Walmart on Welfare: We support their employees so they don't have to.

[Andylusion]

Surely you do not know what we are talking about because the government has built the infrastructure and researched the technologies which private companies are making massive profits off of today. Internet? GPS? The next frontier in private investment in space NASA has been at the forefront of space since the beginning. Hybrid and electric vehicles and renewable technologies? The government has had a big hand in that, agriculture and farming? The government has been involved in that for years and no not every heavily regulated gsociety turns into an authoritarian regime. Most developed nations of the world are much more heavily regulated than ours, Great Britian, France, Japan, Australia, Denmark, Norway, Sweden. People in these countries are much higher educated and have much less poverty and violence than here and none of them are communists, fascists, dictatorships or authoritarian.

Correction.... the Military funded those projects. You know, the military that you people on the left constantly demand is cut, to fund entitlements.

Yes, the military has funded some research that became commercially viable products. I agree.

Out of the billions of products and services in the world, I highly doubt that a significant amount is government funded.

While I do know that government has given billions to the rich and wealthy, supposedly for Hybrid and EV development, I have yet to find any evidence that anything substantive came from it.

However, this is yet another case of unintended consequences. This is something I just do not understand why you people on the left, don't grasp.

Any time you make a system to hand out money, people are going to change how they act, to get that money. There was a story locally about a lady that had $70 thousand more than the maximum amount of money, to qualify for Medicaid Nursing home. So... she bought a $70 Cadillac, and then she qualified. Medicaid recipients are allowed one vehicle that is not counted.

In Hawaii, they introduced a program that any child not covered by health insurance, would be covered by the state for free. Suddenly thousands of people canceled their insurance coverage for their kids, and thus qualified for the gov-insurance. The system started going broke, and was revoked in months.

If I setup a table outside, with a sign "free food to anyone with a yellow shirt, and pink flip flops" within a day... there would be people lined up around my condo, wearing yellow shirts and pink flip flops.

People change how they live, to get the free goodies. It happens all the time. Same is true of government funded research.

Case and point, I worked at a local company, near where I live here in Hilliard Ohio, called Vanner Inc.

I worked at this company back in 2008. Now this is a great company to work for. At the company meetings, they bring out everyone, and post all the numbers, all the information, go through all their projects, pretty much everything. So in 2008, we had the company meeting, one of the projects they announced was a power system for hybrid buses. Our customers were asking for this product, so the demand already existed.

So 2009 rolls around, and the company meeting comes up, and the CEO lists all the projects they have, on the screen the Hybrid Bus power system project... was shelved.

Now as you might imagine, I am not afraid to question my employer, even if I'm the newest employee making $10/hr in the back. I stood up and ask what's up with that project?

As it turns out, they decided to put the project on hold, and instead write grants to get Federal Funding.

Something changed between mid 2008, and mid 2009, namely Obama won the election, and started talking about 'green energy research'. So the company, the CEO and executives, decided not to spend their own money to fund R&D for a product they would have built anyway, but rather spend nothing, and have the Tax Payers foot the bill.

See, again, like I said before, you people on the left... are the party of the rich and wealthy. Here a company was going to build the product anyway. But because you leftist Democrats were offering money... they didn't pay for it, and instead soaked the tax payers.

But this is true all over the economy. Hundreds of corporations do this, especially the big ones. They all change how they operate, to collect more government cash.

And I'll be completely honest, I don't blame them. *YOU* are the people giving out the money. This is *YOUR* fault. Them taking advantage of the stupidity you push, is not their fault.

In fact, if I had found out that I qualify for food stamps when I was looking up that information a few days back, I would have applied for food stamps. Absolutely I would. I'll take anything you are stupid enough to give me! If you want to send money to my paypal account right now, by all means. aekle*[email protected]. Send me every dollar you want! I'll take your cash.

 

[Andylusion]

It is funny you attempt to characterize me as supporting the rich, our current president wants to end subsidies for oil and gas companies the Replublican right does, our current president wants to end the offshoring of capital by changing the laws the Republican right does not. Bush was so far to the right its not even funny and plenty of people will tell you the policies of his administration supported the rich and powerful. I am a spoiled american because I support policies which benefit the middle and lower classes, I do not think so. I am not spoiled at all I wokr just like everyone else yet I come from a lower to middle class family and know all too well hardships that have been faced by my family and others. I suppose you think supporting the healthcare law which attempts to control costs and gives tens of millions more people access to healthcare is supporting the rich as well? Yes, fact, people did have more buying power in the past and had to work less for the same level of equality and yes the rich were taxed at a much igher rate.

No, you do support the rich. It's not a characterize. It's a fact.

Further, we don't subsidize oil companies. We don't. We subsidize Ethanol. Money is stolen (taxed) from my pay check, and the government writes a check to Ethanol companies. That is a subsidy.

We don't not subsidize oil companies. It's a lie. You show me in the Federal budget where an oil company collects money FROM the government. Because I can show you budget items where we subsidize oil.

And your policies do not benefit the lower and middle class. You just posted that you support a policy that will eliminate half a million jobs of exactly those people.

As for Health Care....

I cite myself as an example. Back in 2004, I got an insurance policy for $67 a month. It was a catastrophic coverage policy.

Today... all those policies are gone. The lowest priced policy I could find was $250. So... today I have no insurance. I'll just pay the $97 tax fine.

You sure haven't benefited me.

You really are a piece of shit. You know that? First you claim you only make 12k a year and earn the EIC.
Now you proudly proclaim you can't even provide your own health insurance,

What the fuck is wrong with you? Moocher.

Your fault dude. Not mine. When I could get an insurance policy for $67 a month, I did.

