If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   Empowered by the Hostess strike, the Black Friday Walmart strike begins early   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 635
    More: Followup, flight attendants  
•       •       •

18433 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Nov 2012 at 4:16 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



635 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-18 09:37:20 PM

GroverCleveland: [i511.photobucket.com image 526x473]

I'm afraid the WalMart will be quite operational when Black Friday arrives


Thanks Grover.

You're a meme now.
http://qkme.me/3ru4d4
 
2012-11-18 09:41:37 PM

freewill: EVERYBODY PANIC: So, if we can just get the govenment to stop subsidizing the Wal*Mart employees, they will all finally just up and quit and go get real jobs? Just, cool man! What a boon that would be, huh? Millions of unhappy, unappreciated and underpaid folks would finally become motivated to go do something better. Humanity would be enhanced, the sun would shine more brightly and universal happiness might ensue.

I think it's more likely that they would resort to violence until they were paid more.

It's happened before.


More likely their employees would be reduced to living like people in the third world. Four families in a one bedroom apartment, malnutrition, health problems without recourse to health care, that sort of thing.
Violence might be the eventual result, but first there would be misery, theft, absolutely no loyalty, just the sort of workforce that would be guaranteed to make your business thrive.
 
2012-11-18 09:47:08 PM

red5ish: freewill: EVERYBODY PANIC: So, if we can just get the govenment to stop subsidizing the Wal*Mart employees, they will all finally just up and quit and go get real jobs? Just, cool man! What a boon that would be, huh? Millions of unhappy, unappreciated and underpaid folks would finally become motivated to go do something better. Humanity would be enhanced, the sun would shine more brightly and universal happiness might ensue.

I think it's more likely that they would resort to violence until they were paid more.

It's happened before.

More likely their employees would be reduced to living like people in the third world. Four families in a one bedroom apartment, malnutrition, health problems without recourse to health care, that sort of thing.
Violence might be the eventual result, but first there would be misery, theft, absolutely no loyalty, just the sort of workforce that would be guaranteed to make your business thrive.


Eh, fark them. I got mine.
 
2012-11-18 09:50:38 PM

clowncar on fire: SuperDuper28: They're bribing workers with an extra 10% off of one transaction if they work Black Friday. Totaling 20% anything except gas, alcohol, or tabacco.

I believe when an employer makes an offer like this we refer to the offer as an "incentive" or as a "benefit" not as a "bribe".


If you're under the assumption that it's an "incentive" and not a "bribe" to keep people from walking out, yes. People that actually work there and know how Walmart rolls know better. They don't reward unless it's in their best intrest and they're getting something out of it.
 
2012-11-18 09:55:07 PM

jst3p: Eh, fark them. I got mine.


That is a very popular attitude. It involves being blind to a lot of hypocrisy, insensitive to others suffering, and generally being a prick, but it is popular. (I'm not referring to you.)
Having posted in this thread several times, taking the position that Walmart is subsidized by taxes indirectly through their employees needing assistance, all the while thinking the right wing posters would agree that this represented oh noez! socialisms! I have come to the conclusion that blindness to hypocrisy is also very popular.
 
2012-11-18 09:58:11 PM
I would wholeheartedly support this if it resulted in Wal-Mart liquidating and closing up shop forever.
Of course, that would put 2.2 million more out of work. Principled stands are nice, but they don't pay the gas bill.

/Hates shopping at Wal-Mart
//Only does so when absolutely necessary (ie need a toilet flapper at 2am)
 
2012-11-18 10:13:40 PM
Empowered by the Hostess strike, because that worked out so well for them. People who have no other options than to work at Walmart are in that position because they fail at life. The rest of us found better options (and that includes 99% of us on Fark, who here works at Walmart? I didn't think so). I'm no supporter of Walmart, haven't set foot in 1 in years, but hey if you're going to work there, why not actually show up? What's the point of having a job and then not showing up and not getting paid? It just shows the mentality of those whose only option for employment is Walmart.
 
