WalMart Donation Bins Out Again This Year - Cheap Bastards

[Carla_Danger]

Again anyone with half a brain does not care if a full time employee gets some gov't assistance. I think the problem is only with those that refuse to wok. I have zero problem with a full time worker getting gov't assistance. Nor do others.

Wrong. I have a HUGE problem with it.

A full time employee should NOT qualify for government assistance. It's shameful.

Note - I am talking about a single person with no dependents, if you are making $8 an hour and have 3 or 4 kids to support, I believe you should be charged with neglect and have your kids taken from you.

You had me until the last sentence.

It's neglect to have children you can't provide the basics for Carla. You're not doing those children any good by allowing them to be neglected, and the parents of those children should be charged with a crime.

In this country, it's not a crime to have children. Plus, there are a lot of single parents who live with their parents, to make ends meet.

Actually, your last sentence is just wrong on so many levels, I don't have the strength right this minute. But if your goal is to save taxpayers, taking children from poor families is not going to do it.

Oh, I'm quite literally suggesting that it SHOULD be a crime to have children you can't afford to raise properly.

I honestly don't care if you approve of that idea or not. It is insane that we have a system that ENCOURAGES morons to produce more morons that they can't afford to raise.

Well, you can wish in one hand and shit in the other, it ain't ever going to happen.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Wrong. I have a HUGE problem with it.

A full time employee should NOT qualify for government assistance. It's shameful.

Note - I am talking about a single person with no dependents, if you are making $8 an hour and have 3 or 4 kids to support, I believe you should be charged with neglect and have your kids taken from you.

You had me until the last sentence.

It's neglect to have children you can't provide the basics for Carla. You're not doing those children any good by allowing them to be neglected, and the parents of those children should be charged with a crime.

In this country, it's not a crime to have children. Plus, there are a lot of single parents who live with their parents, to make ends meet.

Actually, your last sentence is just wrong on so many levels, I don't have the strength right this minute. But if your goal is to save taxpayers, taking children from poor families is not going to do it.

Oh, I'm quite literally suggesting that it SHOULD be a crime to have children you can't afford to raise properly.

I honestly don't care if you approve of that idea or not. It is insane that we have a system that ENCOURAGES morons to produce more morons that they can't afford to raise.

Well, you can wish in one hand and shit in the other, it ain't ever going to happen.

and the fact that you take joy in that is why no one takes you serious carla. You are an intellectual lightweight who has no business in any serious conversation. All you do is parrot liberal ideas and wag your finger at people without any independent thought.

 

[Carla_Danger]

You had me until the last sentence.

It's neglect to have children you can't provide the basics for Carla. You're not doing those children any good by allowing them to be neglected, and the parents of those children should be charged with a crime.

In this country, it's not a crime to have children. Plus, there are a lot of single parents who live with their parents, to make ends meet.

Actually, your last sentence is just wrong on so many levels, I don't have the strength right this minute. But if your goal is to save taxpayers, taking children from poor families is not going to do it.

Oh, I'm quite literally suggesting that it SHOULD be a crime to have children you can't afford to raise properly.

I honestly don't care if you approve of that idea or not. It is insane that we have a system that ENCOURAGES morons to produce more morons that they can't afford to raise.

Well, you can wish in one hand and shit in the other, it ain't ever going to happen.

and the fact that you take joy in that is why no one takes you serious carla. You are an intellectual lightweight who has no business in any serious conversation. All you do is parrot liberal ideas and wag your finger at people without any independent thought.

So tell me Einstein, what happens if you have a good paying job, the company goes overseas, and the only company hiring in small town USA is Walmart? And what's the wage limit for it being a crime to have children?

I'm sorry, I'm having trouble typing that with a straight face. You are ridiculous.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

It's neglect to have children you can't provide the basics for Carla. You're not doing those children any good by allowing them to be neglected, and the parents of those children should be charged with a crime.