You killed that. Now the cheapest plan, is $250 a month.

Your fault. I didn't vote for policies that destroyed my insurance. *YOU* did.

 

[Andylusion]

As I said, he was a close personal friend, I know EXACTLY how much he made the year previous out of that store, unless he lied to me.. Yes we're a small town, but he's the only McD in about a 40 square mile area and is located next to the only Wal Mart Super Center in the same area. The guy is doing alright.



And I didn't say he did anything wrong per se, just unethical, and I didn't like it. So did I go to the government and complain? No, I registered my complaint at his cash register.

You seem to be making the government out to be this evil ent

As has been stated, Costco pays much more than a minimum wage and makes a substantial profit.

Absolutely! 100% Costco is what Wal-Mart could be if it really cared.

Government is terrible. By definition, their job infringes on freedom. Government is supposed to be limited to protecting freedom, not stealing my pay check, while arrogant leftist say it's for my benefit.

No, Walmart could not be costco. They are not the same. They do not operate the same.

Costco, has less than 200K employees world wide. If Walmart was to change how they operated to that of Costco, 2 million people would lose their jobs. Yes, the 200K left would be paid more.

 

[Andylusion]

Walmart pays what the market dictates they pay. It's that simple. If people won't work for the wages they offer they'll have a shortage of workers and will be forced to pay more. They are not obligated to pay anyone what you think they should be paid. That is how the free market works, Komrade.

WalMart pays what they can get away with. It's that simple.

Then why doesn't Costco pay what they can get away with? Fail.

Because Costco's managers are kind hearted Democrat types that care about their workers.
Nah, I'm kidding. Costco has a different model that allows them to pay more to attract better workers which is part of their business plan. If they didnt, their shareholders would be screaming at the low returns the company makes.

Costco is in the same business as Wal-Mart and is a much better company to work for than Wal-Mart, stop trying to justify Wal-Marts low pay and crap hours for most of its workers.

You are ignorant.

 

[Andylusion]

Walmart pays what the market dictates they pay. It's that simple. If people won't work for the wages they offer they'll have a shortage of workers and will be forced to pay more. They are not obligated to pay anyone what you think they should be paid. That is how the free market works, Komrade.

WalMart pays what they can get away with. It's that simple.

Then why doesn't Costco pay what they can get away with? Fail.

Because Costco's managers are kind hearted Democrat types that care about their workers.
Nah, I'm kidding. Costco has a different model that allows them to pay more to attract better workers which is part of their business plan. If they didnt, their shareholders would be screaming at the low returns the company makes.

Costco is in the same business as Wal-Mart and is a much better company to work for than Wal-Mart, stop trying to justify Wal-Marts low pay and crap hours for most of its workers.

They are not the same business at all.
This is the problem with stupid people: two things that look sort of the same are the same. They perceive the similarities but not the differences.
In fact Costco charges a fee to its members and sells higher end goods and caters to a wealthier crowd.

You must think I do not know anything about Costco, I have had relatives who have worked for Costco for years and the workplace there is ten times better than Wal- Mart and you can make a wage that people can live off of. Costco sells in bulk a little different than Wal-Mart but you can get most of the exact same goods at Costco as you can at Wal-Mart, all your cereals all your meats all yourveggies, everything and yes you pay a membership fee for Costco but its worth it its savings are as good as if not better than Wal-Mart you just buy your items in bulk is the difference.

We don't 'think' you don't know anything about Costco.... your post... PROVES you don't know anything about Costco.

You simply don't. It's not a theory, you just proved it as fact.

Why Can t Walmart Be More Like Costco - The Daily Beast

There are HUNDREDS of clear differences between the two stores.

Revenue per Walmart employee.... $211K
Revenue per Costco employee.... $620K.

The amount of money brought into the company per employee is THREE TIMES higher for Costco. You think the employee can be paid more, they their labor brings in 3X the value? Duh... of course.

From the article:

A typical Costco store has around 4,000 SKUs, most of which are stacked on pallets so that you can be your own stockboy. A Walmart has 140,000 SKUs, which have to be tediously sorted, replaced on shelves, reordered, delivered, and so forth.​

Instead of 4,000 high value products, Walmart has thousands of low value products. You don't go to Costco, and buy 1 lb of beef, for $5.99 a pound.
Pat LaFrieda Beef Brisket Burger Patties 8 oz. 36-pack
No, you buy the 8 oz 36-pack, for $160.

Huge difference in labor value between the two.

I'm a tea drinker. You go to Walmart and look at the Tea isle, and there is 30 plus different kinds of tea you can buy. You go to Costco, and there is .... 4. Lipton, and 3 version of "mighty leaf" tea. That's it. And the Mighty Leaf tea is $8 a box, and holds 15 packs.

They are not the same. You don't know what your talking about.

From the article:

You know how your husband hates going to Costco because you have to stand in line for twenty minutes? That's another part of Costco's low labor costs. Except for its very busiest days, like Black Friday, Walmart keeps more registers open, which speeds your passage through line, but also wastes expensive worker time standing at the checkout and waiting for people to come by.​

I often go to Walmart for lunch. Cheap subs there. If I had to wait even 10 minutes to check out, I would not go there. Lunch break isn't that long. But of course, all those check out lines, cost money. All those cashiers waiting at the register for someone to come by... that's money.

Again, the average Costco cashier is running non-stop from beginning to the end of their shift. They normally have a line of people. Labor value higher = wage for labor higher.

You simply don't know what you are talking about. The two stores are completely different.