2012-11-18 10:26:53 PM
i734.photobucket.com

Seriously, what's the point of Black Friday? A mob of sheep fight each other to die with the most toys, while the zillionaires laugh all the way to the bank?

STAY HOME ON BLACK FRIDAY. Your nerves will thank you and you'll avoid being part of the problem. Kick back, have some leftover turkey and whatever beverage suits you. Watch some football, pop in a DVD or fire up the Roku. WalmartKmartTargetMacysCVSBestBuy will still be there when the madness cools down a bit. There's a whole month to go till Christmas. And if you don't have kids who still believe in Santa Claus, the extra evening hours make a great low-hassle time to shop.
 
2012-11-18 10:28:30 PM
Just thought I'd add: we've all worked shiatty jobs in our lives. If you're going to work a shiat job, then that's the decision you took, you knew that going in. We've all been there. But you don't take a job scraping shiat all day long, and then 2 months into it decide that it's a shiatty job with shiatty pay. It was in the job description and you knew the pay upfront. If Walmart is so beneath you, then quit. You can't work at Walmart and then pretend like you're above working at Walmart. You're not fooling anyone. You're not skilled labor, you just pass items by a scanner all day long, something a trained monkey can do. I've been a cashier myself, and I had no illusions about the value of my work at that talentless position. It is what it is, and it kept me afloat until I found something better. It's time for a reality check for these idiots that think menial labor is somehow worth $50,000.
 
2012-11-18 10:31:49 PM

jst3p: Lets say you are correct and they have no skills or value, your solution is what? Let them starve? There will always be a segment of the population that can not provide for themselves. How do you propose we deal with them?


*raises hand*

Actually Bill Clinton had a great idea before whatever deal he made with the devil that forced him to support Obama. Quit bailing out companies, quit indefinitely extending unemployment, and use that money to train people for the scores of unfilled jobs that go on and on. Sure, some people belong working at a place like that. But some people are stuck. And the POTUS has zero plan to get those people out of there. On an aside, I'd like to raise minimum wage to $50. That would solve the problem immediately. Also, in regard to the rhetoric about how "big boxes put the little boxes" down- was someone sweeping the floor in the local hardware store getting better pay, benefits, and a safer environment in the first place? Really? Do you think a manager could get away with smacking George like Mr. Gower did in a Wal*Mart pharmacy?
 
2012-11-18 10:34:57 PM
Why on earth would anyone be inspired to strike by18,000 people losing their jobs thanks to their union?
 
2012-11-18 10:39:09 PM

OregonVet: Also, in regard to the rhetoric about how "big boxes put the little boxes" down- was someone sweeping the floor in the local hardware store getting better pay, benefits, and a safer environment in the first place?


Probably the owner or owners of the local stores were doing okay. Not "Walton Okay" but okay.
 
2012-11-18 10:39:19 PM
I'm really surprised this didn't happen sooner. Being retail is a huge chunk of our economy.
 
2012-11-18 10:43:24 PM

clowncar on fire: HempHead: clowncar on fire: No. Finish the post. Kids don't really need healthcare coverage because when you live with your parents it's already covered.

What? Where do kids get free medical care for living with their parents?

Do you mean Medicaid?

Last I checked- lot's of parents make sure those little rascals were covered due to their annoying habit of breaking things or getting sick. Seems this coverage was recently extended up until the age of 26 or so.

I guess if the kid was 18 or over and had been given the boot by mom and dad, they might need coverage. Judging from the tiny sample i know about via my daughter, most of the afternoon employees are still living at home with their folks and presumeably aren't required to cover their own expenses on a $100 a week part time job.


Oh, I see. You mean the kids with parents with Middle-Class jobs(although there is still hope the Republican Senate will get rid of Obamacare and insurance companies will be free to toss off children 18+).

I thought you meant all children.

Obviously, the children of the parents working minimum wage jobs do not deserve medical insurance.
 
