Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Current)   What to say to the last five people that still defend Walmart   (current.com) divider line 437
    More: Obvious, Wal-Mart, John Fugelsang  
•       •       •

10785 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Jul 2013 at 5:15 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-26 06:47:58 PM  
White trash love them some Walmart!
 
2013-07-26 06:48:49 PM  
I enjoyed the part where he said the Walton family "controls" as much wealth as the lower 30 percent of all Americans.

Ha. Like that lower 30 percent has any wealth and in any way "controls" what money they do have.
 
2013-07-26 06:50:02 PM  

Kazrath: OregonVet: Why not just raise minimum wage?

I know that sounds like a simple solution but it is not.  You raise minimum wage and the price of stuff goes up immediately.

Unfortunately in our current system where the corporations have everyone by the balls all that raising the minimum wage translates into is everyone making more than minimum wage earning less on a sliding scale.  So you were doing okay at 15 bucks an hour.  Look! minimum wage jumped to 10 bucks an hour and now you at 15 bucks an hour are spending 10-20% more for exactly the same needed products you bought before it jumped.  Raising minimum wage will not make you jump from 15 to 16-17 bucks an hour.  You will end up with less disposable income and will end up more likely needing assistance

They want to make this work we need to pass some sort of legislation that states:  If any employee of any company qualifies for government subsidies  the cost of those subsidies  will be returned by said company in full as a form of tax.

^  Doing something like that may allow capitalism to work while still being socialist enough to take into account the human element.  We currently let corporations trample all over the human element at the cost of 10 of billions a dollars yearly out of your pocket.


How do you believe your tax idea is different from raising minimum wage?

Aside from adding a huge disincentive to hiring single moms, etc.
 
2013-07-26 06:52:44 PM  

CynicalLA: White trash love them some Walmart!


Internet sheep love to hate on some Walmart!
 
2013-07-26 06:53:31 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: ghare: Unemployed, or on disability?

I'm on the higher end of the average Farker pay scale,


Yeah, you sound pretty poor.
 
2013-07-26 06:55:14 PM  

Descartes: [www.meijer.com image 400x400]


When it's cheaper at Target, I'll buy it there.


It's cheaper to buy them fresh.  They taste better and are better for you.  They take less than 3 mins to cook.
 
2013-07-26 06:55:14 PM  
Alright, so I'm here to drop some anecdotal retorts in Tolstoy wall-o-text form. Take this all with a huge grain of salt if you will. Let me begin by clarifying that I'm a dirty hippy and a registered Democrat, voted for Fartbongo twice (three times if you include against Hillary) and continue to support the evil liberal agenda in non-presidential election years (I'm looking at you, lazy assholes that farked everything up in the Tea Tard wave of 2010). I'm certainly on the lower end of the economic scale, so I appreciate the lower prices at Wally World.

I also have family that work at Wal-Mart, one family member specifically. They get about $10.50-$11 an hour I believe, full time with health insurance and all after five years with the company. Right there, that is above the average wage this fine gentleman spoke of in his video, and that is only for a cashier. I don't know if living in Colorado is a part of that, but there you go. Full time, pay that's moderately above minimum wage, and the all powerful health insurance. Thanks to this healthcare, their significant other was recently able to retire comfortably after 35+ years with their own job. In my mind, that is a solid on Wal-Mart.

You've got the out-sourcing and Chinese stuff, right? Granted, we'd all like for things to be made in America, but we've got The Free Market and the Chinese make things real cheap. Here's the rub: where else are you going to go where they don't sell Chinese products? Seriously. Target? Ha! I challenge anyone to find a major box retailer that doesn't sell foreign made products, or only sells primarily American made products.

Secondly, I always hear this shiat about the people that shop at Wal-Mart. Yeah, the lower class does look awfully lower class, strange, isn't that? Maybe if they could afford better things, they'd shop in a higher-class environment. What a notion! The funny thing about this is that I mostly hear this from conservatives, from the people pulling the lever for folks like Mitt Romney. Gee, Republicans don't like to shop in the midst of poor folks? There is a darker side to this too, no pun intended, in that (at least here in the Denver area), Wal-Mart gets a reputation for having large amounts of Hispanics, specifically jerb-stealing Messicans that shop there. Those damned, dirty illegals with their anchor babies and food stamps. It never fails to surprise me to hear a card-carrying Republican looking down their nose at the "people that shop there" as a code word for Mexicans. The same people that criticize the patrons of Wal-Mart can usually be heard criticizing B. HUSSEIN 0bama in the next sentence. Again, all anecdotal, but there you go.

