• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wal-Mart Asks Workers To Donate Food To Its Needy Employees

And they're as successful as Wal-mart, right?

General Motors paid their employees a market-inefficient wage. Guess what happened to them?

Business models aren't meant to be "respectable". They're meant to be profitable. This is the hyperbole I'm talking about. I'm talking economic principle and policy, and you're trying to make things "fair".

Hell with Wal-mart - nothing in life operates with how the lowest common denominator think it "should" be. If it did, we'd all be a welfare case.

Ironic, Walmart's model is contributing to the welfare cases.
 
So is the US military. Want to shut them down, too?

What? They's no correlation between the military and Walmart. One works for the government for protection and the other is a private business that uses government resources to allow larger profit.
 
Ironic, Walmart's model is contributing to the welfare cases.

What contributes more to the welfare cases are the people who thought a D+ on the algebra final so they could go to homecoming was worth settling into a minimum wage existence later in life.

Liberals are notorious for shirking responsibility. People who survive on their wages are products of their own design. You can shed a tear for them if you want, but I won't.

It's also the reason why I can bring legitimate theory, principle, and terminology in the description process, and not just rely on emotional appeal and sympathetic whimpers.
 
What contributes more to the welfare cases are the people who thought a D+ on the algebra final so they could go to homecoming was worth settling into a minimum wage existence later in life.

Liberals are notorious for shirking responsibility. People who survive on their wages are products of their own design. You can shed a tear for them if you want, but I won't.

It's also the reason why I can bring legitimate theory, principle, and terminology in the description process, and not just rely on emotional appeal and sympathetic whimpers.

The grocery stores in my area pay their employees decent wages and benefits. It can be done. The reason those people get paid decent wages and benefits are because of the public that made sure they kept Walmart out of their communities.
 
What? They's no correlation between the military and Walmart. One works for the government for protection and the other is a private business that uses government resources to allow larger profit.

Wait, though. You complained that Walmart is contributing to welfare cases. So is the US military. The comment was not about what they do for our country. The comment was about their people being on welfare.

Now would you be up for the military increasing the base pay for it's newly enlisted? Be forewarned, your tax dollars will have to go up to do this.
 
The grocery stores in my area pay their employees decent wages and benefits. It can be done. The reason those people get paid decent wages and benefits are because of the public that made sure they kept Walmart out of their communities.

Meh, if Walmart wants to come in, they'll come in. As far as your grocery stores, I'd bet you a nickel that your prices are far and away higher than Walmart's prices. That's how they can afford to pay their people more. I think I said this a few pages back. :shrug:
 
Wait, though. You complained that Walmart is contributing to welfare cases. So is the US military. The comment was not about what they do for our country. The comment was about their people being on welfare.

Now would you be up for the military increasing the base pay for it's newly enlisted? Be forewarned, your tax dollars will have to go up to do this.

As a tax payer, I don't have a problem paying for resources for military personnel. That is not at all the same as paying for a private businesses. As an aside, I think our military deserve better.
 
Anyone who walks into a Wal-Mart, knowing what they are, is so self centered and greedy I doubt they are even remotely willing to help someone else unless there is a tax break in it for them.

I think government should close down Wal-Mart. Put all those people out of a job. That'll show them bastards.
 
Meh, if Walmart wants to come in, they'll come in. As far as your grocery stores, I'd bet you a nickel that your prices are far and away higher than Walmart's prices. That's how they can afford to pay their people more. I think I said this a few pages back. :shrug:

Nope, they stay highly competitive AND pay their workers well. And, no Walmart comes across some deep opposition in some of our most conservative towns.
 
The grocery stores in my area pay their employees decent wages and benefits. It can be done. The reason those people get paid decent wages and benefits are because of the public that made sure they kept Walmart out of their communities.

Good for them. They have that right. If they don't want Wal-mart and would rather propel mom-and-pop joints within the community, more power to 'em. Ultimately, they have the power to decide that.

Some people would rather pay a little bit more for better customer service and to preserve a feel around a small community. I support them. What I don't support is anyone who tries to interfere with Wal-mart performing business as usual, or complaining about wages.

If they had arguments that didn't revolve around "b-b-b-b-but that's not FAIR!" or "but they have it, that means they should give it away!", I'd listen. Unfortunately, they don't.
 
Meh, if Walmart wants to come in, they'll come in. As far as your grocery stores, I'd bet you a nickel that your prices are far and away higher than Walmart's prices. That's how they can afford to pay their people more. I think I said this a few pages back. :shrug:

Looking at Wal Mart's pay scales doesn't show that they pay so poorly. Everyone starts at the bottom but can work their way up. So, some of the lowest employees might not be paid too well but look at the pay scales.

WALMART PAY SCALES

Better than no job at all.
 
Meh, if Walmart wants to come in, they'll come in. As far as your grocery stores, I'd bet you a nickel that your prices are far and away higher than Walmart's prices. That's how they can afford to pay their people more. I think I said this a few pages back. :shrug:

There's really no argument against it. In the town I live outside of, there are two grocery stores - the "local one", and Piggly Wiggly (which is considered a co-op, 100% owned by employees). While the prices aren't absurdly different, everyone knows where the cheaper groceries are. Of course, the Piggly Wiggly is bigger, therefore the selection is a bit bigger.

