Wal-Mart haters, take a look at this

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thomas Veil, Apr 14, 2004.

  1. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #1
    An interesting article from TomPaine.com about how CostCo stores are succeeding and posting a healthy profit by not doing it the Wal-Mart way.

    Full article.

    Think Wall Street will pick up on this idea? Will American business realize that you can't simply cut and layoff your way to profitability? That if you put more dollars into people's pockets, they can buy more things, thus stimulating the economy?

    Think they'll finally get it??

    Me neither.
     
  2. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #2
    Oh I see, it's a rhetorical question...

    No, I don't think they'll get it. And why should they? Their entire business plan, and a wildly successful one at that, is predicated on treating human beings as accounting units, both here where they sell things, and abroad where they have them made. You might as well hope that Microsoft will suddenly decide to stop violating antitrust laws. Put them both in the category "ain't gonna happen."
     
  3. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #3
    I think the problem is corporations with too much power. I read a Slashdot post (I know, what a traitor I am hanging out with the linux community. Shock! Gasp!) yesterday which I think hits the nail on the head.

    Rather than plagiarize it, I'll post it here for your perusal. It is in reference to Microsoft and how they are starting to look at court costs and settlements for all of their illegal tactics as just the cost of doing business. Enjoy.

    Taft


     
  4. SlyHunter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #4
    If Wal-mart didn't have a good business plan that made their stock holders allot of money they wouldn't hire as many people as they do and the unemployment rate would be higher. It is not the employers fault if people don't train themselves so that they can qualify for jobs that takes real skills and instead end up at places like Wal-mart. If you want higher pay then go out and get higher level skills so you are worth that higher pay.
     
  5. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #5
    Thanks. Sure, I've known this for a long time. Microsoft's number one goal has historically been the elimination of competitors, and they'll do it by any means available, legal or otherwise. They've been paying off violated companies since the mid-1980s. Stak, Apple, Sun, Netscape, the list goes on and on.
     
  6. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #6
    All people have a right to not have to live in poverty and to the dignity that goes with that...just because people do not have specialized skills does not mean they have nothing to offer...I applaud CostCo...
     
  7. SlyHunter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #7
    Where did you read that in the constitution? Or the bible even?
     
  8. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #8
    hm you put the bible on the same level as the constitiution of a country ?

    how many constitutions are there world wide ? a few hundreds ? do you know them all ?

    perhaps it was only his own personal opinion or just ethical thinking ?
     
  9. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #9
    walmart has a good plan for the people that own walmart. just look at the ten richest people in America, I think five of them are Waltons. Isn't it odd that the richest people in America pay their employees like crap?

    Why do you think Walmart has a positive effect on jobs in America. My understanding is that they put a lot of local stores out of business and most of the stuff they sell is made in China.

    Also there will always be poor people in America. It's the nature of the system. Rather than blaming people for being poor maybe we could be educating them and providing good public transportation, or are you against public transportation and education?
     
  10. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #10
    Aw, now, wwworry, you can do better than "Rather than blaming people for being poor maybe we could be educating them and providing good public transportation, or are you against public transportation and education?"

    Seems to me that our public education system is pretty much available to every kid, and those kids whose parents really care seem to do fairly well. The problem sure isn't availability or money per student.

    Public transportation? Please define it as you see it, and give us a structure. How would you route any of it, and how are the costs borne?

    :), 'Rat
     
  11. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #11
    A little complacent on the education front, I think. Other countries seem to manage public transportation. There's plenty of dosh over there, it's just all being spent on your crazily overfunded war machine.
     
  12. SlyHunter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #12
    overfunded war machine?
    http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=12995

    I would use the term underfunded myself.
     
  13. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #13
    Ironically, (or perhaps it's damnatory) if you join the military, the government does pay for your education.
     
  14. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #14
     
  15. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #15
    the US spends more on its military than the rest of the world combined spends on its military. if you still think it's underfunded, so be it.
     
  16. SlyHunter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #16
    Our troops are underpaid allot of them believe it or not actually collect wellfare.
    And time and time again I heard Democrats complain that we didn't send enough troops into Iraq to do the job right. Well where were we suppose to get all these extra troops after Clinton shrunk the military like they did. We use to have a large enough army where there was no doubt we could defend ourselves from any attack from any country. Not anymore.
     
  17. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #17
    If $400B+ a year won't defend you from any attack, I'd hate to see what it would cost to be at such a level. Would you support a $2 trillion/year military budget if it meant we were at such a level of readiness?
     
  18. thatwendigo macrumors 6502a

    thatwendigo

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Location:
    Sum, Ergo Sum.
    #18
    Oh, that's a laugh. David Horrowit'z little Conservative rag as a believable source? You might as well have been throwing the PR announcements of Baghdad Bob at us, for all the credibility he has.

    Blame Congressional and Pentagon pork, and administration corporate kickbacks, if you must blam anything at all. We maintain the world's largest military budget, and it's bigger than the next fifteen countries combined.

    When? How many?

    Show me some figures here. How many troops, and at what cost, can we "defend ourself from any attack from any country?"
     
  19. Dippo macrumors 65816

    Dippo

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2003
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    #19
    I can't believe that. Do you have any proof?

    My father is in the military and he gets paid pretty well and he's not even an officer. Of course I am all for military raises :D
     
  20. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #20
    This is nonsense. What you have is an offence budget, not a defence budget. You want to be able to attack any country in the world. Defence is MUCH cheaper.
     
  21. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #21
    SlyHunter , the USA spends more on defence than all other 15 NATO countries together....and the american soldier is (AFAIK) the best payed soldier in the world

    how much does a normal private,corporal,sergeant earn ? the salery of an MZ ("Militärperson auf Zeit" = service with limited time) _here_ i would consider as a joke in normal life

    untill your a seargent you earn a few hundred euros...
    as a private we got ~238 euros a month but we were only conspripts,
    as private first class i got ~282 euros
    1.5k for staff sergeant
    a leutnant starts at 1.6k euro a month

    the US Forces are far from being underpaid or underfunded sorry :rolleyes:
     
  22. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #22
    Maybe we should sterilise our troops so they stop having children they can't afford.
     
  23. SlyHunter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #23
    As an E-4 I think I made about 600 bucks a month back in the early 1980's. But then I wasn't married didn't have kids and was able to eat in the commissary. I could blow thru that money without worrying about keeping some back to insure the rent or other expenses got paid for there were none. For the married E-4's things were diffent and they I don't think got paid more than 400 or so dollars a month than I did.

    On a side note Ft. Polk had 4 homes reserved for Generals, all were empty while I was there and all were reported as being a yearly expense of 1 million bucks a year. That was back during the 1000 dollar toilet fiasco, I believe it was the Clinton years but that doesn't matter. They could have wasted less. Too many times we had to go without air filters for our radios, fuses, light bulbs, toilet paper (allot of privates forgot how to go to the grocery store and buy their own), etc simply because it was close to the end of the month and we weren't issued any new supply money till the next month.
     
  24. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #24
    I think that policy just might decrease the rate of soldiers who reenlist. It does bring together eugenics and world domination in a way that we haven't seen since the thirties. Might be a good idea. I'm sure SlyHunter will tell us if it is.

    edit: SlyHunter, you keep using the word "allot" when you mean "a lot" - just thought I'd let you know.
     

Share This Page