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  
•       •       •

10775 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
 
2013-07-27 01:27:17 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: 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.


That's poverty line for a single guy, let alone some poor sap with a wife and kid.

$15/hr is the minimum to keep your head above water and not be living out of food pantries and used clothes.

$25/hr is what any Journeyman in the country could count on in a job and everybody thought was a damn good job 4 DECADES ago, and is still considered good pay today. Something is seriously wrong with that.
 
2013-07-27 01:29:10 AM

Cletus C.: By his logic, the only way for an individual to recoup any of he money the company is costing society is to save money by shopping at Walmart.

I don't think that's what he was saying, vicious circle, etc.


That's the logic I use when I go there. But if I could find another store near me that sold Heartland gluten free pasta...
 
2013-07-27 01:30:20 AM

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!


Right, because people with jobs are living off the teat of society.

Did that statement hurt? Did your ears pop? Loss in equilibrium? I refuse to believe something that stupid could be made by someone with no negative physical consequence to them.
 
2013-07-27 01:34:10 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: tenpoundsofcheese: Philip Francis Queeg: Debeo Summa Credo: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: Is it possible to not use Walmart because I feel the onus of responsibility is on the consumer?

A corporation is a soulless legal entity that exists to maximize utility for its owners (just like a union). It has no political views and no ethical restrictions and will consider all available options to maximize utility. If Walmart thought that it could make more money by closing the stores and building cruise ships, it would do so. If Walmart thought it could get away with paying labor a cheaper rate, it would do so. And if Walmart thought that it could improve business by giving billions of dollars away to save the rain forest charities, it would also do so. The only ways to control a corporation are through consumption and through the government (both of which required informed citizenry - a major no-no).

I don't agree with Walmart's stance on labor rights and blatant abuse of economies of scale, so I don't use them.

/Filthy liberal socialist

I'm okay with this. Everyone should follow your example: don't like Walmart? Don't shop there.

I'll go because those near me arent nearly as bad as they apparently are in other parts of the country, and they have good prices on basic staples.

You go because you believe that the highest ideal anyone can strive for is to make profits for a large corporation.

Would it be better if they had low profits so the  shareholders, like all the unions, pensions, and people who have 401ks or any investments got screwed?

That is what you want?

When was the last time you demanded to make less so that there shareholders would do better?


Yep. But he won't, since he thinks the solution to a workforce dependant on safety nets is to cut the safety nets...

Does he realize how disastrous cutting those safety nets would be to Wal-Mart? I bet Wal-Mart would lose half its prospective workforce if those nets were fully done away with, because with what WM pays them they wouldn't be able to afford the commute to and from work every day.

Although, I think his and maybe Wal-Mart's ultimate goal is the return of the company town of old. Pullman's for everybody!
 
2013-07-27 01:35:42 AM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: tenpoundsofcheese (farkied: It ain't cheese): Lee Jackson Beauregard: meat0918: Wait, people still defend Wal-Mart?

I mean besides stock-holders?

Ctrl-F tenpoundsofcheese.

Meh.  They sell almost a half trillion dollars worth of stuff, so plenty of people vote with their wallet and support Walmart and their shareholders.

McDonald's is the best-selling fast food restaurant.  Pretty damn close to all of the others make better food.


And Fox News has the highest ratings among cable news channels.
 
2013-07-27 01:36:17 AM
...and, of course, I quote the wrong damn comment. This is what I was responding to:

Selena Luna: IlGreven: Selena Luna: Debeo Summa Credo: peacheslatour: Popcorn Johnny: I shop there at least a few times a month, suck it.

You would.

So do millions and millions of other people, because they can get more for their money there.

Shake your impotent fists of rage all you want, this is a fact.

Over time, it costs considerably more. When the only clothes I could afford were WalMart clothes, I was replacing them all the time. I can afford better clothes now and they last much longer. I realize this is an anecdote, but it's also the case with most of the crap. Your money doesn't go further there.