From the article:

Costco's higher revenues are also a function of their demographic. Costco shoppers have an average income of $85,000--not surprising, because Costco tends to locate itself in affluent suburbs. Walmart shoppers are what the firm calls "value driven shoppers" which is to say, there's not a lot of spare money lying around the house, just waiting for an opportunity to buy a 6-lb wheel of Camembert.​

Costco targets more wealthy customers. Walmart is the value driven store. Which is just another way of saying the cheaper customers.

Again, if Walmart adopted Costco's business model, they would lose their customers. The customers would start going to other Walmart type stores, and Walmart would shrink to the size of Costco, losing 2 Million jobs.

You just don't know what you are talking about. Completely ignorant of the differences.

 

[Andylusion]

The Republican Party does have a real problem. Most in the Party feel compelled to defend everything Corporations do. It's become a knee-jerk defense for them. American Workers don't feel the Party cares about them anymore. It's forsaken them in favor of Corporations like Walmart. I'm not completely sure why so many feel compelled to defend them. I think it's that they feel it's about defending Capitalism or something. But you can be a Capitalist and defend workers.

Doing the right thing goes beyond Republican/Democrat, or whether you call yourself a Conservative or Liberal. The Republican Party needs to do better in supporting American Workers. Otherwise they risk losing the Worker-Vote for good.

No, we just know your policies ruin the economy. They always have, and always will. You saying we're defending corporations, is just you not haven't a valid argument.

 

[Andylusion]

Look, Walmart does represent the 'Evil Corporation' perfectly. They pay their employees like shite and treat them like shite. They fund and support the Slave Labor in Asia that produces the vast majority of products on their shelves. They also brutally crushed the little guy. And they enjoy absurd Tax Breaks as well.

There are reasons why Walmart can offer products at such low prices. I just pointed out a few of em. So it is fair to criticize them, and even despise them. The Republican Party needs to get passed the knee-jerk defense of Corporations approach. They need to help the workers out a bit more. Most People see the Party as the Party that doesn't giving a rat's balls about American Workers. And i have to say, they have earned that reputation. All you have to do is scroll through this thread and observe so many of em vigorously defending Walmart. It's actually pretty sad.

of course you could equally say the Democratic party needs to get over its knee jerk reaction of defending , for instance, every minority no matter what they have done. But for purposes of THIS thread, your point stands

Democrats automatically attack anyone who is successful. It's just as much a knee jerk reaction to successful people.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The Republican Party does have a real problem. Most in the Party feel compelled to defend everything Corporations do. It's become a knee-jerk defense for them. American Workers don't feel the Party cares about them anymore. It's forsaken them in favor of Corporations like Walmart. I'm not completely sure why so many feel compelled to defend them. I think it's that they feel it's about defending Capitalism or something. But you can be a Capitalist and defend workers.

Doing the right thing goes beyond Republican/Democrat, or whether you call yourself a Conservative or Liberal. The Republican Party needs to do better in supporting American Workers. Otherwise they risk losing the Worker-Vote for good.

No, we just know your policies ruin the economy. They always have, and always will. You saying we're defending corporations, is just you not haven't a valid argument.

You just know? Examples please. Saying they always have and always will, coming from anyone is laughable; coming from you hysterically funny.

Stagflation was a term invented for the economic situation after Richard Nixon was in office for five years; The Great Depression began and continued after and during Republican Administrations; and, the Great Recession in the second term of GWB (2007-2009). Each economic crisis was handed off to Democratic Administrations (Carter, FDR and Obama).

People like you blame the D's as result of brain washing, and a limited understanding of history.

 

[Progressivedude2014]

No not really, the government is a legitimate avenue for people to communicate their needs to. Whether it is a road with potholes or a school that needs to be renovated or increasing the size of a police force or the tax rate or ensuring fair business practices and labor laws are followed. The government exists to serve the people and the community, from what you had said to me about what happened in your community this guy really screwed some people over and I do feel the government absolutely has a right to get involved when people are being screwed over. Don't put words in my mouth and tell me what redress means to you. These people were financially wronged by this person and the government is in every aspect of our lives and they serve us and represent us and YES they have a say!

Wow the illogic is stunning.
Government provides some services like roads, schools, and police protection. So when those are substandard it makes sense to go to the provider and complain.
A job in private industry is not provided by the government. Ergo you dont go to the government when you feel wronged. You can go to court, but that's not really the same thing.
People generally arent being screwed over. Except by government. And then where do you go?

That is not "illogic", the government is involved in every aspect of our lives,including the economy, from the fed to trade agreements to tax rates or tax zones to fees and licenses and regulations. The government is already heavily involved in the economy and I do feel is obligated to make sure people are not being wronged or screwed over.

Congrats... you just provided the exact justification that every brutal tyrant has used.

This right here, is exactly why every leftist government ends up a brutal authoritarian regime.

Yes, government is involved heavily in our economy, and it is exactly those areas it is most heavily involved in, that have the most problems.

We have the most heavily regulated and controlled banking system in the world. Anyone remember 2008?

We have massive controls in health care, and health insurance. No problems there, right?

Want to know some of the least regulated aspects of our economy? Technology. Man, of only we had better computers, and cell phones, and high speed internet access. We clearly need government to step in and fix all those problems. Practically no one can get a smart phone, or computers with 4 Terabyte hard drives, 3x Core 3.1 Ghz computers, with 50 fps 2300x2100 3d-rendering graphics card, and 24" flat screens... you know... like the one I'm sitting in front of.

We clearly need government to help this struggling depressed high tech industry.... and fix it.... like health care and banking.... right?