Here is the CSB part: I used to work at a Super Target. If you think that they treat their mostly part-time employees much better, you are sorely mistaken. The same positions in a Wal-Mart receive larger raises and better benefits in a much more timely manner, so Target is in fact (in my opinion) a worse employer than Wal-Mart. I offer this because they are most often compared to Wal-Mart as being superior. Following from what I said above about certain Conservatives disliking Wal-Mart, I have seen the same people speak very highly of Target. Target, based out of Minnesota, has given money to politicians in the past that oppose gay marriage, these politicians naturally being of the (R) persuasion. Target also donates more money to the Republican party as a whole, compared to Wal-Mart, which donates "equally" to both parties. In 2008, shortly before Barack Obama was elected, all of the employees in my Target were brought into the conference room throughout the following weeks to watch a video prepared by headquarters. In so many words, they described the "changes that may occur in the coming election in congress and government" and how all employees should be on the watch for talk of *gasp* UNIONIZING. The video described how even one employee signing up for the union could risk the entire store having to close, and anyone that spoke of unionizing to other employees was to be reported immediately and could face losing their barely above minimum wage job. All in all, Target was not a pleasant work experience. I offer much of this to my fellow Liberal-minded comrades: if you think that shopping at a place like Target over Wal-Mart is going to stick it to Republicans... sorry, you're doing much worse.

Finally, there is supposed to be a new Wal-Mart Supercenter constructed in my hometown. The city council recently approved this decision after huge amounts of public outcry against a Wal-Mart opening in the community, although chances are strong that it will become a ballot issue, whereupon Wally World will surely lose. The area where this Wal-Mart is supposed to be built has been in need of renovation since the 1980's, and no one else has shown interest in the area despite many attempts at coercing Target, Best-Buy, Kroger, Safeway, on and on... After Jan. 1st 2014, the existing strip malls and other structures will be bulldozed. If Wal-Mart is shot down by the public, nothing will be constructed; instead of an archaic, failing area losing business steadily, we will have nothing, at all. This is the best example of cutting off the nose to spite the face I can think off. At least Wal-Mart, as odious as that is for so many, will provide tax income as well as jobs, not to mention the other businesses it will attract to the area. Nope. Some people are still holding out on Barnes & Noble or some such other impossible thing to magically open a store, followed by trendy restaurants and coffee shops. Anything to avoid "that crowd" and stain the glorious shores of America with evil Chinese products that they will just buy somewhere else instead.

So.... yeah. End rant. If anyone actually read all of that, thanks. I'm just trying to say... Wal-Mart isn't all that bad. Yeah, it could be much better. I support some of the comments upthread about being willing to pay a little more to increase wages, and how laws need to be passed in order to get some more worker-friendly policies in place. But really, it's not all this evil horrible stuff you hear all the time.

/CSB Tolstoy over
 
2013-07-26 06:55:31 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: I shop there at least a few times a month, suck it.


You can pick up Blackhawks Stanley Cup Champions merchandise at decent prices.
 
2013-07-26 06:57:10 PM  

ghare: Popcorn Johnny: max_pooper: Yes. It's no big secret that suppliers have special lower grade products runs just for Walmart to meet their demand on prices. The box may have the same name on it but often it is an inferior product.

As I pointed out, that's for some electronics. I've never noticed a difference in anything I've bought at a Walmart when compared to buying the same item at another store. I have shiat all over my house that's from Walmart, CVS, Target and other places and I couldn't pick out those that were bought at Walmart if I tried.
12349876: Popcorn Johnny: 12349876: You claim you only care about money and you're buying name brands?

I'm buying name brands cheaper.

Store brands are cheaper than any name brand anywhere.  You should be getting store brands or else you're taking quality into account not just price.

Publix has pretty good store-brand stuff.


I find Publix is often cheaper than Wal-Mart if you stick to the BOGO and sale items.  As long as I don't go in with a list of absolute items or brands I will buy, and buy the closest thing or whatever they have on sale, I come out ahead.  That might mean I use Old Spice antiperspirant one month and Right Guard the next, or buy Red Baron Breakfast Pizzas instead of Hot Pockets, but it works for me.

BMFPitt: ghare: So just remember, your taxes subsidize Wal-Mart's profits. To think otherwise is ignoring reality.

I agree.  And my gripe is with the subsidies and the politicians who give them out.


