Again, what are you talking about? We're not talking about TAX CODES. Come on, I don't have the energy for pushing you back to the topic every post.
Well if you are not talking about two sets of rules for two like businesses just different sized, then I don't know WTF you are talking about. If both industries of like kind follow the same rules and have the same ability to write-off, then there is nothing unfair about it. That's besides the fact that prices are not set based on taxes paid instead of ability to buy in bulk and from the lowest price providers.
I go grocery shopping every week, but once every month or so I go to Sam's Club. Why? Because when you buy in larger quantities, you get a lower price just like businesses do. Our customers deal with Walmart and they are constantly dropping providers and picking up new ones; sometimes at a disadvantage to us and sometime an advantage to us. But none of our customers deal with K-Mart, Target or any other stores. They don't put as much effort into getting products at the lowest possible price as Walmart does. Even if they did, they would not sell their products as cheap as they sell to Walmart because Walmart buys in much larger quantities.
Fine you don't know what the **** I'm talking about. Maybe if you read what I actually wrote it would help.
We are, in actual fact, talking about companies being GIVEN special deals by governments. Do you remember the bit about bribery? Do you think having a two day conversation about this might have meant that we weren't just talking about tax code? Come on Ray, what the ****? Get off the bottle or whatever it is you're on man.
Why do you think Walmart can get lower prices?
How Walmart and Home Depot Are Buying Huge Political Influence
"Walmart and Home Depot are ranked among the top 100 political donors overall for the period since 1989, putting their fingerprints on tax and labor law."
Ah.... Walmart pay a lot for political influence.
Why do you think Walmart pay politicians a lot of money? Could it be because they get something out of it Ray?
They got govt to make it so they can pay their workers less and the govt picks up a $6 BILLION tap on that one. Workers come in and they're like "hey, we won't pay you much, but looky here, the govt WILL pay you".
You complain about the govt giving hand outs. They're giving hand outs because Walmart PAY THEM to do so.
As I showed you before, they get $1 billion or more in govt subsidies
Report says Wal-Mart received $1B in government subsidies. - May. 24, 2004
"
Over $1 billion in government subsidies have gone into transforming discounter Wal-Mart Stores from a regional discount store operator into the world's largest retailer, "
Yes, how does a company go from a regional discount store to having stores in China and other countries around the world? Wait, let's see. Oh, yeah, the govt gives them an unfair competitive advantage to the tune of ONE BILLION DOLLARS, excluding the shit they get for paying their workers SIX BILLION too little a year and demand the govt picks up that tap too.
I've said all this before Ray, does it not ring a bell, or did you just not bother to read what I wrote?
Wal-Mart, feds struggle to settle bribery investigation
Here's Walmart being done for Bribery, but they don't want to be convicted of the crimes they've been committing, because if they get convicted Ray, they can't get govt subsidies, so they bribing people to make sure they don't get convicted and don't lose their ability to get money from their bribes.
Yes, we have been through this before, and unless you're going to post non-bias evidence instead of liberal propaganda, I'm not wasting the time to read them.
One more time: What Walmart workers con government for is NOT A SUBSIDY TO WALMART! Walmart doesn't benefit if one of their workers are on food stamps or 100,000. It has nothing to do with Walmart, it has to do with electing liberals into office. Saying Walmart workers getting X from government is a Walmart subsidy is an out and out lie and pure propaganda.
Now if you want to call industry asking for lower taxes a payoff, then why not talk about the union bribery to politicians, particularly government unions like the teachers? How about trial lawyer bribery to Democrats that make it possible for a con artist spilling hot coffee on themselves a liability to the restaurant? How about the environmental bribery of making laws that favor their agenda?
Yes, been through it before, and you somehow managed to come out of the whole thing thinking it was a conversation about tax code.
So what is "liberal propaganda" then Ray? Everything I have posted should be well known to you in the first place. I haven't posted anything that is shocking have I? Or are you just trying to deflect once again because you know that your partisan hackery view is under threat and if you close the door, the outside world doesn't need to impact you for a while?