2012-11-18 10:44:48 PM

red5ish: More likely their employees would be reduced to living like people in the third world. Four families in a one bedroom apartment, malnutrition, health problems without recourse to health care, that sort of thing.


You got a problem with returning to the Guilded Age? People always claim this was America's golden age in immigration threads.
 
2012-11-18 10:49:18 PM

DrewCurtisJr: GoldDude: My nephew wanted a certain toy for Christmas, as his Mom let me know that WalMart had them for $43. I did not mind paying $50 for the same item at a smaller local store. Seven bucks to avoid having to enter WalMart? Done! Super cheap!

Are you on food stamps? Is $7 the difference between a few extra, cheap spaghetti dinners for you and your children?


No, I don't work at WalMart, so I'm not on food stamps.
 
2012-11-18 10:49:26 PM

DrewCurtisJr: red5ish: More likely their employees would be reduced to living like people in the third world. Four families in a one bedroom apartment, malnutrition, health problems without recourse to health care, that sort of thing.

You got a problem with returning to the Guilded Age? People always claim this was America's golden age in immigration threads.


In United States history, the Gilded Age was the period following the Civil War, running from 1877 to 1893 when the next era began, the Progressive Era. The term was coined by writers Mark Twain and Charles Dudley Warner in The Gilded Age: A Tale of Today, satirizing what they believed to be an era of serious social problems hidden by a thin layer of gold.

That sounds awesome.
 
2012-11-18 10:53:51 PM

Dinkledort: Why on earth would anyone be inspired to strike by18,000 people losing their jobs thanks to their union?


Ah, yes, it's the unions fault they all lost their jobs and not the fault of upper management that negotiated lower wages with the unions the LAST time and then voted everyone in upper management pay raises. Mhmm ... yep ...

How can anyone be AGAINST unions? It's the most basic ideal of democracy alive today. The fact that people can organize and demand benefits en masse that they would never be able to demand individually. They give power back to the employees. See, it's a purely basic power struggle in which one group (the business owners) usually can't afford to fire, rehire, and retrain employees that choose to strike and unions who can't ask for too much because of the reality of the company or being fired en masse (like Reagan did in the 1980s with the ATCs).

See, if you're against unions, you're against the basic freedom and liberty that is afforded us in this country and you're against the basic ideal of how the free market works. If your workforce feels their labor is being undercompensated, well, that's the basis of capitalism. You buy the labor at whatever the market will support ... your market essentially just told you to fark off and die when they strike.

It's a beautiful system and I can't see why anyone could be against unions. If you really feel like they are getting too much power, fire all your union workers and rehire new people. I'm sure retraining will be far cheaper than the $1/hour raise your old workforce was demanding ... facepalm.
 
2012-11-18 11:00:18 PM
clowncar on fire (farkied: s/clowncar/pants/): "they should be willing to pay them enough to live"- It would be nice but pay is damand based rather than need based. We all want more money- we all don't necessarily possess the skills that are in demand enough that perspective[1] employers are willing to compete for those skills.

So, then, you're OK with the government effectively subsidizing the wages of a large segment of the population through social services? Oh, wait, you're a wingnut, social services are teh Debbil. So you're OK with much of our labor force having to live like Chinese laborers.

Free clue: it's the condition of the labor force, not capital, that separates the developed world from the rest. Plutocrats are plutocrats wherever you go. Mexico has plenty of zillionaires, but does not pay its labor force a decent wage. When the plutocrats who control the Publican party (and, to a lesser extent, the Democratic Party) are done with the stockboys, bakers, teachers and truck drivers, they'll be coming after the firefighters, civil engineers and software developers like me. We'll all be living like Chinese laborers, but I suppose you're OK with that, because you think you'll be one of the plutocrats (img1.fark.net) and it'll solve that pesky illegal immigration problem.

/[1][inigo-montoya.jpg]
 
2012-11-18 11:02:12 PM

seadoo2006: See, if you're against unions, you're against the basic freedom and liberty that is afforded us in this country and you're against the basic ideal of how the free market works. If your workforce feels their labor is being undercompensated, well, that's the basis of capitalism. You buy the labor at whatever the market will support ... your market essentially just told you to fark off and die when they strike.