The subsidies aren't direct (well, Wal-Mart may be getting direct subsidies as well) but paying someone $8.50 an hour and keeping them at 30 hours a week so that you don't have to pay for their insurance means that they'll have to take advantage of the government safety net available to everyone just to make ends meet.

To me the best solution would be to just raise the national minimum wage to something around $15/hour and make employers contribute to healthcare costs for part time employees at a rate equal the percentage of a full time schedule they work (so if full time is 40 hours a week, and someone works 30 hours, that's 75% and Wal-Mart would have to contribute 75% of the amount towards healthcare costs to that person that would contribute to a full time employee).
 
2013-07-26 06:57:23 PM  
I'm surprised this hasn't been linked at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-o1fj1rX7A&list=PL8E709BB0E08AFD2F

I like how Wal Mart forces people into their stores.pushing other stores out of business.

/fugelsang really needs a cock punch
 
2013-07-26 07:00:24 PM  
They should shut the entire company down.  The people that work there will find jobs in all the Mom and Pop shops that will instantly spring up to fulfill the demand.  And of course Mom and Pop shops are much better employers than major corporations.  They are more friendly to the environment, they pay better, they have better health care, sell better products at better prices.  There is no downside.

/oh, it doesn't work that way?
 
2013-07-26 07:01:14 PM  

Gulper Eel: brainscab: Didn't current just sell to an arab country?

It was bought by Al-Jazeera, which will be shutting Current down and relaunching as Al-Jazeera America in less than one month.


God willing
 
2013-07-26 07:04:11 PM  

SkorzenyNinja: Alright, so I'm here to drop some anecdotal retorts in Tolstoy wall-o-text form. Take this all with a huge grain of salt if you will. Let me begin by clarifying that I'm a dirty hippy and a registered Democrat, voted for Fartbongo twice (three times if you include against Hillary) and continue to support the evil liberal agenda in non-presidential election years (I'm looking at you, lazy assholes that farked everything up in the Tea Tard wave of 2010). I'm certainly on the lower end of the economic scale, so I appreciate the lower prices at Wally World.

I also have family that work at Wal-Mart, one family member specifically. They get about $10.50-$11 an hour I believe, full time with health insurance and all after five years with the company. Right there, that is above the average wage this fine gentleman spoke of in his video, and that is only for a cashier. I don't know if living in Colorado is a part of that, but there you go. Full time, pay that's moderately above minimum wage, and the all powerful health insurance. Thanks to this healthcare, their significant other was recently able to retire comfortably after 35+ years with their own job. In my mind, that is a solid on Wal-Mart.


Does it take 5 years to get benefits?  That seems like an absurdly long amount of time.  Most reputable companies start full benefits at the hire date, or 30/60/90 days after hire.

Also, 5 years in and only $11 an hour?  That's not exactly something that people should be shooting for.
 
2013-07-26 07:04:27 PM  

Propain_az: They should shut the entire company down.  The people that work there will find jobs in all the Mom and Pop shops that will instantly spring up to fulfill the demand.  And of course Mom and Pop shops are much better employers than major corporations.  They are more friendly to the environment, they pay better, they have better health care, sell better products at better prices.  There is no downside.

/oh, it doesn't work that way?


You're right.  The Mom and Pop argument is the only reason people hate Wal Mart.

/oh, it doesn't work that way?
 
2013-07-26 07:04:39 PM  
the attacks on Walmart are severely misguided, as most other big-box retailers (and Amazon) are guilty of the same things that Walmart does.

I hear and see a lot of crying over Walmart killing off small businesses and stopping collective organization of workers, but almost never hear of complaints of the same against from by Target, Sears, Kmart, Macys, Best Buy, Staples, Home Depot, Lowes, Kohls, Family Dollar, Big Lots, Ikea, etc. All of them are guilty. And "killing" Walmart wouldn't solve it, as some other behemoth would come to take its place (as Walmart did to Sears Roebuck).
 
2013-07-26 07:06:33 PM  

Sudlow: I like how Wal Mart forces people into their stores.pushing other stores out of business.


Yeah, mom and pop stores weren't already a dying breed because of Target, Penny's, Sears, K-Mart, CVS, Walgreens, Office Depot, Office Max, Best Buy, Home Depot, Lowes, and countless other large retail chains. Walmart isn't doing anything different than anybody else, they're just doing it the best.
 