Surely you do not know what we are talking about because the government has built the infrastructure and researched the technologies which private companies are making massive profits off of today. Internet? GPS? The next frontier in private investment in space NASA has been at the forefront of space since the beginning. Hybrid and electric vehicles and renewable technologies? The government has had a big hand in that, agriculture and farming? The government has been involved in that for years and no not every heavily regulated gsociety turns into an authoritarian regime. Most developed nations of the world are much more heavily regulated than ours, Great Britian, France, Japan, Australia, Denmark, Norway, Sweden. People in these countries are much higher educated and have much less poverty and violence than here and none of them are communists, fascists, dictatorships or authoritarian.

Geezus are you an idiot. I didnt think people this uninformed existed.
The internet would be nothing without Cisco, Netscape, Google, Microsoft, and all the other companies that built both hardware and software to run it.
Agriculture? It would be nothng without Monsanto, International Harvester, and all the other companies that have done R&D to make stuff for it.
Hybrids, ditto. In all these cases the government contribution was both minimal and incredibly expensive.
Government cannot run a whore house profitably. They cannot develop a website that even today will tell you how many people bought your product. Government is the most failed "innovator" ever. Recall the "synfuels" project of Jimmy Carter, amid an army of others.
Government does not "invest". Government spends money it coerces from other, more productive entities.

Other countries like the ones you named live in an economically stagnant society. In Sweden, their biggest 10 companies were all formed around WW1. In the US probably one was.

I don't need the name calling, fuckin bitch and yes government investment in the economy does build the infrastructure for private markets and does spur economic growth.

Here is a link to an article which says exactly that.

Nine Government Investments That Made Us an Industrial economic Leader.
Nine Government Investments That Made Us an Industrial Economic Leader William Lazonick

 

[The Rabbi]

No not really, the government is a legitimate avenue for people to communicate their needs to. Whether it is a road with potholes or a school that needs to be renovated or increasing the size of a police force or the tax rate or ensuring fair business practices and labor laws are followed. The government exists to serve the people and the community, from what you had said to me about what happened in your community this guy really screwed some people over and I do feel the government absolutely has a right to get involved when people are being screwed over. Don't put words in my mouth and tell me what redress means to you. These people were financially wronged by this person and the government is in every aspect of our lives and they serve us and represent us and YES they have a say!

Wow the illogic is stunning.
Government provides some services like roads, schools, and police protection. So when those are substandard it makes sense to go to the provider and complain.
A job in private industry is not provided by the government. Ergo you dont go to the government when you feel wronged. You can go to court, but that's not really the same thing.
People generally arent being screwed over. Except by government. And then where do you go?

That is not "illogic", the government is involved in every aspect of our lives,including the economy, from the fed to trade agreements to tax rates or tax zones to fees and licenses and regulations. The government is already heavily involved in the economy and I do feel is obligated to make sure people are not being wronged or screwed over.

Congrats... you just provided the exact justification that every brutal tyrant has used.

This right here, is exactly why every leftist government ends up a brutal authoritarian regime.

Yes, government is involved heavily in our economy, and it is exactly those areas it is most heavily involved in, that have the most problems.

We have the most heavily regulated and controlled banking system in the world. Anyone remember 2008?

We have massive controls in health care, and health insurance. No problems there, right?

Want to know some of the least regulated aspects of our economy? Technology. Man, of only we had better computers, and cell phones, and high speed internet access. We clearly need government to step in and fix all those problems. Practically no one can get a smart phone, or computers with 4 Terabyte hard drives, 3x Core 3.1 Ghz computers, with 50 fps 2300x2100 3d-rendering graphics card, and 24" flat screens... you know... like the one I'm sitting in front of.

We clearly need government to help this struggling depressed high tech industry.... and fix it.... like health care and banking.... right?

Surely you do not know what we are talking about because the government has built the infrastructure and researched the technologies which private companies are making massive profits off of today. Internet? GPS? The next frontier in private investment in space NASA has been at the forefront of space since the beginning. Hybrid and electric vehicles and renewable technologies? The government has had a big hand in that, agriculture and farming? The government has been involved in that for years and no not every heavily regulated gsociety turns into an authoritarian regime. Most developed nations of the world are much more heavily regulated than ours, Great Britian, France, Japan, Australia, Denmark, Norway, Sweden. People in these countries are much higher educated and have much less poverty and violence than here and none of them are communists, fascists, dictatorships or authoritarian.

Geezus are you an idiot. I didnt think people this uninformed existed.
The internet would be nothing without Cisco, Netscape, Google, Microsoft, and all the other companies that built both hardware and software to run it.
Agriculture? It would be nothng without Monsanto, International Harvester, and all the other companies that have done R&D to make stuff for it.
Hybrids, ditto. In all these cases the government contribution was both minimal and incredibly expensive.
Government cannot run a whore house profitably. They cannot develop a website that even today will tell you how many people bought your product. Government is the most failed "innovator" ever. Recall the "synfuels" project of Jimmy Carter, amid an army of others.
Government does not "invest". Government spends money it coerces from other, more productive entities.

Other countries like the ones you named live in an economically stagnant society. In Sweden, their biggest 10 companies were all formed around WW1. In the US probably one was.

I don't need the name calling, fuckin bitch and yes government investment in the economy does build the infrastructure for private markets and does spur economic growth.

Here is a link to an article which says exactly that.

Nine Government Investments That Made Us an Industrial economic Leader.
Nine Government Investments That Made Us an Industrial Economic Leader William Lazonick

No, it actually doesnt say anything like that. And the article itself is full of crap. Just because government once put its hands on something doesnt make the industry a success. Look at synfuels from the Carter era. Or electric cars today. Or solar panels. The government "helped" all those industries but they failed to mature or show much profit.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Republican Party does have a real problem. Most in the Party feel compelled to defend everything Corporations do. It's become a knee-jerk defense for them. American Workers don't feel the Party cares about them anymore. It's forsaken them in favor of Corporations like Walmart. I'm not completely sure why so many feel compelled to defend them. I think it's that they feel it's about defending Capitalism or something. But you can be a Capitalist and defend workers.