In this country, it's not a crime to have children. Plus, there are a lot of single parents who live with their parents, to make ends meet.

Actually, your last sentence is just wrong on so many levels, I don't have the strength right this minute. But if your goal is to save taxpayers, taking children from poor families is not going to do it.

Oh, I'm quite literally suggesting that it SHOULD be a crime to have children you can't afford to raise properly.

I honestly don't care if you approve of that idea or not. It is insane that we have a system that ENCOURAGES morons to produce more morons that they can't afford to raise.

Well, you can wish in one hand and shit in the other, it ain't ever going to happen.

and the fact that you take joy in that is why no one takes you serious carla. You are an intellectual lightweight who has no business in any serious conversation. All you do is parrot liberal ideas and wag your finger at people without any independent thought.

So tell me Einstein, what happens if you have a good paying job, the company goes overseas, and the only company hiring in small town USA is Walmart? And what's the wage limit for it being a crime to have children?

I'm sorry, I'm having trouble typing that with a straight face. You are ridiculous.

Who said anything about a dollar limit?
And guess what? Folks who have a good paying job, don't generally have trouble finding another one if they lose it because they are in demand.

You ignore facts.

MOST people who are at Wal Mart earning $9 an hour are NOT there because they had a good paying job at your mythical business that moved overseas.

No, most of them are there because of choices they have made. They have chosen to be limited to a Wal Mart type job, and there's nothing wrong with that, but on $18K a year you can't afford kids. PERIOD.

As I said Carla, you are not to be taken seriously, but you aren't alone. I'd say 90% of the posters on this board only see the facts they WANT to see.

It's quite sad.

 

[Dot Com]

Cheap, cheap bastards.... THey are number 6- 9 of the top 10 wealthiest Americans according to Forbes. And yet they are not too proud to beg from their own employees. Shame.....

They are worth $140,000,000,000 and they won't pay a living wage.



#6 Christy Walton & family $41.1 B $38 B 59 Jackson, WY Wal-Mart
#7 Jim Walton $40 B $36 B 66 Bentonville, AR Wal-Mart
#8 Alice Walton $38.5 B $34.9 B 65 Fort Worth, TX Wal-Mart
#9 S. Robson Walton $38.5 B $34.8 B 70 Bentonville, AR

makes me:

 

[Wake]

If people lived within their means and weren't foolish with their money then our society as a whole would benefit. Yeah, I'd like to buy this or that at $3,000, but it'd be better to hold onto the money instead. If you can't easily afford yourself, chances are it might not be wise to go ahead and start a family. Some people spend their money freely and don't have the prudence to keep a portion of it socked away.

How do you sock money away if you're single and trying to live on $18,000 a year.

Easy. You save it.

Decide what you're willing to pay for rent and where. Take one or more jobs if you must like I do. Don't simply be content to float, but ascend, using your job experience to get better employment. Stay out of trouble with the law. Don't get yourself into debt sans accidents, and work hard to claw and drag yourself out of that pit. Buy your own food at a good value, or change your habits entirely. I skip supper, because it's not necessary. Don't spend hundreds or thousands on fast food or junk food, and don't waste what you pay for. Try applying minimalism into your life, and work yourself down to owning 100, 70, 50, maybe even 30 possessions. Hold your money for taxes, insurance, rent, future car problems, etc. Check to see what local colleges have to offer: I bought into a CNA program and am now comfortably employed in home care and a hospital, and am now saving for nursing school while accruing experience. I used my negotiation skills to work my rent down to only $200 a month; it's not the Taj Mahal but I worked with people to help me succeed in life. There are so many things you can do to save money. Now I'm already investing and researching various passive income streams. If you're single and savvy you can do it.

 

[Dot Com]

Doesn't change the power structure simply by getting used to your chains Wake

 

[depotoo]

How the fuck do you idiots even know that is for real??? What a bunch of gullible retards.

If you doubt the credibility of this report you could easily have researched it via Google.