2013-07-26 07:11:15 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: SkorzenyNinja: Alright, so I'm here to drop some anecdotal retorts in Tolstoy wall-o-text form. Take this all with a huge grain of salt if you will. Let me begin by clarifying that I'm a dirty hippy and a registered Democrat, voted for Fartbongo twice (three times if you include against Hillary) and continue to support the evil liberal agenda in non-presidential election years (I'm looking at you, lazy assholes that farked everything up in the Tea Tard wave of 2010). I'm certainly on the lower end of the economic scale, so I appreciate the lower prices at Wally World.

I also have family that work at Wal-Mart, one family member specifically. They get about $10.50-$11 an hour I believe, full time with health insurance and all after five years with the company. Right there, that is above the average wage this fine gentleman spoke of in his video, and that is only for a cashier. I don't know if living in Colorado is a part of that, but there you go. Full time, pay that's moderately above minimum wage, and the all powerful health insurance. Thanks to this healthcare, their significant other was recently able to retire comfortably after 35+ years with their own job. In my mind, that is a solid on Wal-Mart.

Does it take 5 years to get benefits?  That seems like an absurdly long amount of time.  Most reputable companies start full benefits at the hire date, or 30/60/90 days after hire.

Also, 5 years in and only $11 an hour?  That's not exactly something that people should be shooting for.


Yep that's just about the poverty line for a family of 3.
 
2013-07-26 07:11:41 PM  

SkorzenyNinja: They get about $10.50-$11 an hour I believe, full time with health insurance and all after five years with the company.


It took 5 years to get to that point?  Sorry, but she got gypped.  I work in an inbound call center for a hotel chain, and our reps hit that point within 90 days.

/they start out full time at $10 an hour
//after 90 days, they get health insurance and a $0.50 raise
///and then they get performance bonuses on top of that
 
2013-07-26 07:12:19 PM  
TuteTibiImperes:

Does it take 5 years to get benefits?  That seems like an absurdly long amount of time.  Most reputable companies start full benefits at the hire date, or 30/60/90 days after hire.

No, I believe you are correct, they received their benefits in the first year, but not having worked at Wal-Mart, I can't give you specifics.

Also, 5 years in and only $11 an hour?  That's not exactly something that people should be shooting for.

I can, however, tell you that full-time employees constantly scoring "good" or "excellent" in all categories on yearly evaluations at Target, including pushing the despised Red Card on poor schmucks who had no farking clue what they were signing (don't take the 10% off for that farking thing) didn't fare any better. 18 cent raises, 25 cent raises, to the point where you start with $8.00 an hour and only make about $8.50-8.60 after more than three years with the company. All of this in the name of "oh, the economy isn't doing very well, sorry". Yeah, fark that shiat. I know what kind of profits this company makes.

I really do believe that Wal-Mart offers better raises to their employees than Target does, however this is all anecdotal. I know for certain that if you choose to work in one of these major box retailers, go for Costco. They really do treat their employees very well, from what I've heard.
 
2013-07-26 07:13:01 PM  

silvervial: Lackofname: I will say when I lived in NY and MD, I was happy to not be shopping at Walmart. But since I had to move back in with my parents in Tennessee, Walmart is really the only game around. Also since I can't drive I don't really get to choose where groceries are gotten.

This is actually how Walmart grew into such a powerhouse, enough to earn the praises of deluded shills like Debeo Summa Credo. They drive the competition out of town and end up being the only game around. This is pretty much the *opposite* of the kind of capitalism that people *think* we have.


They drive the competition out of town by offering better value.

If they really do offer shiattier products, a horrific shopping experience, and lousy value, as farklibs seem to believe, consumers will eventually move to other retailers, driving Walmart out of business.

Then we can share a toast. Me to the free markets working, as usual, and you all to the demise of the horrific and evil monstrosity known as Walmart.
 
2013-07-26 07:14:07 PM  

HeartBurnKid: SkorzenyNinja: They get about $10.50-$11 an hour I believe, full time with health insurance and all after five years with the company.

It took 5 years to get to that point?  Sorry, but she got gypped.  I work in an inbound call center for a hotel chain, and our reps hit that point within 90 days.

/they start out full time at $10 an hour
//after 90 days, they get health insurance and a $0.50 raise
///and then they get performance bonuses on top of that


Agreed, it's not great. That's not what I'm trying to say. I'm asking you to compare to other locations of the same nature: Target, Kroger, Safeway, etc. In that kind of job market, you take what you can get, and from what I've seen/heard it's usually starting in the $8.00 range, even full time.
 
2013-07-26 07:16:24 PM  

SkorzenyNinja: HeartBurnKid: SkorzenyNinja: They get about $10.50-$11 an hour I believe, full time with health insurance and all after five years with the company.