Remember, cost is money x time. Which costs less, really: Something that you pay $400 for that lasts six months, or something you pay $600 for that lasts 2 years?

I thought that's what I was saying... Were you telling the other guy to remember this?


Yep. But he won't, since he thinks the solution to a workforce dependant on safety nets is to cut the safety nets...

Does he realize how disastrous cutting those safety nets would be to Wal-Mart? I bet Wal-Mart would lose half its prospective workforce if those nets were fully done away with, because with what WM pays them they wouldn't be able to afford the commute to and from work every day.

Although, I think his and maybe Wal-Mart's ultimate goal is the return of the company town of old. Pullman's for everybody!
 
2013-07-27 01:36:22 AM

Lsherm: I Like Bread: 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.

Even though executive compensation is grossly out of proportion with what is deserved, you couldn't fund a minimum wage hike with their compensation.  It's not enough.


What?

Yes you could, here's how you do it, you progressively tax the shiat out of all compensation. Want to make more than, oh say $400k/year? You're paying 90% on every dollar to uncle Sam. All of a sudden it's no longer feasible to pay yourself more than $400k, the money is instead reinvested into either the company or compensating other employees. That's how we became the powerhouse of the world all through the 50's, 60's and 70's. EVERYBODY could make a good living, not just the lucky few in the top quintile.
 
2013-07-27 01:39:10 AM

The My Little Pony Killer: It's a shiatty financial decision and you should feel bad for making it. It has nothing to do with libruls, dear.


Your first claim is equal parts wrong and presumptuous (are you actually claiming to know my budget better than I do?), and regarding your second, I don't feel the tiniest iota bad about shopping at Walmart.


i.imgur.com
 
2013-07-27 01:39:42 AM

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.


Walmart used to be all about using their superior logistics to demand lower prices from suppliers. They claimed to pass the savings to customers. When that wasn't enough for the shareholders, they cut costs internally, by ignoring quality and shafting employees.

fark'em.
 
2013-07-27 01:41:06 AM

Captain Dan: In this case, it's liberals who are nosy, so they're the ones resented. In other contexts the meddlesome pricks might be conservative (e.g. pushing creationism in public schools).


Can we just compromise?  Conservatives won't tell liberals how to live their lives, and liberals won't tell conservatives how to run their businesses?

Actually, that sounds like libertarianism.
 
2013-07-27 01:43:17 AM

foo monkey: 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.

Walmart used to be all about using their superior logistics to demand lower prices from suppliers. They claimed to pass the savings to customers. When that wasn't enough for the shareholders, they cut costs internally, by ignoring quality and shafting employees.

fark'em.


That sounds about right.

Ironically the Walmarts by me started to go downhill around the same time they rebranded the stores to appeal to more middle class (Target) shoppers on a national level.
 
2013-07-27 02:15:01 AM
"At least the still have the ammo price stickers in that locker thingy"
 
2013-07-27 02:44:45 AM

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


I'm sorry you are so poor that you are forced to buy shiatty products made in a shiatty country from a shiatty store that treats its employees like shiat.  You'll be replacing whatever you bought very soon since it was made so shiatty it will self destruct in short order.

I bet my vacuum cost more than your car.
 
2013-07-27 02:47:05 AM

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

I have never set foot in a Walmart and I don't even know where one is located in my vicinity.

Suck it.


We're driving around doing errands when my roommate said, "let's swing by walmart, I need to get a few things."  I said, "just drop me off right here."  He said, "ha ha, funny."  I said, "I'm serious, drop me off right here.  I refuse to go near that store."  He chose to go to walmart another time.
 
2013-07-27 02:48:49 AM

Popcorn Johnny: ghare: Unemployed, or on disability?

I'm on the higher end of the average Farker pay scale, that doesn't mean I'm not going to shop smart. If you feel superior by paying more for what you buy, rock on with your bad self


God, just STFU. You ain't on the higher end of any scale except "paint chip consumption".

Compare yourself to service workers all you want, you're still a loser.
 
