Wal-Mart Helps the Poor More Than Any Politician

[red states rule]

Also, in Wal Mart they actually tell their employees how to work the government aid systems in this country. They have classes, telling them how much they have to earn to be qualified!

Wal Mart is adding more pressure on the Government aid system in this country even though Wal Mart could easily afford it.

Wal Mart is starting to fight back. Unions use the money they steal form their workers to attack Wal Mart, stage photo ops with the union thugs telling how rotten it is to work at Wal Mart, grease the palms of Dems via contributions to get what they want, and now because Wal Mart is telling their workers how to become politically active, that is an outrage?

 

[supermarine]

With all the different watch groups, that constantly hound Wal-Mart, don't see how your assertion could be true.

Got any links showing Wal-Mart "working the system"?

Here's a few:

OLYMPIA — It cost the state an estimated $12 million in 2004 to provide government-subsidized health care to Wal-Mart employees, according to a state Senate analysis released Tuesday.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002791346_walmart07m.html

Wal-Mart topped the list. According to the report, 2,866 people who relied on MassHealth or the state's free care pool said they worked for Wal-Mart. The estimated taxpayer cost to provide health care to those workers and their dependents: $7.9 million."

http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma...anies_relying_on_taxpayer_funded_health_care/

"Wal-Mart provides its workers with access to a Web-based service that allows a county social services worker to immediately verify income and employment. Such access can help to qualify workers quickly for Medi-Cal benefits, food stamps and other taxpayer-funded aid.

http://www.commondreams.org/scriptfiles/views03/1107-07.htm




"More than 60 percent of Wal-Mart employees--600,000 people--are forced to get health insurance coverage from the government or through spouses’ plans—or live without any health insurance. Wal-Mart shifts the cost of health insurance to taxpayers and other employers, driving up the health costs for all of us. "

http://www.ufcw.org/take_action/wal..._info/facts_and_figures/walmartonbenefits.cfm

 

[red states rule]

Wal Mart does pay above average wages and does offer FULL TIME employees medical coverage

The feeble attempt by libs in Maryland to require Wal Mart to spend 8% of their payroll on health benefits OR pay the difference to the state was overturned bu the courts

It also cost the stae a huge Wal Mart distribution center in Baltimore. The state LOST a hell of alot of money in tax revenue because of the hate they have for Wal Mart

 

[Shattered]

wal mart drives out the small buisnesses and treats their workers horribly. They are given little if no benefits, paid poorly, and the workers have to be available on a day's notice, thus making the worker's life dependent on Wal Mart. They are a disgusting company that only gives a bad name for Capitalism.

Have you actually stopped to LOOK at some of the people that work at Walmart? Why should they be given additional benefits when they're unwilling to even do their JOB to the best of their ability? They're lazy, crabby, mean, and just don't give a flying fuck, but think just because they show up (mostly on time), their employers OWE them.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

I'm still amazed when people bring up the tired old "Wal-Mart pays poor wages" canard. Yes, it's true. You won't get rich from putting cans on shelves...nor should you. But the same is true for all the "mom and pop" stores that Wal-Mart displaced! And it's also true, everywhere and always, for entry-level retail jobs! That is why employees will often warmly refer to them as "shit jobs".

And health care, let's stop and think a second. Your employer doesn't provide your car insurance or house insurance. Why should it provide your health insurance? It's completely and totally illogical. If you get laid off, you lose your insurance coverage.

The reason for this of course is government. During WWII, the government put price controls in place and froze wages. Businesses could no longer compete for workers by paying higher wages. So, they got around it by offering non-cash benefits. And since there is a big tax deduction on the books for employers who provide health insurance, that's what they provided. If the deduction was for car insurance, we'd all probably be getting that from our employers too. It would be overpriced, just like health care is, due to the one-size fits all approach; and your wages would be less to cover it.

What we really need to do, at the minimum, is give individuals a tax break for self-bought health insurance at least equal to the one companies get. We could also go a step further and get government out of health care. It used to be cheap until government got involved. Doctors used to be able to donate their time to indigent care without some dimwit Medicare bureaucrat accusing them of dual pricing (ie, ripping off the government). We could have the FDA scaled back to it's original mission: insuring that drugs are safe. In the 60's, that changed, as the FDA's changed it's mission to insuring that drugs are safe and effective. The former is cheap and quick; the latter absolutely is not. This keeps drugs off the market and keeps prices high.

 

[red states rule]

Have you actually stopped to LOOK at some of the people that work at Walmart? Why should they be given additional benefits when they're unwilling to even do their JOB to the best of their ability? They're lazy, crabby, mean, and just don't give a flying fuck, but think just because they show up (mostly on time), their employers OWE them.

In that case, these workers would be perfect Dem voters. MM should be nicer to them

 

[jasendorf]

Never fails... the Walton kids comprise the third through sixth richest people in America... but if the workers want to unionize to get some decent pay and benefits, it's the unions who are bankrupting the corporation...

I'm all for the Walton kids being rich... but is it really necessary to make them rich using my tax dollars to supplement their workers' health care?

 

[red states rule]

Never fails... the Walton kids comprise the third through sixth richest people in America... but if the workers want to unionize to get some decent pay and benefits, it's the unions who are bankrupting the corporation...

I'm all for the Walton kids being rich... but is it really necessary to make them rich using my tax dollars to supplement their workers' health care?

The unions would do for Wal Mart what the did for the auto companies

Union membership is down to about 9% of the workforce and the US economy is booming

Tells you something dosen't it?