It took 5 years to get to that point?  Sorry, but she got gypped.  I work in an inbound call center for a hotel chain, and our reps hit that point within 90 days.

/they start out full time at $10 an hour
//after 90 days, they get health insurance and a $0.50 raise
///and then they get performance bonuses on top of that

Agreed, it's not great. That's not what I'm trying to say. I'm asking you to compare to other locations of the same nature: Target, Kroger, Safeway, etc. In that kind of job market, you take what you can get, and from what I've seen/heard it's usually starting in the $8.00 range, even full time.


Not sure how it is where you live, but the local versions of Kroger and Safeway where I live (Ralph's and Vons, respectively) are unionized and start new hires at, I believe, $11.00 per hour.
 
2013-07-26 07:19:29 PM  

HeartBurnKid: SkorzenyNinja: HeartBurnKid: SkorzenyNinja: They get about $10.50-$11 an hour I believe, full time with health insurance and all after five years with the company.

It took 5 years to get to that point?  Sorry, but she got gypped.  I work in an inbound call center for a hotel chain, and our reps hit that point within 90 days.

/they start out full time at $10 an hour
//after 90 days, they get health insurance and a $0.50 raise
///and then they get performance bonuses on top of that

Agreed, it's not great. That's not what I'm trying to say. I'm asking you to compare to other locations of the same nature: Target, Kroger, Safeway, etc. In that kind of job market, you take what you can get, and from what I've seen/heard it's usually starting in the $8.00 range, even full time.

Not sure how it is where you live, but the local versions of Kroger and Safeway where I live (Ralph's and Vons, respectively) are unionized and start new hires at, I believe, $11.00 per hour.


Yup, it is different here. Kroger and Safeway are unionized, but usually start right above minimum wage. I worked at King Soopers (Kroger) for a year in high school, and I started at about $7.19 I believe. I know someone that just got hired on as a deli clerk for Kroger and they are starting at $9.15. I recall cashiers making $9.13.
 
2013-07-26 07:19:39 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: silvervial: Lackofname: I will say when I lived in NY and MD, I was happy to not be shopping at Walmart. But since I had to move back in with my parents in Tennessee, Walmart is really the only game around. Also since I can't drive I don't really get to choose where groceries are gotten.

This is actually how Walmart grew into such a powerhouse, enough to earn the praises of deluded shills like Debeo Summa Credo. They drive the competition out of town and end up being the only game around. This is pretty much the *opposite* of the kind of capitalism that people *think* we have.

They drive the competition out of town by offering better value.

If they really do offer shiattier products, a horrific shopping experience, and lousy value, as farklibs seem to believe, consumers will eventually move to other retailers, driving Walmart out of business.

Then we can share a toast. Me to the free markets working, as usual, and you all to the demise of the horrific and evil monstrosity known as Walmart.


The point is that the consumers CAN'T "move on to other retailers" because THEY AREN'T AROUND ANYMORE!
 
2013-07-26 07:24:46 PM  
It really is amusing to see right-wingers shilling for corporations with big ties to the Chinese. I suppose hating Communists takes a back seat to pissing off the libs, eh?
 
2013-07-26 07:25:18 PM  

revrendjim: I heard (from a regional-level Wal-Mart manager) that some of their products have lower prices because they are lower quality, even if they are well-known national brands. Wal-Mart controls about a fourth of all the grocery business in the US and has so much leverage that they can demand lower prices from their suppliers, so the manufacturers run special batches just for Wal-Mart where they use inferior ingredients and cut corners any way they can.


Smells like bullshiat. A vendor is going to put their name on a shiattier quality product just for walmart? No chance.

Do you think the consumer is going to attribute the shiftiness of a, I don't know, Brinkmann grill to Walmart or are they going to tell their friends not to buy a Brinkmann grill?
 
2013-07-26 07:28:52 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Smells like bullshiat. A vendor is going to put their name on a shiattier quality product just for walmart? No chance.


This is documented fact.

http://www.cio.com/article/31948/Supply_Chain_Partnerships_How_Levi_s _ Got_Its_Jeans_into_Wal_Mart
 
2013-07-26 07:30:10 PM  

LordJiro: It really is amusing to see right-wingers shilling for corporations with big ties to the Chinese. I suppose hating Communists takes a back seat to pissing off the libs, eh?


What I like is all of the examples from them of how reality and capitalist theory don't line up and the conclusion that reality must be wrong.
 
2013-07-26 07:30:16 PM  
Damn you farkscripts, there were no spaces in that URL.
 