2013-07-27 02:50:05 AM
I get better deals at Hy-Vee and Walgreens than I could find at Walmart.  Plus, my time is valuable, so I calculate that into the savings as well.  I can get all of my shopping done in 1/2 the time, plus the fruits and vegetables that I get are better quality and the checkout people actually smile.  I've actually found maggots in vegetables at Walmart...I've never seen that anywhere else.
 
2013-07-27 02:51:28 AM

Captain Dan: The My Little Pony Killer: It's a shiatty financial decision and you should feel bad for making it. It has nothing to do with libruls, dear.

Your first claim is equal parts wrong and presumptuous (are you actually claiming to know my budget better than I do?), and regarding your second, I don't feel the tiniest iota bad about shopping at Walmart.


[i.imgur.com image 400x154]


Keep livin' in that vacuum, son. Keep leaching off the rest of us. It's ok, we'll cover you.
 
2013-07-27 03:00:25 AM

OgreMagi: I bet my vacuum cost more than your car.


I'm driving a 2013 car, what kind of vacuum do you have?
 
2013-07-27 03:15:15 AM

Popcorn Johnny: I'm driving a 2013 car


of course you are sweetie. of course you are.
 
2013-07-27 03:18:44 AM

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

You would.

So do millions and millions of other people, because they can get more for their money there.

Shake your impotent fists of rage all you want, this is a fact.


Should we feel sorry for the person who would forge the chains used to keep him in bondage?

The whole point behind the "impotent rage" as you call it is that people are NOT getting more for their money there, because they are paying the salaries of those employees (and their corporate masters) in taxes. If they were smart enough to realize this, Walmart would go out of business tomorrow, but they count on the stupidity, stubbornness and sloth of the american suburbanite to continue their existence and increase their profits.

The irony is that the people who would support such corporations are the same ones who b*tch about paying more taxes all the time, and are too slow-witted to realize why.
 
2013-07-27 03:29:17 AM
@Debeo Summa credo; I've only been in like three walmarts in my life, each one has between filthy with rude employees.. I don't understand the appeal of the place, it wasn't even cheaper then other comparable places..
 
2013-07-27 03:50:41 AM

joonyer: Keep livin' in that vacuum, son. Keep leaching off the rest of us. It's ok, we'll cover you.


Joonyer, you ignorant slut.  Your pointless sentences are the product of a malfunctioning peanut brain.  Before you respond, take a class in remedial English so you'll be able to spell it correctly.
 
2013-07-27 03:53:58 AM

BMFPitt: I will still shop there if the price is 30% more. Especially if the workers are better treated.

Why? That would make then significantly more expensive than their competitors. If you're saying you'd pay more for better-paid workers, why aren't you shopping at a place that pays workers better right now?


I do, and the name of the place is spelled C-O-S-T-C-O. The local one is right across the street from a Wal-Mart, so I've had opportunity to compare both of them with a 100 yard or so stroll.
I walk into Costco... clean, well-lit, they have what I want and people of above average intelligence to help me find it, including well made american, japanese, korean and european brands.

I walk into the WalMart... it's like a farking George Romero movie. Filthy walked through puddles of crap spilled on the floor, items and clothing that feel as if they will fall apart as you try them on, and checkout people who seem to have left a few chromosomes at home. I won't even go into what the zombie customer base was like.

There is no comparison. I pay more for Costco, but I only have to buy it once.
 
2013-07-27 04:01:37 AM
Wow Debbie thinks WalMart's all right?

img191.imageshack.us
 
2013-07-27 04:04:39 AM

max_pooper: Popcorn Johnny: ghare: the few extra dollars I pay for higher quality merchandise, and better service

Wait, your can of Arrid deodorant, Irish Spring soap, Suave shampoo and Crest toothpaste are better than the ones I buy at Walmart? Better service, do they give you a hand job while waiting in line where you shop?

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.


The part number is different.
 
2013-07-27 04:23:12 AM
I've never shopped at Walmart, neener neener

Give it a rest. With the way it underpays employees and puts locals out of business, Walmart is basically making its own consumer base.
 