Doing the right thing goes beyond Republican/Democrat, or whether you call yourself a Conservative or Liberal. The Republican Party needs to do better in supporting American Workers. Otherwise they risk losing the Worker-Vote for good.

No, we just know your policies ruin the economy. They always have, and always will. You saying we're defending corporations, is just you not haven't a valid argument.

You just know? Examples please. Saying they always have and always will, coming from anyone is laughable; coming from you hysterically funny.

Stagflation was a term invented for the economic situation after Richard Nixon was in office for five years; The Great Depression began and continued after and during Republican Administrations; and, the Great Recession in the second term of GWB (2007-2009). Each economic crisis was handed off to Democratic Administrations (Carter, FDR and Obama).

People like you blame the D's as result of brain washing, and a limited understanding of history.

You're an idiot.
Stagflation came about later. But even so, Nixon pursued policies similar to Democrats today. He created a plethora of agencies, like EPA, and added to regulations. Hs economic policies were disaster, including wage and price controls.
Clinton pursued policies closer to GOP ideals: welfare reform and NAFTA. Yes, he raised taxes towards the end of his term. And we got a recession.
Dem policies are always and everywhere disaster for the country.

 

[Andylusion]

The Republican Party does have a real problem. Most in the Party feel compelled to defend everything Corporations do. It's become a knee-jerk defense for them. American Workers don't feel the Party cares about them anymore. It's forsaken them in favor of Corporations like Walmart. I'm not completely sure why so many feel compelled to defend them. I think it's that they feel it's about defending Capitalism or something. But you can be a Capitalist and defend workers.

Doing the right thing goes beyond Republican/Democrat, or whether you call yourself a Conservative or Liberal. The Republican Party needs to do better in supporting American Workers. Otherwise they risk losing the Worker-Vote for good.

No, we just know your policies ruin the economy. They always have, and always will. You saying we're defending corporations, is just you not haven't a valid argument.

You just know? Examples please. Saying they always have and always will, coming from anyone is laughable; coming from you hysterically funny.

Stagflation was a term invented for the economic situation after Richard Nixon was in office for five years; The Great Depression began and continued after and during Republican Administrations; and, the Great Recession in the second term of GWB (2007-2009). Each economic crisis was handed off to Democratic Administrations (Carter, FDR and Obama).

People like you blame the D's as result of brain washing, and a limited understanding of history.

I just posted a perfect example. In 2006, I had an insurance policy that was $67 a month. I could afford that.

Now... the cheapest plan is $250 a month. I can't afford that, so now I don't have insurance.

Your fault. Not mine. You screwed us over. Not me.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Republican Party does have a real problem. Most in the Party feel compelled to defend everything Corporations do. It's become a knee-jerk defense for them. American Workers don't feel the Party cares about them anymore. It's forsaken them in favor of Corporations like Walmart. I'm not completely sure why so many feel compelled to defend them. I think it's that they feel it's about defending Capitalism or something. But you can be a Capitalist and defend workers.

Doing the right thing goes beyond Republican/Democrat, or whether you call yourself a Conservative or Liberal. The Republican Party needs to do better in supporting American Workers. Otherwise they risk losing the Worker-Vote for good.

No, we just know your policies ruin the economy. They always have, and always will. You saying we're defending corporations, is just you not haven't a valid argument.

You just know? Examples please. Saying they always have and always will, coming from anyone is laughable; coming from you hysterically funny.

Stagflation was a term invented for the economic situation after Richard Nixon was in office for five years; The Great Depression began and continued after and during Republican Administrations; and, the Great Recession in the second term of GWB (2007-2009). Each economic crisis was handed off to Democratic Administrations (Carter, FDR and Obama).

People like you blame the D's as result of brain washing, and a limited understanding of history.

I just posted a perfect example. In 2006, I had an insurance policy that was $67 a month. I could afford that.

Now... the cheapest plan is $250 a month. I can't afford that, so now I don't have insurance.

Your fault. Not mine. You screwed us over. Not me.

Yeah but you're better off now because the old policy was crap insurance. Dont you read the talking points?

 

[Andylusion]

No not really, the government is a legitimate avenue for people to communicate their needs to. Whether it is a road with potholes or a school that needs to be renovated or increasing the size of a police force or the tax rate or ensuring fair business practices and labor laws are followed. The government exists to serve the people and the community, from what you had said to me about what happened in your community this guy really screwed some people over and I do feel the government absolutely has a right to get involved when people are being screwed over. Don't put words in my mouth and tell me what redress means to you. These people were financially wronged by this person and the government is in every aspect of our lives and they serve us and represent us and YES they have a say!

Wow the illogic is stunning.
Government provides some services like roads, schools, and police protection. So when those are substandard it makes sense to go to the provider and complain.
A job in private industry is not provided by the government. Ergo you dont go to the government when you feel wronged. You can go to court, but that's not really the same thing.
People generally arent being screwed over. Except by government. And then where do you go?

That is not "illogic", the government is involved in every aspect of our lives,including the economy, from the fed to trade agreements to tax rates or tax zones to fees and licenses and regulations. The government is already heavily involved in the economy and I do feel is obligated to make sure people are not being wronged or screwed over.

Congrats... you just provided the exact justification that every brutal tyrant has used.

This right here, is exactly why every leftist government ends up a brutal authoritarian regime.