2013-07-26 07:30:29 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: They drive the competition out of town by offering better value.

If they really do offer shiattier products, a horrific shopping experience, and lousy value, as farklibs seem to believe, consumers will eventually move to other retailers, driving Walmart out of business.


Your naivete amuses me.
 
2013-07-26 07:31:09 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: meat0918: Wait, people still defend Wal-Mart?

I mean besides stock-holders?

Nah, the stock holders don't defend it. They just say "I got mine, Fark You!":


Yep. Wal-Mart wiped out competition wherever they could, from producer to wholesaler to distributor to retailer. They're the best possible example of naked capitalism you'll find on a large scale - they're happy to milk your entire country for all it's worth, if it means eking out a fractional increase in their profit margin.

And, yes, the idiots defending them are of the "fark you, got mine" ilk - they see a successful business, even as their stores dot landscapes devoid of competition, culture, or even society. They don't care how Wal-Mart got there - the fact that they got there is all that matters to them. They're the same folks that believe in prosperity gospel, that believe in the rich because they're rich, that oddly believe that they, too, have a chance at being rich, and conversely despise those unwilling or unable to lie, cheat, and steal their way to being rich.
 
2013-07-26 07:33:22 PM  

Ed Grubermann: Debeo Summa Credo: Where are all these shiatty walmarts? I've been into maybe half a dozen, in the northeast, and they've all been fine. It's not farking nordstroms but it always seems reasonably clean and organized.

Let's see, the one in Stockton, California, is pretty damned disgusting. And the one in Anchorage, Alaska, requires a tetanus shot before you can leave the building... But, it's not the cleanliness that's the issue. Nor is it the decor (Costco has no decor and doesn't feel as shiatty as a WalMart). It's the thick film of desperation and poverty that permeates the buildings like some horrific miasma. Every time I've been in a WalMart I've felt like I needed a squeegee and a bath in acid to get the stink off of me.


Sounds like the one by me in the suburbs of St. Louis.

Even though I live in a fairly middle class suburb, it still has that thick film of desperation and poverty. It also doesn't help that it isn't a supercenter so Walmart doesn't bother to keep the store clean and fully staffed.

The main reason I don't shop there anymore unless I really have to is because the service there has become so godawful (because it's so understaffed) that I'm wasting an hour in line buying headphones that I could've gotten at Walgreen for a couple more bucks in less than 5 minutes.
 
2013-07-26 07:33:40 PM  

silvervial: Debeo Summa Credo: silvervial: Lackofname: I will say when I lived in NY and MD, I was happy to not be shopping at Walmart. But since I had to move back in with my parents in Tennessee, Walmart is really the only game around. Also since I can't drive I don't really get to choose where groceries are gotten.

This is actually how Walmart grew into such a powerhouse, enough to earn the praises of deluded shills like Debeo Summa Credo. They drive the competition out of town and end up being the only game around. This is pretty much the *opposite* of the kind of capitalism that people *think* we have.

They drive the competition out of town by offering better value.

If they really do offer shiattier products, a horrific shopping experience, and lousy value, as farklibs seem to believe, consumers will eventually move to other retailers, driving Walmart out of business.

Then we can share a toast. Me to the free markets working, as usual, and you all to the demise of the horrific and evil monstrosity known as Walmart.

The point is that the consumers CAN'T "move on to other retailers" because THEY AREN'T AROUND ANYMORE!


Laughable nonsense. 99% (wild estimate) of the country could go somewhere else to buy whatever they need. Maybe there are some rural areas where all the bad stories about Walmart are true. But in the vast, vast, majority of the country Walmart isn't anywhere close to a monopoly.

And if they did want to be a monopoly, by offering lower prices as they do, they are doing it wrong.
 
2013-07-26 07:35:49 PM  

Kazrath: You raise minimum wage and the price of stuff goes up immediately.


Anyone who condones this is a corporatist shill. The average CEO:worker pay ratio has gone from about 5:1 to 500:1 in the past 50 years. Their profits are higher and their taxes are lower than they've ever been. The idea that higher wages must come out of OUR pockets, not those of executives who are strangling their own companies, is indefensible. Still, conservatives have successfully created this big lie that capitalists are forces of nature, that their actions may not be opposed, and that any effort to ease the burden on the lower class actually HURTS them in the long run because the upper class have the power and influence to pass the buck.
 
2013-07-26 07:39:55 PM  

ghare: Oh, and I'd like to invite people who want to see Hell to experience the Wal-Mart on South Semoran in Orlando. I'm sure there are worse places, but the employees look damned.