2013-07-27 04:36:54 AM
Happy Reading!

warning..pdf
 
2013-07-27 05:07:40 AM

DVOM: max_pooper: Popcorn Johnny: ghare: the few extra dollars I pay for higher quality merchandise, and better service

Wait, your can of Arrid deodorant, Irish Spring soap, Suave shampoo and Crest toothpaste are better than the ones I buy at Walmart? Better service, do they give you a hand job while waiting in line where you shop?

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.

The part number is different.


Not just that. Inferior electrical components, substandard plastics, QC failed lcds/leds/oleds, QC failed boards, you name it. When I worked PC Repair and we had customers who told us they got it at Walmart, we flat out told them get a new computer from anywhere else. We literally didn't have to even open it up to know it had popped caps.

The only thing I've bought electronic at Walmart was my 3DS, because they CAN'T screw that up.
 
2013-07-27 05:19:29 AM
Captain Dan:

What you read as "pride" is mostly backlash against the nosy liberals who want to impose their preferences on other people.

I'm not sure I'd categorize revenge as something to be proud of, either.
 
2013-07-27 06:11:35 AM

The My Little Pony Killer: meanmutton: Every other store you shop at has employment practices effectively the same as WalMart.

You have a citation for this tidbit?


People who have no option but to shop at Wal-Mart will defend Wal-Mart.
 
2013-07-27 06:17:39 AM

ghare: The My Little Pony Killer: meanmutton: Every other store you shop at has employment practices effectively the same as WalMart.

You have a citation for this tidbit?

People who have no option but to shop at Wal-Mart will defend Wal-Mart.


Or people who are paid to. Seriously, have you READ some of the Walmart defenders' posts in this thread? They sound like farking commercials.
 
2013-07-27 06:25:57 AM

ghare: People who have no option but to shop at Wal-Mart will defend Wal-Mart.


I have no option but to shop at walmart. (It's the only place open when I'm in town) but you won't see me defend it. I can only imagine how soul crushing it is to work there.
 
2013-07-27 07:02:59 AM

Ringshadow: There were two local box stores, a Walmart, and a Kroger's. And it was single-handedly the most useless Walmart I'd ever been in. Nothing was ever stocked. Every time I went entire shelves were empty. I went a grand total of three times I think, and never for groceries. I shopped at Kroger's almost exclusively. Initially, I assumed that the rush of outage workers had overwhelmed the local Walmart.


That's the funniest thing about Walmart: between their byzintine accounting practices and the way they flim-flam their suppliers, while what they offer is cheap, they frequently don't actually have product on the shelves of their stores, which gives them the look of State stores in the Soviet Union.
 
2013-07-27 07:10:57 AM

log_jammin: ghare: People who have no option but to shop at Wal-Mart will defend Wal-Mart.

I have no option but to shop at walmart. (It's the only place open when I'm in town) but you won't see me defend it. I can only imagine how soul crushing it is to work there


Hell, I have to do business with them sometimes, just like sometimes I have to do business with Enterprise car rentals even though I hate them too.

But it's always a last resort, or because someone else makes me.
 
2013-07-27 07:11:54 AM

rewind2846: I do, and the name of the place is spelled C-O-S-T-C-O. The local one is right across the street from a Wal-Mart, so I've had opportunity to compare both of them with a 100 yard or so stroll.
I walk into Costco... clean, well-lit, they have what I want and people of above average intelligence to help me find it, including well made american, japanese, korean and european brands.


Don't forget how awesome Kirkland brand is.

I walk into the WalMart... it's like a farking George Romero movie. Filthy walked through puddles of crap spilled on the floor, items and clothing that feel as if they will fall apart as you try them on, and checkout people who seem to have left a few chromosomes at home. I won't even go into what the zombie customer base was like.

That's why I've only been in there like 10 times in the last 10 years (excluding the the VUDU movie service, which they own.)  Generally either because they're 24 hours and I needed something at 2am or because of some crazy deal on electronics.