In fairness, when multiple companies get together and agree on the prices to demand of consumers, the law frowns on that a bit.
 
2012-11-18 11:04:54 PM

seadoo2006: How can anyone be AGAINST unions?


Because socialism.
 
2012-11-18 11:05:49 PM
hurray, pink slips for xmas.
 
2012-11-18 11:06:58 PM

clowncar on fire: "they should be willing to pay them enough to live"- It would be nice but pay is damand based rather than need based. We all want more money- we all don't necessarily possess the skills that are in demand enough that perspective employers are willing to compete for those skills.

Is she working or not? Makes a difference.


Except numbnut, that's what unions do ... they collectively bargain for the betterment of wages and benefits because, with amassing people, they amass power. So, the power unions have is derived from the idea that it is harder for businesses to fire, rehire, retrain a multi-thousand employee workforce.

AKA, this is the absolute essence of the free market. They are essentially saying our labor is worth more than you are paying, so we're all going to walk off unless you pay us more.

If you really hate unions, then fire everyone and start from scratch and hope the next group doesn't get all 'uppity' like your last round of hires did. Unions, striking, and the formation of collective bargaining means your management is undervaluing your labor and you better start compensating people better.
 
2012-11-18 11:10:17 PM

freewill: seadoo2006: See, if you're against unions, you're against the basic freedom and liberty that is afforded us in this country and you're against the basic ideal of how the free market works. If your workforce feels their labor is being undercompensated, well, that's the basis of capitalism. You buy the labor at whatever the market will support ... your market essentially just told you to fark off and die when they strike.

In fairness, when multiple companies get together and agree on the prices to demand of consumers, the law frowns on that a bit.


Are you really trying to tell me that collective bargaining == collusion? REALLY?!?!?!

thisrecording.com
 
2012-11-18 11:28:48 PM

seadoo2006: Are you really trying to tell me that collective bargaining == collusion? REALLY?!?!?!


This is a fun thread, isn't it?
 
2012-11-18 11:31:49 PM

seadoo2006: freewill: seadoo2006: See, if you're against unions, you're against the basic freedom and liberty that is afforded us in this country and you're against the basic ideal of how the free market works. If your workforce feels their labor is being undercompensated, well, that's the basis of capitalism. You buy the labor at whatever the market will support ... your market essentially just told you to fark off and die when they strike.

In fairness, when multiple companies get together and agree on the prices to demand of consumers, the law frowns on that a bit.

Are you really trying to tell me that collective bargaining == collusion? REALLY?!?!?!


Hell yes, it is! However, union activity is explicitly exempted from antitrust laws in the U. S. by the Clayton Act of 1914

"The labor of a human being is not a commodity or article of commerce. Nothing contained in the antitrust laws shall be construed to forbid the existence and operation of labor, agricultural, or horticultural organizations, instituted for the purposes of mutual help, and not having capital stock or conducted for profit, or to forbid or restrain individual members of such organizations from lawfully carrying out the legitimate objects thereof; nor shall such organizations, or the members thereof, be held or construed to be illegal combinations or conspiracies in restraint of trade, under the antitrust laws. "

The rationale for this exemption should be obvious. A company consists of many people with relatively large resources. A worker consists of one person with relatively small resources. There is an inherent imbalance of bargaining power. Allowing workers to organize pits one large organization against another, favoring an equitable bargain.
 
2012-11-18 11:39:00 PM
www.xtimeline.com
www.battleofhomesteadfoundation.org

I support this action and/or ideological position.
 
2012-11-18 11:47:42 PM

whistleridge: Have you ever been to some towns in flyover country? You know, the ones where there used to be 20 - 30 businesses downtown


... that never had what you were looking for?

Yeah, I've been there.
 