Go here: Walmart Store Holding Thanksgiving Charity Food Drive -- For Its Own Employees - Forbes

It's rather clear you don't wish to believe this report but the important question is, why!

A dept head held it for 2 employees, single income that have taken an extended leave.

 

[Wake]

Doesn't change the power structure simply by getting used to your chains Wake

Which society doesn't have a power structure?

 

[Dot Com]

Doesn't change the power structure simply by getting used to your chains Wake

Which society doesn't have a power structure?

people need to awaken from their slumber and march on Washington saying no to the security industrial complex, the gerrymandering to the benefit of the two-parties, the prison industrial complex etc...

Then the people could call a Constitutional convention to address those ills

 

[Wake]

Doesn't change the power structure simply by getting used to your chains Wake

Which society doesn't have a power structure?

people need to awaken from their slumber and march on Washington saying no to the security industrial complex, the gerrymandering to the benefit of the two-parties, the prison industrial complex etc...

Then the people could call a Constitutional convention to address those ills

And...?

You new society will cease using a power structure, or just change the reigns again?

Maybe the problem is within the genetic make-up of every human being.

Even animals have their hierarchies, systems, and exchanges.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Doesn't change the power structure simply by getting used to your chains Wake

Which society doesn't have a power structure?

people need to awaken from their slumber and march on Washington saying no to the security industrial complex, the gerrymandering to the benefit of the two-parties, the prison industrial complex etc...

Then the people could call a Constitutional convention to address those ills

And...?

You new society will cease using a power structure, or just change the reigns again?

Maybe the problem is within the genetic make-up of every human being.

Even animals have their hierarchies, systems, and exchanges.

Come on Wake a company with $200B in gross profits a year shouldn't have employees who are in need of food.

Let's be fair.

 

[Wake]

Come on Wake a company with $200B in gross profits a year shouldn't have employees who are in need of food.

Let's be fair.

Some people make poor choices. Others are unfortunate.

I know of a single nurse with seven children. I have an unemployed cousin with three.

We CNAs work far harder than Wal-Mart employees and earn less money. We are the front-line soldiers in the health care profession. I'm not complaining. I tighten my belt and keep walking up that long, harrowing hill.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Come on Wake a company with $200B in gross profits a year shouldn't have employees who are in need of food.

Let's be fair.

Some people make poor choices. Others are unfortunate.

I know of a single nurse with seven children. I have an unemployed cousin with three.

We CNAs work far harder than Wal-Mart employees and earn less money. We are the front-line soldiers in the health care profession. I'm not complaining. I tighten my belt and keep walking up that long, harrowing hill.

Okay, if you have been reading what I have been writing you would know that I am ONLY concerned with a single employee earning enough to remain off welfare.

I don't feel sorry for the person who has 7 kids while working at McDonalds, that person is an idiot who made terrible choices.

 

[Wake]

Okay, if you have been reading what I have been writing you would know that I am ONLY concerned with a single employee earning enough to remain off welfare.

Then I am exactly the kind of person you are concerned about.

At this rate I've paid off $8,000 in school loans off of $12,000, and have $5,000 resting in the bank and about $1,600 in investments. For 16 months I made only $9.75 an hour, with an ever-changing work schedule. With yesterday being my 3rd day in the better-paying/more-stable job, I'm climbing my way out of the pit and reaching new heights.

I haven't used welfare, but I did use Unemployment insurance for about 3 weeks during a rough patch in work when a lot of clients died/cancelled in a short period of time.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Okay, if you have been reading what I have been writing you would know that I am ONLY concerned with a single employee earning enough to remain off welfare.

Then I am exactly the kind of person you are concerned about.

At this rate I've paid off $8,000 in school loans off of $12,000, and have $5,000 resting in the bank and about $1,600 in investments. For 16 months I made only $9.75 an hour, with an ever-changing work schedule. With yesterday being my 3rd day in the better-paying/more-stable job, I'm climbing my way out of the pit and reaching new heights.