There is no comparison. I pay more for Costco, but I only have to buy it once.

I'd say that there are probably very few things you'd pay more for at Costco that were of the same quality.

But the guy I was responding to said he shops at Wally World right now, and also that he'd shop there if they were 30% more expensive.  So I wanted to know what his retarded logic was.
 
2013-07-27 07:13:45 AM
If your argument in defense of Wal-Mart is "they're successful, therefore correct, get over it," you're missing the point SOOOO HAAARD.
 
2013-07-27 07:43:56 AM

tbhouston: Oh look, it's that durrrrtard that compares Costco to Walmart instead of SAMs club.....


No, it's that farking genius who is comparing the number 1 retailer in the US, to the number 2 retailer in the US.

Besides, you durrtard - Sam's Club is not a separate company from WalMart and it is represented in WalMart's stock prices.   Why would I segregate Sam's Club performance (if that was even possible), when comparing the relative performance of WalMart's stock against Costco's?   That would be like comparing Ford's stock performance to GM and you telling me that I'm stupid for not segregating out the earnings of GMC trucks vs that of Ford trucks and using that as the metric.
 
2013-07-27 08:15:15 AM
i shop at J-mart
 
2013-07-27 08:23:13 AM
Bill Clinton signed NAFTA and made China a permanent most favored trading nation because of his and Hilary's ties to Walmart.

Walmart has literally ruined our middle class.
 
2013-07-27 08:42:32 AM

Popcorn Johnny: ghare: If you think you can't beat Wal-Mart pricing, well, that's why you're a Wal-Mart customer.

Sure there are sales at other stores on items that will beat Walmart's prices, but are you really going to drive to 15 different stores to get the things you need?


We moved here (Costa Rica) about 3 months ago. When you go down town, you visit this guy for produce, that lady for meats, this store for milk, that store for shampoo. I've not noticed anyone's head bursting into flames because of it.Once you get over your *need* for convenience, it actually works out rather well.
 
2013-07-27 08:45:37 AM

Jon iz teh kewl: i shop at J-mart


Remember, "Shop smart, shop J-Mart"
 
2013-07-27 09:00:23 AM
Not everything is a moral battle between good and evil.  In fact, almost nothing is.  Brand name choice is one of the things that isn't.  You can hate WalMart's policies and aesthetics and still go there looking for some cheap patio chairs.  It's crazy, I know, but i think our brains are complex enough to handle all those deep ethical questions that come with a choice of such gravity.

Dive into the grey.  The edge is for pussies.
 
2013-07-27 09:04:26 AM
Throughout the 80's and 90's you found computers everywhere in business except increased productivity.

Meanwhile, Walmart's innovations reduced prices for consumers. Applying innovations like cross-docking, JIT, and commands such "stop putting underarm deodorant in cardboard boxes"

This company concentrates consumption as a lower cost then takes the profits out of the community. But be real, other than union grocery stores the rest of retail is working on getting employees to take 2/3 time jobs at minimum wage.
 
2013-07-27 09:11:27 AM
Really folks. What the hell is up with Walmart. The entire operation reeks of evil. Everything about how it's run, it's employees, it's creepy Orwellian TV spots, it's corportate family gang mentality, it's predatory nature against its workers, it's vendors, against local city governments. It's a massive shakedown against our entire society, and really needs to be tamed.
 
2013-07-27 09:13:11 AM
I shop at Walmart from time to time because they're open when I'm up (I work nights) and because I like Transformers toys, and Walmart has a better selection than Toys R Us (or Target, which never has any of them on the shelves).

I don't love shopping at Walmart - if I spend too long in the store I start feeling not well, but then I've never been in a Target store for more than 5 minutes without getting a headache.
 
2013-07-27 09:32:32 AM

wildcardjack: Throughout the 80's and 90's you found computers everywhere in business except increased productivity.