The best part is that the profit margin is greater with Piggly Wiggly, due to superior suppliers (it makes sense - they're larger).

As such, if people want to pay...oh, 10-15% more for their groceries so that they can "give back", that's fine. I go where my dollar stretches more.
 
Good for them. They have that right. If they don't want Wal-mart and would rather propel mom-and-pop joints within the community, more power to 'em. Ultimately, they have the power to decide that.

Some people would rather pay a little bit more for better customer service and to preserve a feel around a small community. I support them. What I don't support is anyone who tries to interfere with Wal-mart performing business as usual, or complaining about wages.

If they had arguments that didn't revolve around "b-b-b-b-but that's not FAIR!" or "but they have it, that means they should give it away!", I'd listen. Unfortunately, they don't.

Well, at least I can fully agree to the first part of your post. I disagree with your second part because it takes a strong grass root opposition to come up against a Goliath.
 
As a tax payer, I don't have a problem paying for resources for military personnel. That is not at all the same as paying for a private businesses. As an aside, I think our military deserve better.

I do, too. My husband was career military.
 
Well, at least I can fully agree to the first part of your post. I disagree with your second part because it takes a strong grass root opposition to come up against a Goliath.

All it takes is people sticking to their guns. The problem is that you cannot force other people to stick to them.

It's basically the same argument for socialism. Socialism requires what you do to keep Wal-mart out. It's why it doesn't pan out in application. However, if enough people committed, then it's quite easy. Wal-mart won't build (or stay) where it's not profitable. If they open doors and people don't come in, they leave. That's the joy of capitalism - the profit motive dictates all. You vote with your wallet.

If you can convince people in a large scale to do this, you can prove me wrong in my belief that socialism and anarcho-syndicalism is the habitat of children and fools.
 
Well it appears that a Cleveland, Ohio Walmart is holding a food drive so that it's employees can have a nice Holiday meal. The sign in the store, accompanied by several plastic bins, reads: "Please donate food items so associates in need can enjoy Thanksgiving dinner."

Really? Thank goodness those people are employed so those associates don't have to get on food stamps. :roll:

What cracks me up with some people that see nothing wrong with what Walmart is doing would probably go berserk if you wished them "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas." :roll:

I have no problem with what Walmart is doing here. Some employees don't work full time or can't work full time. Some employees have outside circumstances they may be dealing with, that puts a burden on them financially. There are a plethora of possibilities at play here.

I would much rather it be administered in this manner, versus at the government perceived entitlement level.
 
Last edited:
Wal-Mart = costing Uncle Sam untold billions every year due to poverty wages..
 
All it takes is people sticking to their guns. The problem is that you cannot force other people to stick to them.

It's basically the same argument for socialism. Socialism requires what you do to keep Wal-mart out. It's why it doesn't pan out in application. However, if enough people committed, then it's quite easy. Wal-mart won't build (or stay) where it's not profitable. If they open doors and people don't come in, they leave. That's the joy of capitalism - the profit motive dictates all. You vote with your wallet.

If you can convince people in a large scale to do this, you can prove me wrong in my belief that socialism and anarcho-syndicalism is the habitat of children and fools.

Problem is people complain endlessly about the expanding welfare state with due diligence but then some of these same people either don't realize or care about what they are really paying out of their wallets when they shop at places like Walmart. If they don't mind growing the a Welfare state and prefer to buy cheap Chinese goods at Walmart so be it. To me that reeks of a socialist model as the public must have the cost socialized to them.
 
So the OP says:
Walmart is holding a food drive so that it's employees can have a nice Holiday meal.

Isn't that what the Conservatives want? Charity instead of welfare? Isn't that what Liberals want? Sharing the wealth?

So, what is all the bitching about. WalMart pays a little on the low side but they hire those without FOA (you either know what that mens or you don't). So why are they being slammed here? All they seems to be asking is that those with the higher wages kick down a few food items (they can buy them at WalMart:)) for the part time or large family workers.
 
Wal-Mart = costing Uncle Sam untold billions every year due to poverty wages..

Bunk. If you raise the wage, you raise the threshold. Poverty is determined by factors such as the CPI and median wages. You raise the floor, you raise everything above it. If anything, a minimum wage increase would raise the percentage of people living below the poverty level. The raise would start to catch people with wages slightly above minimum wage and the poverty level because those jobs would not be reintroduced into the marketplace with a wage of a similar percentage above MW as before.
 
Problem is people complain endlessly about the expanding welfare state with due diligence but then some of these same people either don't realize or care about what they are really paying out of their wallets when they shop at places like Walmart. If they don't mind growing the a Welfare state and prefer to buy cheap Chinese goods at Walmart so be it. To me that reeks of a socialist model as the public must have the cost socialized to them.

Um...what?
 
So is the US military. Want to shut them down, too?
No I want the same for the military that I want for Walmart workers... livable wages.
 
No I want the same for the military that I want for Walmart workers... livable wages.

"Livable wage" - another subjective term. You cannot economically dictate a "liveable wage". It's just as subjective as someone crying "fair".
 
"Livable wage" - another subjective term. You cannot economically dictate a "liveable wage". It's just as subjective as someone crying "fair".
What ever ignorance you have to dictate to yourself to continue such hatefulness.... Livable wage is subjective yes, but easily understood, and reasonably easily computed for most of the USA. Bless your heart.
 
Back
Top Bottom