I haven't used welfare, but I did use Unemployment insurance for about 3 weeks during a rough patch in work when a lot of clients died/cancelled in a short period of time.

And in my opinion you shouldn't have had to struggle that hard.

And let's just be honest; most people aren't going to make wise decisions.

So, our choices boil down to three.

1. Require employers to pay a wage which would keep all but the most irresponsible off of welfare

2. Keep things the way they are

3. Cancel all welfare and just let people starve

Now, sir. I paid $106K in federal income tax last year, so I certainly believe I should have some input as to how that money is spent, and to be frank it doesn't sit well with me that some of it goes to support employees of people who are earning HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of dollars per year.

Actually I read an interesting article awhile back (I've searched the internet for a copy with no luck and can't remember the source) anyway this economist showed that it would be cheaper in the long run to shut down ALL entitlement programs, just shutter them (including SS and medicaire/medicaid) and simpy pay every adult US citizen $30K a year; and the ones who want more, could work. Those who were satisfied with $30K a year, wouldn't have to.

He provided all the math, and correctly pointed out that doing so would not cause inflation because the money is already in circulation; so you wouldn't see prices rising and such.

What you would see though is a natural rise in wages because only those who actually wanted to work would be seeking jobs and they would be damned picky about which jobs they took.

That is an idea worth exploring; BUT the border situation and anchor baby law would need to be addressed first.

 

[Wake]

I believe he that does not work shall not eat.

Life should be a struggle. I want to feel alive.

If you pay people $30K a year, without requiring them to work, you will spoil them. Placate them. If you think entitlement mentality is bad now, you're offering people 30 grand a year while not having to ever work. The fallout should that system hit a snag would be ugly.

There are, what, over 6 million adults in America? How many of those millions would jump on this? How many foreigners would swell into America in order to get paid $30K a year without lifting a finger?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

I believe he that does not work shall not eat.

Life should be a struggle. I want to feel alive.

If you pay people $30K a year, without requiring them to work, you will spoil them. Placate them. If you think entitlement mentality is bad now, you're offering people 30 grand a year while not having to ever work. The fallout should that system hit a snag would be ugly.

There are, what, over 6 million adults in America? How many of those millions would jump on this? How many foreigners would swell into America in order to get paid $30K a year without lifting a finger?

You're missing the point entirely Wake. We are ALREADY spending WELL OVER $30K a year per adult on such entitlements. It would save , if I remember correctly, $20K per adult per year.

 

[Wake]

You're missing the point entirely Wake. We are ALREADY spending WELL OVER $30K a year per adult on such entitlements. It would save , if I remember correctly, $20K per adult per year.

I feel, with food stamps and the like, our government is far too permissive.

If money is to be given for food, it should be used for the necessary staples. Beans, rice, chicken, oatmeal, basic fruits and vegetables, and otherwise every inexpensive yet healthy and nutritious foodstuff out there. If money is allotted towards non-food items, it should only be used for basic necessities.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

You're missing the point entirely Wake. We are ALREADY spending WELL OVER $30K a year per adult on such entitlements. It would save , if I remember correctly, $20K per adult per year.

I feel, with food stamps and the like, our government is far too permissive.

If money is to be given for food, it should be used for the necessary staples. Beans, rice, chicken, oatmeal, basic fruits and vegetables, and otherwise every inexpensive yet healthy and nutritious foodstuff out there. If money is allotted towards non-food items, it should only be used for basic necessities.

But that is your emotion speaking, not your intellect. Hence your statement "I feel...")

The cold hard fact is that financial security should be the government's main concern. Even if it means a truly unique approach.

And yes, probably the lower rungs of Americans would spend every dime of their $30K a year, but that's the beauty of it, who cares? Let them spend it, that just means more money in local economies instead of being tied up in some bureaucrats pockets in DC.