wages & lower quality in their product.
The Wal-Mart You Don't Know | Fast Company | Business + Innovation
The blatant double-standard is a hoot to witness
So much for the argument that LOCAL CONTROL is something right wingers believe in.
They, no less that the so called left wing, believe in local control only when they object to Federal control.
And, PC, who has never in her life had any issues with dishonesty. Being dishonest, that is. No problem at all.
The most agregious statement in your post was the one that stated child labor abuse was a thing of the past. Proof positive that you do not look at what information is available. Here is one of hundreds of hits on child labor abuses by us corporations:
"Multinational Corporations have been shipping jobs overseas where people, including children, are forced to work as much as fifteen hours per day, seven days a week, for as little as $1.61 per month, some suffering torture, beatings, and verbal abuse. It appears that our government and corporations may have been guilty of looking the other way all in the name of profits."
Are Multinational Corporations exploiting child and adult "labor camps" for corporate profits? - William Brighenti, CPA - Berlin, CT Patch
If you want to confine it to the US, which I am sure you do, take a look at the food industry, and wonder why farming gets a pass on child labor laws. And why tens of thousands of mostly mexican children toil in our farm fields in order to allow you to save a couple of bucks a month.
Yeah, PC, there is really nothing you will not lie about, is there?
libertarians need a place to buy thier solar panels, water purifiers, & windmills (as TRUE libertarians live off-the-grid donchaknow
Are you supply-side or demand-side?
Your posts make me think you're fence sitting. Seriously.
The inflation metrics. Inflation is an increase in the general price. You can't claim inflation on asset classes or sectors of the economy. That's not inflation.
I agree more with the supply-side, but I do not generally propose solutions such as lower income taxes and capital gains. I propose an economic environment where an economic structure between capital and consumer goods are freely coordinated based on the laws of supply and demand, without the constraints of overbearing government regulation.
So I'm a partial subscriber to the Supply-Side and Free Market economies, but this usually pegs me among the ranks of Austrians and this is sort of fair. Free Market Economies is often compared to Austrian Economics, but the two are nothing alike. Austrian Economics is a set of claims about how markets, the economy, and how the social world works. It's a frame work for economic analysis and not a set of policy conclusions. From the roles of exchange, to the price system and the profit mechanism and the business cycle, I generally agree with Austrians. Also Austrians and Supply-Sides generally agree that it is production that is the key to economic prosperity and consumption is merely a product of what has been produced.
Also I try to keep an framework of independent consciousness, so I also subscribe to a philosophical theory of Objectivism.
So that is four general schools of thought I subscribe to, and they are all different in many ways but they're the same in some. Hope this clears something up at least.
And another profound economic argument by PC. Best she can do, unfortunately.And, PC, who has never in her life had any issues with dishonesty. Being dishonest, that is. No problem at all.
The most agregious statement in your post was the one that stated child labor abuse was a thing of the past. Proof positive that you do not look at what information is available. Here is one of hundreds of hits on child labor abuses by us corporations:
"Multinational Corporations have been shipping jobs overseas where people, including children, are forced to work as much as fifteen hours per day, seven days a week, for as little as $1.61 per month, some suffering torture, beatings, and verbal abuse. It appears that our government and corporations may have been guilty of looking the other way all in the name of profits."
Are Multinational Corporations exploiting child and adult "labor camps" for corporate profits? - William Brighenti, CPA - Berlin, CT Patch
If you want to confine it to the US, which I am sure you do, take a look at the food industry, and wonder why farming gets a pass on child labor laws. And why tens of thousands of mostly mexican children toil in our farm fields in order to allow you to save a couple of bucks a month.
Yeah, PC, there is really nothing you will not lie about, is there?
I never lie......
Proof?
Sure:
You're a slimy dirt-eating worm.
And another profound economic argument by PC. Best she can do, unfortunately.And, PC, who has never in her life had any issues with dishonesty. Being dishonest, that is. No problem at all.
The most agregious statement in your post was the one that stated child labor abuse was a thing of the past. Proof positive that you do not look at what information is available. Here is one of hundreds of hits on child labor abuses by us corporations:
"Multinational Corporations have been shipping jobs overseas where people, including children, are forced to work as much as fifteen hours per day, seven days a week, for as little as $1.61 per month, some suffering torture, beatings, and verbal abuse. It appears that our government and corporations may have been guilty of looking the other way all in the name of profits."
Are Multinational Corporations exploiting child and adult "labor camps" for corporate profits? - William Brighenti, CPA - Berlin, CT Patch
If you want to confine it to the US, which I am sure you do, take a look at the food industry, and wonder why farming gets a pass on child labor laws. And why tens of thousands of mostly mexican children toil in our farm fields in order to allow you to save a couple of bucks a month.
Yeah, PC, there is really nothing you will not lie about, is there?
I never lie......
Proof?
Sure:
You're a slimy dirt-eating worm.