There was a Super Target in Orlando that was like walking into Heaven.  The place was so clean the sparkle made my eyes hurt, everyone was nice to me, and folks kept offering me free food.
 
2013-07-26 07:40:59 PM  

SkorzenyNinja: I also have family that work at Wal-Mart, one family member specifically. They get about $10.50-$11 an hour I believe, full time with health insurance and all after five years with the company.


Setting aside the way that Wal-Mart is increasingly preventing staff from working full-time hours just so they can deny employees these kinds of benefits...I don't think a $22,000 a year job is the kind of thing that's going to strengthen the middle class.

It's bad for the employees, and even Forbes recognizes it's bad for business:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/04/17/walmart-pays-worker s- poorly-and-sinks-while-costco-pays-workers-well-and-sails-proof-that-y ou-get-what-you-pay-for/
 
2013-07-26 07:41:45 PM  

Bung_Howdy: [24.media.tumblr.com image 500x267]


One and done. Unless I took it the wrong way. In that case, fark you, Jack/Frank.
 
2013-07-26 07:44:00 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: CynicalLA: White trash love them some Walmart!

Internet sheep love to hate on some Walmart!


I disagree with about 95% of what you post on Fark, but this thread is ridiculous. Everyone is jumping all over your ass because you shop at Wal Mart because its the economically sound decision. You're not even defending their business practices, just saying you shop there because its cheaper (as anyone smart with their money would do).

People around here can be so farking stupid.
 
2013-07-26 07:46:43 PM  

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: I disagree with about 95% of what you post on Fark, but this thread is ridiculous. Everyone is jumping all over your ass because you shop at Wal Mart because its the economically sound decision. You're not even defending their business practices, just saying you shop there because its cheaper (as anyone smart with their money would do).


And if you'd understood anything you read, you'd see that everyone is mentioning the hidden price of shopping there, mainly via taxes to support Wal-Mart's poverty wages.

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: People around here can be so farking stupid.


Right back at ya.
 
2013-07-26 07:48:03 PM  

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: Popcorn Johnny: CynicalLA: White trash love them some Walmart!

Internet sheep love to hate on some Walmart!

I disagree with about 95% of what you post on Fark, but this thread is ridiculous. Everyone is jumping all over your ass because you shop at Wal Mart because its the economically sound decision. You're not even defending their business practices, just saying you shop there because its cheaper (as anyone smart with their money would do).

People around here can be so farking stupid.


And we're pointing out you'd have to be a dumbass to base every life decision based solely on the economical.  He himself even admitted so in saying he bought brand names.
 
2013-07-26 07:48:31 PM  
Look at it in terms of internet service providers. We've all seen what has happened in the last 20 years.

There used to be about 25 small ISPs when home internet started around 1995 (in my area). You could shop around and pick which one gave you the best service and price.

Now, the only, the ONLY, option for an ISP in my area is Comcast. They bought out or drove out of business all the small providers in less than 20 years, using various methods, and yes, one of those methods was price, in the beginning. Once the competition was gone, the rates have gone up and the service has gotten worse, and it's only going to get worse because they KNOW we have no other option.

And to provide competitive options will take another communications behemoth, because only they have the capital needed to put in their own lines, etc. A mom and pop ISP can't operate anymore. And the more rural you are, the fewer options you have, and that includes stores.
 
2013-07-26 07:49:17 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: I disagree with about 95% of what you post on Fark, but this thread is ridiculous. Everyone is jumping all over your ass because you shop at Wal Mart because its the economically sound decision. You're not even defending their business practices, just saying you shop there because its cheaper (as anyone smart with their money would do).

And if you'd understood anything you read, you'd see that everyone is mentioning the hidden price of shopping there, mainly via taxes to support Wal-Mart's poverty wages.

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: People around here can be so farking stupid.

Right back at ya.


Don't like subsidizing the workers? Cut the farking subsidy!!!

Its not walmarts fault. If Walmart wasnt around, we'd be paying even more to support these people, and every other poor person who now shops at Walmart would have a harder time making ends meet!
 
2013-07-26 07:51:15 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Sergeant Grumbles: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: I disagree with about 95% of what you post on Fark, but this thread is ridiculous. Everyone is jumping all over your ass because you shop at Wal Mart because its the economically sound decision. You're not even defending their business practices, just saying you shop there because its cheaper (as anyone smart with their money would do).

And if you'd understood anything you read, you'd see that everyone is mentioning the hidden price of shopping there, mainly via taxes to support Wal-Mart's poverty wages.