Yes, government is involved heavily in our economy, and it is exactly those areas it is most heavily involved in, that have the most problems.

We have the most heavily regulated and controlled banking system in the world. Anyone remember 2008?

We have massive controls in health care, and health insurance. No problems there, right?

Want to know some of the least regulated aspects of our economy? Technology. Man, of only we had better computers, and cell phones, and high speed internet access. We clearly need government to step in and fix all those problems. Practically no one can get a smart phone, or computers with 4 Terabyte hard drives, 3x Core 3.1 Ghz computers, with 50 fps 2300x2100 3d-rendering graphics card, and 24" flat screens... you know... like the one I'm sitting in front of.

We clearly need government to help this struggling depressed high tech industry.... and fix it.... like health care and banking.... right?

Surely you do not know what we are talking about because the government has built the infrastructure and researched the technologies which private companies are making massive profits off of today. Internet? GPS? The next frontier in private investment in space NASA has been at the forefront of space since the beginning. Hybrid and electric vehicles and renewable technologies? The government has had a big hand in that, agriculture and farming? The government has been involved in that for years and no not every heavily regulated gsociety turns into an authoritarian regime. Most developed nations of the world are much more heavily regulated than ours, Great Britian, France, Japan, Australia, Denmark, Norway, Sweden. People in these countries are much higher educated and have much less poverty and violence than here and none of them are communists, fascists, dictatorships or authoritarian.

Geezus are you an idiot. I didnt think people this uninformed existed.
The internet would be nothing without Cisco, Netscape, Google, Microsoft, and all the other companies that built both hardware and software to run it.
Agriculture? It would be nothng without Monsanto, International Harvester, and all the other companies that have done R&D to make stuff for it.
Hybrids, ditto. In all these cases the government contribution was both minimal and incredibly expensive.
Government cannot run a whore house profitably. They cannot develop a website that even today will tell you how many people bought your product. Government is the most failed "innovator" ever. Recall the "synfuels" project of Jimmy Carter, amid an army of others.
Government does not "invest". Government spends money it coerces from other, more productive entities.

Other countries like the ones you named live in an economically stagnant society. In Sweden, their biggest 10 companies were all formed around WW1. In the US probably one was.

I don't need the name calling, fuckin bitch and yes government investment in the economy does build the infrastructure for private markets and does spur economic growth.

Here is a link to an article which says exactly that.

Nine Government Investments That Made Us an Industrial economic Leader.
Nine Government Investments That Made Us an Industrial Economic Leader William Lazonick

Yet another ignorant article. I could answer each of those... but let's stay on the topic in question. Good night... you people just find something somewhere that you already agree with, don't fact check it, don't consider any other side to the argument, and then post the link and say "dur... I have proof!".

I found three errors in that article, and all I did was skim it. Good night...

 

[Andylusion]

The Republican Party does have a real problem. Most in the Party feel compelled to defend everything Corporations do. It's become a knee-jerk defense for them. American Workers don't feel the Party cares about them anymore. It's forsaken them in favor of Corporations like Walmart. I'm not completely sure why so many feel compelled to defend them. I think it's that they feel it's about defending Capitalism or something. But you can be a Capitalist and defend workers.

Doing the right thing goes beyond Republican/Democrat, or whether you call yourself a Conservative or Liberal. The Republican Party needs to do better in supporting American Workers. Otherwise they risk losing the Worker-Vote for good.

No, we just know your policies ruin the economy. They always have, and always will. You saying we're defending corporations, is just you not haven't a valid argument.

You just know? Examples please. Saying they always have and always will, coming from anyone is laughable; coming from you hysterically funny.

Stagflation was a term invented for the economic situation after Richard Nixon was in office for five years; The Great Depression began and continued after and during Republican Administrations; and, the Great Recession in the second term of GWB (2007-2009). Each economic crisis was handed off to Democratic Administrations (Carter, FDR and Obama).

People like you blame the D's as result of brain washing, and a limited understanding of history.

I just posted a perfect example. In 2006, I had an insurance policy that was $67 a month. I could afford that.

Now... the cheapest plan is $250 a month. I can't afford that, so now I don't have insurance.

Your fault. Not mine. You screwed us over. Not me.

Yeah but you're better off now because the old policy was crap insurance. Dont you read the talking points?

Oh oh ! Right my bad.... my bad... I was much worse off with low coverage insurance. Now that I have no-coverage insurance... I'm set!

As unbelievable as it sounds... I actually had a guy at work, say exactly what you said, and he meant it. He actually said that. I'm better off now, because that insurance was bad. Now, the insurance I can't afford... is better, so I'm better off. You should have seen it....

"Yeah.... but.... I still can't afford it"

And he stopped... and just stared at me with this blank look... o.o

And then did this topic change "well there are other people and the economy is recovering so...."

I laughed so hard..... and he still had this blank o.o look on his face... that was the end of the conversation. Leftists are just so amazingly dense. It's breath taking. I can't believe I used to be a leftist when I was young. I must have been unbelievably dumb when I was younger.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Look, Walmart does represent the 'Evil Corporation' perfectly. They pay their employees like shite and treat them like shite. They fund and support the Slave Labor in Asia that produces the vast majority of products on their shelves. They also brutally crushed the little guy. And they enjoy absurd Tax Breaks as well.

There are reasons why Walmart can offer products at such low prices. I just pointed out a few of em. So it is fair to criticize them, and even despise them. The Republican Party needs to get passed the knee-jerk defense of Corporations approach. They need to help the workers out a bit more. Most People see the Party as the Party that doesn't giving a rat's balls about American Workers. And i have to say, they have earned that reputation. All you have to do is scroll through this thread and observe so many of em vigorously defending Walmart. It's actually pretty sad.

of course you could equally say the Democratic party needs to get over its knee jerk reaction of defending , for instance, every minority no matter what they have done. But for purposes of THIS thread, your point stands

Democrats automatically attack anyone who is successful. It's just as much a knee jerk reaction to successful people.