And PC, as usual, can think of no economic argument that is not pure dogma. So, she simply posts childish attacks. She is so good at childish attacks. She needs an audience of children.And another profound economic argument by PC. Best she can do, unfortunately.I never lie......
Proof?
Sure:
You're a slimy dirt-eating worm.
Actually, the best would be some fisherman using you as bait.
And PC, as usual, can think of no economic argument that is not pure dogma. So, she simply posts childish attacks. She is so good at childish attacks. She needs an audience of children.And another profound economic argument by PC. Best she can do, unfortunately.
Actually, the best would be some fisherman using you as bait.
That would assume you are a rational human being. So far, I have seen no evidence. Posting dogma is not economic theory, though I suspect you may believe it to be.And PC, as usual, can think of no economic argument that is not pure dogma. So, she simply posts childish attacks. She is so good at childish attacks. She needs an audience of children.Actually, the best would be some fisherman using you as bait.
Be serious.
Why would a rational human being discuss economic theory with a worm???
That would assume you are a rational human being. So far, I have seen no evidence. Posting dogma is not economic theory, though I suspect you may believe it to be.And PC, as usual, can think of no economic argument that is not pure dogma. So, she simply posts childish attacks. She is so good at childish attacks. She needs an audience of children.
Be serious.
Why would a rational human being discuss economic theory with a worm???
And the beat goes on. You never discuss economics, PC. You simply insult. But then, what is that old saying?? Consider the source. I do, and I take your insults as a compliment. Simply shows you incapable of discussion or argument.
Right. Why would I, PC. Why would everyone??That would assume you are a rational human being. So far, I have seen no evidence. Posting dogma is not economic theory, though I suspect you may believe it to be.Be serious.
Why would a rational human being discuss economic theory with a worm???
And the beat goes on. You never discuss economics, PC. You simply insult. But then, what is that old saying?? Consider the source. I do, and I take your insults as a compliment. Simply shows you incapable of discussion or argument.
"You never discuss economics, PC. You simply insult."
Gee, why would you say that?
If what you don't know can't hurt you, you're invulnerable.
I agree more with the supply-side, but I do not generally propose solutions such as lower income taxes and capital gains. I propose an economic environment where an economic structure between capital and consumer goods are freely coordinated based on the laws of supply and demand, without the constraints of overbearing government regulation.
So I'm a partial subscriber to the Supply-Side and Free Market economies, but this usually pegs me among the ranks of Austrians and this is sort of fair. Free Market Economies is often compared to Austrian Economics, but the two are nothing alike. Austrian Economics is a set of claims about how markets, the economy, and how the social world works. It's a frame work for economic analysis and not a set of policy conclusions. From the roles of exchange, to the price system and the profit mechanism and the business cycle, I generally agree with Austrians. Also Austrians and Supply-Sides generally agree that it is production that is the key to economic prosperity and consumption is merely a product of what has been produced.
Also I try to keep an framework of independent consciousness, so I also subscribe to a philosophical theory of Objectivism.
So that is four general schools of thought I subscribe to, and they are all different in many ways but they're the same in some. Hope this clears something up at least.
There, I fixed that for you... Not my favorite band, but they have some good stuff.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fy7FzXLin7o]Depeche Mode - Heaven - YouTube[/ame]
Free Market Economies is often compared to Austrian Economics, but the two are nothing alike. .
What does the number of workers on minimum wage have to do with his post?
Kimura merely asserted that, in a competitive economy with a manifestly powerful capitalist class, the supply-side will dictate public affairs. Not that most people were paid minimum wage, or that the state should be the determinant of all wages.
I never said that.
However, by keeping our minimum wage at pathetically depressed levels, it doesnt improve employment prospects in the least. As a matter of fact, it makes it matters worse, since it takes demand out of the economy and lowers the prospects of someone on unemployment benefits or other types of assistance from reentering the workforce.
Wages are source of demand and an input cost. For example, if we reduce wages and demand falls, it has more of a negative impact than any cost savings derived from paying workers less wages. If we look at todays pathetic minimum wage, its not even in the universe of what could be deemed a living wage. Just sayin
Well, that would be your opinion. And when you are looking at an opinion, it is always necessary to look at the intent and personality of the person making the accusations. So, you make accusations. And you are an idiot. So, your accusations, your opinion, is one of those truly who cares kind of events. Though calling it an event is really giving it much more import than it has.What does the number of workers on minimum wage have to do with his post?
Everything, Minimum wage is not intended to support a family of 10. It is an entry wage the prior to that invasion of illegals was primarily earned by Teens.
Kimura merely asserted that, in a competitive economy with a manifestly powerful capitalist class, the supply-side will dictate public affairs. Not that most people were paid minimum wage, or that the state should be the determinant of all wages.
What Kimura asserts in regard to economics is irrelevant, I've long since discovered he has no knowledge of the subject.
Public affairs are dictated by our corrupt elected leaders and our even more corrupt public employee unions.