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: People around here can be so farking stupid.

Right back at ya.

Don't like subsidizing the workers? Cut the farking subsidy!!!

Its not walmarts fault. If Walmart wasnt around, we'd be paying even more to support these people, and every other poor person who now shops at Walmart would have a harder time making ends meet!


Yes, it's the WORKERS' fault Walmart refuses to pay them a decent wage!
 
2013-07-26 07:51:19 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Sergeant Grumbles: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: I disagree with about 95% of what you post on Fark, but this thread is ridiculous. Everyone is jumping all over your ass because you shop at Wal Mart because its the economically sound decision. You're not even defending their business practices, just saying you shop there because its cheaper (as anyone smart with their money would do).

And if you'd understood anything you read, you'd see that everyone is mentioning the hidden price of shopping there, mainly via taxes to support Wal-Mart's poverty wages.

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: People around here can be so farking stupid.

Right back at ya.

Don't like subsidizing the workers? Cut the farking subsidy!!!

Its not walmarts fault. If Walmart wasnt around, we'd be paying even more to support these people, and every other poor person who now shops at Walmart would have a harder time making ends meet!


How will cutting the subsidy help?
 
2013-07-26 07:51:33 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: And if you'd understood anything you read, you'd see that everyone is mentioning the hidden price of shopping there, mainly via taxes to support Wal-Mart's poverty wages.


So your taxes are lower at the end of the year because you don't shop at Walmart? Also, what's the additional tax burden on the average taxpayer and how does it compare to the savings they've had by shopping at Wally World?
 
2013-07-26 07:53:01 PM  
I have to admit, its pretty pitiful that one with a job still has to rely on welfare to survive.

/my two cents
 
2013-07-26 07:53:51 PM  

revrendjim: I heard (from a regional-level Wal-Mart manager) that some of their products have lower prices because they are lower quality, even if they are well-known national brands. Wal-Mart controls about a fourth of all the grocery business in the US and has so much leverage that they can demand lower prices from their suppliers, so the manufacturers run special batches just for Wal-Mart where they use inferior ingredients and cut corners any way they can.


I've heard that about firearms. Remington, Winchester, ad nauseum dump their seconds on WalMart. Never been confirmed though, IIRC.
 
2013-07-26 07:54:55 PM  

12349876: And we're pointing out you'd have to be a dumbass to base every life decision based solely on the economical.  He himself even admitted so in saying he bought brand names.


That line of reasoning still makes no farking sense.
 
2013-07-26 07:55:12 PM  
Walmart is truely the embodiment of the saying "you get what you pay for".

/shiatty products, shiatty Service, overall a miserable place to shop
 
2013-07-26 07:55:43 PM  

silvervial: Look at it in terms of internet service providers. We've all seen what has happened in the last 20 years.

There used to be about 25 small ISPs when home internet started around 1995 (in my area). You could shop around and pick which one gave you the best service and price.

Now, the only, the ONLY, option for an ISP in my area is Comcast. They bought out or drove out of business all the small providers in less than 20 years, using various methods, and yes, one of those methods was price, in the beginning. Once the competition was gone, the rates have gone up and the service has gotten worse, and it's only going to get worse because they KNOW we have no other option.

And to provide competitive options will take another communications behemoth, because only they have the capital needed to put in their own lines, etc. A mom and pop ISP can't operate anymore. And the more rural you are, the fewer options you have, and that includes stores.


It's not exactly the same thing.  In 1995 it was pretty much all dial-up, you called into a bank of modems at the ISP central location that was served by a high speed line that they purchased and linked you to the rest of the Internet.

When broadband started taking over the infrastructure costs drove the small time players out.  Comcast already owned the cable lines going to your house, so they were the ones who could offer the service.  Around here if you want cable internet Comcast is the only game in town, but if you are willing to deal with DSL you can go with CenturyLink, and if you want satellite broadband you can go with Dish or Hughesnet.  If you want dial up you can still get service through a couple companies.

Verizon and AT&T have been trying to compete by laying fiber to the home or fiber to the node in some areas, though it's mostly available only in heavily urbanized population centers and the areas immediately surrounding them for now.  Wireless broadband has potential, but we'll need a much more robust wireless infrastructure nationwide to take the load of both increasing phone data and data from what used to be handled through cable/DSL/whatever if we expect decent speeds without ridiculously small bandwidth caps.

I suppose the government could mandate line sharing so that other companies could use Comcast's network to offer their own service, but that never seems to have caught on.
 
Displayed 50 of 437 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report