Meanwhile, Walmart's innovations reduced prices for consumers. Applying innovations like cross-docking, JIT, and commands such "stop putting underarm deodorant in cardboard boxes"

This company concentrates consumption as a lower cost then takes the profits out of the community. But be real, other than union grocery stores the rest of retail is working on getting employees to take 2/3 time jobs at minimum wage.


I don't think that anyone will argue that, apart from a few exceptions, we aren't seeing a race to the bottom. There is no question that Wal*Mart has vastly optimized it's operations in order to compete for business based on price. The problem is that those are one time optimizations and you can't get significant improvements in operational costs year over year for the long term.

So Wal*Mart turned its attention to other ways of cutting costs. One way to do this is analyze their suppliers and then dictate a buy price that helps the WalMart bottom line at the expense of their supplier's profit margins. WalMart, as the number one retailer, is in a unique position to be able to break a manufacturer by dropping it's product which gives WalMart huge leverage in price negotiations. There comes a point where the supplier can't make that price with domestic production which is where WalMart recommends that production be moved overseas and provides expertise on how to make that transition. At this point the supplier is in too deep and refusal of WalMart's terms would result in a loss of a significant fraction of their business and massive drops in stock price. They are no longer an independent business entity but a satellite of WalMart.

But you can't squeeze your suppliers year after year for long, eventually there's nothing left to squeeze. Shareholders and the board still demand double digit returns so they trim wages. Hourly employees see wages stagnate and the workload increase as store staffing is reduced, benefits are cut, and individual hours are cut. Both salaried and hourly employees see mandatory unpaid overtime, off the clock work time, and stagnating wages.

WalMart is a success story but it is built on a foundation of human suffering.
 
2013-07-27 09:34:36 AM

Captain Dan: 2. Which business practices are you upset about? Specifically, not "they're greedy and furthermore capitalism."


How about them subsidizing their employees off the government teat and actively pushing employees onto medicaid and food stamps for starters?  That really should get them a nice income tax increase.

And to the fark wads that say, "just eliminate the subsidies! That's not Wal Mart's fault!"

1.  Personal beliefs aside, the notion that we care for our fellow man and help the poor is kinda a good one and one that is promoted by major religions not involving a chain smoking, mass murderer worshipping immigrant welfare queen.
2.  We have a few examples from history of what happens  a mass of hungry, poor people are told by the upper class, "fark you, I've got mine"  18th Century France, 20th Century Russia and Germany.  Oh, and having easy access to guns kinda will speed the lesson  along.for the slow learners.
3.  Contrary to popular belief, reigning in capitalism and regulations designed to curb some of the excesses don't amount to an obituary for capitalism.  Quite the opposite.
 
2013-07-27 09:41:58 AM
People that work at walmart tend to have made poor decisions, like having kids they could not afford.  Ye, I get it, Walmart is evil.  These people would not be in poverty i they did not have children they could not afford, Walmart isn't forcing them to have children.
 
2013-07-27 09:49:20 AM

Brostorm: People that work at walmart tend to have made poor decisions, like having kids they could not afford.  Ye, I get it, Walmart is evil.  These people would not be in poverty i they did not have children they could not afford, Walmart isn't forcing them to have children.


Yep, and people never lose their job after they have children through no fault of their own.
 
2013-07-27 09:55:00 AM

Brostorm: People that work at walmart tend to have made poor decisions, like having kids they could not afford.  Ye, I get it, Walmart is evil.  These people would not be in poverty i they did not have children they could not afford, Walmart isn't forcing them to have children.


Having children is evil?  Wow, that really puts a spin on the whole pro-life movement in this country.  Those people are farking satanists!  Or maybe it's the poor decision making.  Well, if they made the wrong choice, then the decision should be to give them more choices, now, isn't it.  You know, maybe a way to control when they have the birth of a child to a more fortunate time when they can fully afford the expense.  Cause clearly they can't go up and demand a raise, now, can they?  What was that saying, "A communist is any son of a biatch who wants a quarter when we're paying a dime!"
 
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 »






Report