Oh goody, another pissing contest.

 

[Progressivedude2014]

No not really, the government is a legitimate avenue for people to communicate their needs to. Whether it is a road with potholes or a school that needs to be renovated or increasing the size of a police force or the tax rate or ensuring fair business practices and labor laws are followed. The government exists to serve the people and the community, from what you had said to me about what happened in your community this guy really screwed some people over and I do feel the government absolutely has a right to get involved when people are being screwed over. Don't put words in my mouth and tell me what redress means to you. These people were financially wronged by this person and the government is in every aspect of our lives and they serve us and represent us and YES they have a say!

Wow the illogic is stunning.
Government provides some services like roads, schools, and police protection. So when those are substandard it makes sense to go to the provider and complain.
A job in private industry is not provided by the government. Ergo you dont go to the government when you feel wronged. You can go to court, but that's not really the same thing.
People generally arent being screwed over. Except by government. And then where do you go?

That is not "illogic", the government is involved in every aspect of our lives,including the economy, from the fed to trade agreements to tax rates or tax zones to fees and licenses and regulations. The government is already heavily involved in the economy and I do feel is obligated to make sure people are not being wronged or screwed over.

Congrats... you just provided the exact justification that every brutal tyrant has used.

This right here, is exactly why every leftist government ends up a brutal authoritarian regime.

Yes, government is involved heavily in our economy, and it is exactly those areas it is most heavily involved in, that have the most problems.

We have the most heavily regulated and controlled banking system in the world. Anyone remember 2008?

We have massive controls in health care, and health insurance. No problems there, right?

Want to know some of the least regulated aspects of our economy? Technology. Man, of only we had better computers, and cell phones, and high speed internet access. We clearly need government to step in and fix all those problems. Practically no one can get a smart phone, or computers with 4 Terabyte hard drives, 3x Core 3.1 Ghz computers, with 50 fps 2300x2100 3d-rendering graphics card, and 24" flat screens... you know... like the one I'm sitting in front of.

We clearly need government to help this struggling depressed high tech industry.... and fix it.... like health care and banking.... right?

Surely you do not know what we are talking about because the government has built the infrastructure and researched the technologies which private companies are making massive profits off of today. Internet? GPS? The next frontier in private investment in space NASA has been at the forefront of space since the beginning. Hybrid and electric vehicles and renewable technologies? The government has had a big hand in that, agriculture and farming? The government has been involved in that for years and no not every heavily regulated gsociety turns into an authoritarian regime. Most developed nations of the world are much more heavily regulated than ours, Great Britian, France, Japan, Australia, Denmark, Norway, Sweden. People in these countries are much higher educated and have much less poverty and violence than here and none of them are communists, fascists, dictatorships or authoritarian.

Geezus are you an idiot. I didnt think people this uninformed existed.
The internet would be nothing without Cisco, Netscape, Google, Microsoft, and all the other companies that built both hardware and software to run it.
Agriculture? It would be nothng without Monsanto, International Harvester, and all the other companies that have done R&D to make stuff for it.
Hybrids, ditto. In all these cases the government contribution was both minimal and incredibly expensive.
Government cannot run a whore house profitably. They cannot develop a website that even today will tell you how many people bought your product. Government is the most failed "innovator" ever. Recall the "synfuels" project of Jimmy Carter, amid an army of others.
Government does not "invest". Government spends money it coerces from other, more productive entities.

Other countries like the ones you named live in an economically stagnant society. In Sweden, their biggest 10 companies were all formed around WW1. In the US probably one was.

I don't need the name calling, fuckin bitch and yes government investment in the economy does build the infrastructure for private markets and does spur economic growth.

Here is a link to an article which says exactly that.

Nine Government Investments That Made Us an Industrial economic Leader.
Nine Government Investments That Made Us an Industrial Economic Leader William Lazonick

No, it actually doesnt say anything like that. And the article itself is full of crap. Just because government once put its hands on something doesnt make the industry a success. Look at synfuels from the Carter era. Or electric cars today. Or solar panels. The government "helped" all those industries but they failed to mature or show much profit.

It doesn't? "Under the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, the government committed to pay for 90 percent of the cost of building 41,000 miles of interstate highways.", "A 1999 study, "Funding a Revolution: Government Support of for Computing Research," stated, "Federal funding not only financed development of most of the nation's early digital computers, but also has continued to enable breakthroughs in areas as wide ranging as computer time-sharing, the Internet, artificial intelligence, and virtual reality as the industry has matured." Among other things, the study details the now well-known role of the U.S. government in developing the ARPANET and the NSFNET for over three decades before it became available commercially as the Internet.", "Under the Pacific Railroad Acts of 1862 through 1866, the U.S. government handed railroad companies 103 million acres of public land that could be sold or used as loan collateral to finance the construction of transcontinental railroad lines.", "The 2010 budget of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for life sciences research was30.9 billion, almost double in real terms the budget of 1993 and triple in real terms the budget of 1985. From the founding of the first national institute in 1938 through 2010, NIH spending totaled738 billion in 2010 dollars. The 2011 budget is30.9 billion, and the request for 2012 is32 billion. In addition, federal and state governments provide many subsidies to the medical field.", "One could go on to talk about the U.S. government's support for nanotechnology andrenewable energy, among other programs. None of these government programs is a secret. Indeed, prominent corporate executives lobby for them (and you won't find the Tea Party attacking them). Yet there is a widespread belief that the U.S. government plays at most a regulatory role in the economy.", yes actually IT DOES!