2012-11-18 11:50:29 PM
Capitalism isn't a system. It's a component. Socialism is a component, All these ostensibly absolute sociopolitical / economic constructs are just components of management methods that mostly work. The ideologies are just the mechanism, though. The the people who oversee them are what makes them work or be ill applied to the point where they do not.

We built all of this stuff on this planet to serve US. Greedy men try and convince us that it's the other way 'round.

Corporations are not people. No, they're not. That law is pure fantasy like saying "red is blue for the purposes of this particular construct", but it isn't, is it? Nope.

All of this "who owes who what, who should kiss who's ass, who is or isn't obligated to do what for whom" bullsh*t is red herrings they feed yo while they clean out the safe. And to see how addicted we are to bad ideas as a norm. And do you know why? Because if everybody to whom we attribute authority keeps saying "well, you can't have anything good unless you accept something bad to get it", and we keep believing it, we're overlooking the fact that accepting that idiot's delight logic means that the "good thing" isn't good at all. It's just leverage to fit your rear end for a larger size boot. You can only keep a slave class for so long, even if you never have to smell their stink or throw bread in their cage. History will eat you if you don't read it's map. And this is nothing more than a rerun.
 
2012-11-18 11:58:34 PM

buckler: UsikFark: basemetal: And in other news, WalMart is now hiring.

Pssh. They're going to bring in strike-busters from a correctional facility in AR.

Or maybe call Pinkerton to help with some historical reenactment.


247wallst.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-11-19 12:14:01 AM

EVERYBODY PANIC: 2 - "Everyone's homeless and starving because..."
Nobody is starving. You say everybody is starving, but I don't know even one person who has starved to death in my life. Please return to reality. You are smarter than this. Prove it. Please


You don't know anyone who has starved so that means it doesn't happen? I don't know anyone who's been murdered I guess murder doesn't happen either.

Link

World life expectancy shows a death by malnutrition rate in America of 1 per 100,000. Sure that's a mere 33ish people a year, but why the hell is anyone starving in America? 

China's rate is 1.2 per 100,000 and they have 3-4 times as many people, less farmable land, and far less technology used in producing and distribution of food.
 
2012-11-19 12:23:53 AM
Sure, even our poor people are fat because they largely can only afford processed junk to eat. But that doesn't man things are working. Because nobody wants to grow up in the richest nation on earth aspiring to be poor and fat. Do they?
 
2012-11-19 12:25:43 AM

wedun: buckler: UsikFark: basemetal: And in other news, WalMart is now hiring.

Pssh. They're going to bring in strike-busters from a correctional facility in AR.

Or maybe call Pinkerton to help with some historical reenactment.

[247wallst.files.wordpress.com image 130x130]


Meaning of logo lost on internet sometimes-idiot; details at eleven.
 
2012-11-19 12:26:33 AM

squirrelflavoredyogurt: EVERYBODY PANIC: 2 - "Everyone's homeless and starving because..."
Nobody is starving. You say everybody is starving, but I don't know even one person who has starved to death in my life. Please return to reality. You are smarter than this. Prove it. Please

You don't know anyone who has starved so that means it doesn't happen? I don't know anyone who's been murdered I guess murder doesn't happen either.

Link

World life expectancy shows a death by malnutrition rate in America of 1 per 100,000. Sure that's a mere 33ish people a year, but why the hell is anyone starving in America? 

China's rate is 1.2 per 100,000 and they have 3-4 times as many people, less farmable land, and far less technology used in producing and distribution of food.


Try 3,300-ish.
 
2012-11-19 12:27:06 AM
Don't the executives at Wal-Mart understand that the world owes things to people? They were SPECIAL enough to BE BORN, for goodness' sake. Only many billions of people have ever BEEN BORN before. Can't they see how unique and special every mouth-breathing idiot that's too lazy to get a real job is? How much they DESERVE just for BEING?
 
2012-11-19 12:30:30 AM

freewill: EVERYBODY PANIC: So, if we can just get the govenment to stop subsidizing the Wal*Mart employees, they will all finally just up and quit and go get real jobs? Just, cool man! What a boon that would be, huh? Millions of unhappy, unappreciated and underpaid folks would finally become motivated to go do something better. Humanity would be enhanced, the sun would shine more brightly and universal happiness might ensue.