Actually Ray, it does benefit Walmart, it benefits them quite nicely, because they can bring workers in, tell them they'll get X amount of money and pay them X-Y and save $6 billion a year.
It's quite simple, there are programs in place that you don't like, and somehow you're defending them. It's amazing how you'll defend anything if you think it'll make your argument.
And then you come along, Ray, and go off on one about pure propaganda. Rubbish, pure deflection is what it is.
Ray, we're talking about what we're talking about. We can talk about bribery elsewhere on a different thread if you like, but this is what we're talking about, and you're deflecting AGAIN by pointing to bribery within unions etc.
It's pretty simple Ray.
Companies like Walmart pay money to politicians. Walmart is in the top 100 contributors to politics in the US.
Walmart wants something in return.
Walmart gets something (quite a lot actually) in return.
Walmart becomes uber competitive as a result.
Simple process that you seem to be trying to ignore.
Wait a minute! You're the one who brought up bribery, not me. I just responded in like.
Yes, liberal propaganda, saying that Walmart is considered getting a subsidy by government allowing their workers on the dole is plain BS and propaganda. Walmart isn't getting anything--their employees are. Walmart could give two hoots what goes on between their employees and the government. It has nothing to do with them.
If Walmart tells their applicants they will pay them X dollars, it has nothing to do with government. They will pay them X dollars whether they don't go on one welfare program or they go on six of them. It's totally irrelevant to what Walmart is willing to pay their employees.
Yes Walmart wants something in return for their support to politicians, just like unions want something in return, trial lawyers want something in return, environmentalists want something in return, they wall want something in return, so don't pretend it's just Walmart.
Oh, come on Ray. Bribery, it's all part of what we're talking about, people paying politicians for favors. This is the whole point of EVERYTHING on this particular part of the topic.
No Ray, it's not propaganda, it's TRUE.
Walmart employees are able to get government subsidies, which in other countries they'd probably not be able to get. Food stamps. What kind of a working person needs food stamps?
Now, the issue here is that the govt giving Walmart tax breaks for opening a store is far more direct and gives Walmart far more of an advantage than food stamps because other companies can also take the food stamps, but will struggle to get tax breaks like Walmart gets.
The point I am making is that there is a link between companies paying politicians and politicians giving out favors. We know it happens, I showed a source of people getting put in prison for this, AND I showed a source of where Walmart is getting in trouble for bribery.
Walmart makes sure this sort of thing continue. They pay politicians because it's beneficial for them. As a competitive advantage over those who are in the same game, it doesn't give them that much, because the other stores can also do the same thing. They can ride the wave that Walmart has managed to gained.
However Walmart gives more than two hoots. Its profits are directly linked to how much it pays workers, right? If Walmart can pay $9 an hour rather than $15 an hour, they save $6 an hour per employee who is on this wage. If they employ 50 people at a store who are saving $6 and hour, that's $48 a day they save on each employee, which is $2,400 a day for 50 employees.
Now, if you can save that kind of money, that's an extra $2,400 a day, that's nearly $900,000 a year. Nothing to be sniffed at, when the govt is paying you $900,000 per year, theoretically here.
The issue you seem to be having here Ray is that people will go to work for less than they can live off.
If the govt said "you're working, you get no subsidies" and Walmart charged $9 an hour, people wouldn't go work there. What's the point. If you can get the subsidies then you're earning more than $9 an hour, you're potentially earning $15 an hour.
You go from an wage where you can't live, to one where you can.
Ray, where did I say it's just Walmart that wants something in return? I didn't. More deflection huh?
The reality is those companies who make a lot of money, many of them are paying a lot of money to politicians to get things how they want them.
The system is supposed to be 1) people vote 2) politicians then do what is best for the voters.
This doesn't seem to happen any more, because people know that there are two parties and people choose one or the other, which means people don't vote much on policies, they vote of personality, how much name recognition there is and the like, they are advertised to death and they buy it.