 

[dblack]

Walmart pays what the market dictates they pay. It's that simple. If people won't work for the wages they offer they'll have a shortage of workers and will be forced to pay more. They are not obligated to pay anyone what you think they should be paid. That is how the free market works, Komrade.

WalMart pays what they can get away with. It's that simple.

Then why doesn't Costco pay what they can get away with? Fail.

Because Costco's managers are kind hearted Democrat types that care about their workers.
Nah, I'm kidding. Costco has a different model that allows them to pay more to attract better workers which is part of their business plan. If they didnt, their shareholders would be screaming at the low returns the company makes.

Costco is in the same business as Wal-Mart and is a much better company to work for than Wal-Mart, stop trying to justify Wal-Marts low pay and crap hours for most of its workers.

I'm not really interested in defending Wal-Mart at all. But then, that's not really what this thread is about, is it? If this was really about Wal-Mart doing something wrong, we'd be looking at punishing them in some way - either putting the owners in jail for violating existing laws are passing new laws to criminalize their behavior.

But that's not on the agenda. Because in reality, this is just demagoguing for more minimum wage nonsense.

 

[2aguy]

In fact Costco charges a fee to its members and sells higher end goods and caters to a wealthier crowd.

See, this is another place where the lefty hypocrites get let off the hook...Costco charges you to just shop there...what do poor people who want to shop there do if they can't afford the fee...you would think they would be all over that elitist fee, which is obviously meant to keep poor people out of their stores...where are the pickets, the riots, the looting...where are all the grand standing politicians....oh...that's right...I think Costco donates to democrats...but I could be wrong...

 

[Andylusion]

It doesn't? "Under the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, the government committed to pay for 90 percent of the cost of building 41,000 miles of interstate highways.", "A 1999 study, "Funding a Revolution: Government Support of for Computing Research," stated, "Federal funding not only financed development of most of the nation's early digital computers, but also has continued to enable breakthroughs in areas as wide ranging as computer time-sharing, the Internet, artificial intelligence, and virtual reality as the industry has matured." Among other things, the study details the now well-known role of the U.S. government in developing the ARPANET and the NSFNET for over three decades before it became available commercially as the Internet.", "Under the Pacific Railroad Acts of 1862 through 1866, the U.S. government handed railroad companies 103 million acres of public land that could be sold or used as loan collateral to finance the construction of transcontinental railroad lines.", "The 2010 budget of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for life sciences research was30.9 billion, almost double in real terms the budget of 1993 and triple in real terms the budget of 1985. From the founding of the first national institute in 1938 through 2010, NIH spending totaled738 billion in 2010 dollars. The 2011 budget is30.9 billion, and the request for 2012 is32 billion. In addition, federal and state governments provide many subsidies to the medical field.", "One could go on to talk about the U.S. government's support for nanotechnology andrenewable energy, among other programs. None of these government programs is a secret. Indeed, prominent corporate executives lobby for them (and you won't find the Tea Party attacking them). Yet there is a widespread belief that the U.S. government plays at most a regulatory role in the economy.", yes actually IT DOES!

Again, you keep posting someone's opinion, as though, that makes it fact.

Renewable energy is a complete disaster. It's a massive fail. All it is, is government paying rich wealthy people, to make a product that doesn't solve any problem. Solar Panels require more electricity to make, than they ever produce in their entire life span. Wind Mills, do not replace any conventional source of power, while costing billions of dollars for very little energy.

The Federal Highway act, has lead to the creation of super expensive infrastructure that we can't afford to maintain.

Moreover, a ton of you people who keep referring to the interstate system....

I don't get you people. Are you blind? Look at this.

Right above the red dot, is I-70. Directly above I-70, is Route 40.

Before I-70, Route 40, went from NJ to CA.

In many many parts of Route 40, you can literally see I-70 from Route 40.

When I-70 was opened... I *KILLED* towns and businesses along Route 40, and the road is practically not used at all.

Miles on miles and see barely a handful of cars.

The point is, the Interstate didn't help anything. We already had a perfectly good 4-lane divided limited access highway, that stretched from coast to coast. Why did we need a second highway? We didn't. It was a waste of billions of tax dollars, for a road that wasn't needed, and in the process you killed towns and businesses along Route 40.

I can show you pictures of motels, shops and gas stations along Route 40, at least here in Ohio, but I bet elsewhere too, that are completely deserted.

See, this is what you people do. You push a bad policy, and build stuff we don't need. Then claim that without you and your program, we wouldn't be able to survive. No, you are wrong. Without I-70, we would have used the perfectly fine, perfectly function 4-lane divided limited access highway we already had.

Instead, you saddled us tax payers, with paying to keep and maintain a road we didn't need. Trucks and cars, could just as easily drive down Route 40 if they needed to get here.

And the truth is, nearly all Interstate Highways directly parallel existing roads. I-71 is paralleled by Route 62 and 22, or by Route 42. Ironically there are two large towns between Columbus and Cincinnati, I-71 manages to hit neither of them, while of course the State built roads hit one or the other. What a waste. I-75 is paralleled by Route 25. Route 20 is paralleled by I-90/80 from Buffalo New York, to Chicago.

Over and over, you people on the left, build a road, that parallels EXISTING ROADS.... and the come on here and say absolute crap like "Without us you wouldn't have roads!" or "It's because of OUR road, that we have economic benefit". Bull crap. Just crap! You are full of crap.

No, without you, I would not lose 20% of check to pay for roads we don't need.