I think it's more likely that they would resort to violence until they were paid more.

It's happened before.


Okay, okay. I was kidding guys. I was just extrapolating based on an odd sentence. I do not really encourage the government to drop its safety net just to starve people into quitting a job. I very much oppose human suffering, period.
 
2012-11-19 12:33:19 AM

jst3p: red5ish: freewill: EVERYBODY PANIC: So, if we can just get the govenment to stop subsidizing the Wal*Mart employees, they will all finally just up and quit and go get real jobs? Just, cool man! What a boon that would be, huh? Millions of unhappy, unappreciated and underpaid folks would finally become motivated to go do something better. Humanity would be enhanced, the sun would shine more brightly and universal happiness might ensue.

I think it's more likely that they would resort to violence until they were paid more.

It's happened before.

More likely their employees would be reduced to living like people in the third world. Four families in a one bedroom apartment, malnutrition, health problems without recourse to health care, that sort of thing.
Violence might be the eventual result, but first there would be misery, theft, absolutely no loyalty, just the sort of workforce that would be guaranteed to make your business thrive.

Eh, fark them. I got mine.


Sometimes, the things you post just kill me dead. +1 for you tonight.
imageshack.us
 
2012-11-19 12:36:54 AM

bunner: Capitalism isn't a system. It's a component. Socialism is a component, All these ostensibly absolute sociopolitical / economic constructs are just components of management methods that mostly work. The ideologies are just the mechanism, though. The the people who oversee them are what makes them work or be ill applied to the point where they do not.

We built all of this stuff on this planet to serve US. Greedy men try and convince us that it's the other way 'round.

Corporations are not people. No, they're not. That law is pure fantasy like saying "red is blue for the purposes of this particular construct", but it isn't, is it? Nope.

All of this "who owes who what, who should kiss who's ass, who is or isn't obligated to do what for whom" bullsh*t is red herrings they feed yo while they clean out the safe. And to see how addicted we are to bad ideas as a norm. And do you know why? Because if everybody to whom we attribute authority keeps saying "well, you can't have anything good unless you accept something bad to get it", and we keep believing it, we're overlooking the fact that accepting that idiot's delight logic means that the "good thing" isn't good at all. It's just leverage to fit your rear end for a larger size boot. You can only keep a slave class for so long, even if you never have to smell their stink or throw bread in their cage. History will eat you if you don't read it's map. And this is nothing more than a rerun.


Wow. You get really good late at night. This is good. Very very good.
 
2012-11-19 12:44:48 AM

EVERYBODY PANIC: Wow. You get really good late at night. This is good. Very very good.


I appreciate the read. Actually I tend to think this way all the time.

It's pretty easy, actually.

Most people see this.

vanbooventree.com

I see this.

www.worldofstock.com
 
2012-11-19 12:48:09 AM

EVERYBODY PANIC: freewill: EVERYBODY PANIC: So, if we can just get the govenment to stop subsidizing the Wal*Mart employees, they will all finally just up and quit and go get real jobs? Just, cool man! What a boon that would be, huh? Millions of unhappy, unappreciated and underpaid folks would finally become motivated to go do something better. Humanity would be enhanced, the sun would shine more brightly and universal happiness might ensue.

I think it's more likely that they would resort to violence until they were paid more.

It's happened before.

Okay, okay. I was kidding guys. I was just extrapolating based on an odd sentence. I do not really encourage the government to drop its safety net just to starve people into quitting a job. I very much oppose human suffering, period.


You know who else flip-flopped?
 
2012-11-19 12:49:22 AM
Tourney3p0

If we just raised the minimum wage to 20 dollars an hour with mandatory 4 weeks vacation and full health insurance, there would be no more problems.


Somebody has shiat for brains!
 
2012-11-19 12:51:04 AM

BarkingUnicorn: You know who else flip-flopped?


Was it Hitler?

I bet it wasn't Hitler.

Hitler was never one to change his tune.

/Hitler.
 
2012-11-19 12:52:45 AM

bunner: BarkingUnicorn: You know who else flip-flopped?

Was it Hitler?

I bet it wasn't Hitler.

Hitler was never one to change his tune.

/Hitler.


Some people would say you're close. :-)
 
2012-11-19 12:52:52 AM
How do conservatives reconcile the fact that in exchange for the lower prices that get on cheap chinese sh*t that they will have to buy again soon and which should have been made here... with the part of their taxes that go to make sure that so many full-time (lol) walmart employees who still need to use WIC, EBT and welfare survive?

Welp, time to fire up the old internet machine and get ta shoppin'!

/anywhere but Walmart.com
//fark Walmart
///seriously
//// support the employees 1000%
 
2012-11-19 12:53:18 AM

squirrelflavoredyogurt: EVERYBODY PANIC: 2 - "Everyone's homeless and starving because..."
Nobody is starving. You say everybody is starving, but I don't know even one person who has starved to death in my life. Please return to reality. You are smarter than this. Prove it. Please

You don't know anyone who has starved so that means it doesn't happen? I don't know anyone who's been murdered I guess murder doesn't happen either.

Link

World life expectancy shows a death by malnutrition rate in America of 1 per 100,000. Sure that's a mere 33ish people a year, but why the hell is anyone starving in America? 

China's rate is 1.2 per 100,000 and they have 3-4 times as many people, less farmable land, and far less technology used in producing and distribution of food.


This thread is about the United States. Hell yeah they drop like flies in shiathole countries and always did. But there is no excuse for anybody starving here, and this thread is about Wal*Mart strikers in the good 'ol USA. If you stay on topic, it all makes sense. So let me clarify this one point: Except for people trapped in mines or held hostage in basements or quadrapalegics forgotten in musty bedrooms, or people otherwise restrained from normal physical mobility, nobody in the United States starves to death. Lord, I'm starting to sound like a lawyer.
 
2012-11-19 12:56:55 AM

BarkingUnicorn: EVERYBODY PANIC: freewill: EVERYBODY PANIC: So, if we can just get the govenment to stop subsidizing the Wal*Mart employees, they will all finally just up and quit and go get real jobs? Just, cool man! What a boon that would be, huh? Millions of unhappy, unappreciated and underpaid folks would finally become motivated to go do something better. Humanity would be enhanced, the sun would shine more brightly and universal happiness might ensue.

I think it's more likely that they would resort to violence until they were paid more.

It's happened before.

Okay, okay. I was kidding guys. I was just extrapolating based on an odd sentence. I do not really encourage the government to drop its safety net just to starve people into quitting a job. I very much oppose human suffering, period.

You know who else flip-flopped?


I appreciate that. Rock on!
 
2012-11-19 12:57:00 AM

rewind2846: How do conservatives reconcile the fact that in exchange for the lower prices that get on cheap chinese sh*t that they will have to buy again soon and which should have been made here... with the part of their taxes that go to make sure that so many full-time (lol) walmart employees who still need to use WIC, EBT and welfare survive?


Perhaps a lot of Walmart shoppers are in the 47% who don't pay income taxes.
 
2012-11-19 12:58:48 AM

EVERYBODY PANIC: nobody in the United States starves to death


So, capitalism works and we're all ingrates? Yay. : )
 
2012-11-19 01:10:31 AM
WHAT?!

WHERE AM I SUPPOSED TO GET MY JEAN JACKETS WITH LOONY TOONS CHARACTERS ON THEM?!
 
2012-11-19 01:25:09 AM

charmingkiddo: WHAT?!

WHERE AM I SUPPOSED TO GET MY JEAN JACKETS WITH LOONY TOONS CHARACTERS ON THEM?!


The question isn't where, but when. Not on Thanksgiving day. Gee.
 
Displayed 50 of 635 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report