• 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

If we survive as a species, a lot of the changes that have to be made are already starting to happen -- such as the Re-localization Movements (especially when it comes to growing food, in many regions there has been a quiet, rarely reported move away from agribusiness to growing and buying food locally. Energy costs and resource scarcities are going to force changes that may make life in a few generations look almost exactly as it did prior to the Industrial Revolution.

When it comes to communes and communal organization, that was the standard way of organizing family life until about 10,000 years ago, and worth noting that according to more recent anthropological evidence, most early settled communities did not establish patriarchal hierarchies as in the example of the city states of Sumer. In the Indus Valley during that time, cities such as Mohenjo Daro and Harappa were enforcing some degree of conformity as houses in the early period of those cities all followed the same floor plans; there were no palaces or temples, and what's known about family life indicates that they were matrilocal (men went to live with their wife's family after marriage). A lot of the changes we have accepted as products of civilization are in fact products of barbarian invasions...since warrior cultures tended to be patriarchal and extremely hierarchal....and I'm way off topic now so I'll stop here and make a note to post a topic on ancient civilizations at some time in the near future.

"Re-localization movement" LOLOLOL

That has been mankind's survival strategy since we evolved. Migrate to the food, the resources, the jobs. The last major migrations took place in the US during the Industrial Revolution and then from farms to cities in the 40s-50s. So it's nothing new and makes total sense. And that's also why it BS that people say that they dont have a choice when they work for years at Walmart.

As for communal living...have at it. I believe in socialism or any other basis for an economic system as long as it's not our govt doing it. Coops and socialist-type businesses and orgs can do very well economically. There are some very good models, for both services and goods. I'm all for it, as long as it remains private and not something the govt forces on us.
 
They do have an operations standard that seems to work well, but they do offer lower prices (even lower than market) because of subsidies. It'd be nice if corporate subsidies for Wal-mart just ended. They still have enough goodwill built up that a product price increase to compete with everyone else would still not hurt business. But ah well.

I agree

The problem there is that these jobs are not designed to be self-sustaining. I honestly have no sympathy for people who live on minimum wage when everything possible is offered to them to prevent it, but refused because it took effort.

I think we've had this debate before. There's only so many of certain types of jobs out there. It's dynamic long term but if everyone got an Engineering/Physics/Accounting etc degree then a lot of Engineers/Physicists/Accountants would be bagging groceries. The big difference between now and 40 years ago was that there were decent jobs that paid a living salary for people that didn't end up getting professional degrees. You always had the manufacturing job to fall back on. Now it's the Wal-Mart or burger flipping job.
 
Even in our low cost of living area where median household incomes are lower than the national average people at WalMart start at $8.45, not minimum wage. The speculation and assumptions about WalMart are often wrong. Again, if you really want to know, ask the people who work there. As has been pointed out several times in this thread, not everybody who works at WalMart is a destitute single mother. As a business owner I know a lot of other business owners including independent contractors. The nature of a lot of these small businesses and self employers is that income is variable. While WalMart is not a high paying job, it is a consistent paycheck. Several of my construction buddies have wives who work at WalMart for that anchor check because they are the single biggest low skilled employer in the area. It's a concept often lost on those who criticize such jobs. Not every job needs to be high skilled and high pay.

One of my first jobs was in a bicycle shop. It was not just for the pay (which was not much) but for the benefits such as a hefty employee discount. I saved a lot of money on my first race bike. A good friend of mine works at WalMart for several of these reasons. First, her husband is a small business owner, he does house painting and light remodeling. Her 10% employee discount saves him money on supplies (she runs the paint department) plus gets a 10% discount on groceries. She is very active in our church too, you can bet she is using that 20% holiday discount from her job to donate to our church's food pantry, and she loads it up. Another friend there does it to make some money (his girlfriend makes considerably more than he does) without making enough to bump him out of state funded college. They are waiting to get married until after he graduates as an engineer for the same reason. There are instances where making less can be a benefit, at least for a while. Before I started my business I made too much for my wife to get state education funds, so we waited until I started the business. Due to our reduced income she was eligible for both the Hope Scholarship (state) and a Pell Grant (federal) and ended up getting her degree as a medical lab tech paying nothing out of pocket. Pretty much the same thing this guy is doing. Had we not done it that way we would not have been able to afford to pay for her schooling even of what I was making.

Sure for some folk jobs like these are taken on the path to other things. As anybody that has worked at these jobs (I have as well through college) you also know that a lot of your co-workers will be working there or a similar place for the rest of their lives. A lot of them are also very hard workers.
 
Walmart should up the pay. They still bank profit, less tax money is used on those employee's welfare checks. More money in the employee's pocket makes a happier, loyal and more productive employee who will spend a chunk of that money at their place of employment. It's a win win for everyone.

Prove that money is a motivator.
 
By no means is it 'Walmart's fault.' No forces anyone to work at Walmart. If you cant survive on Walmart's pay....DONT WORK THERE. But people do...and then abuse the safety net of public assistance. That is the individual, not a corporation.

OK, how does that change the fact Walmart is being subsidized by the government to keep their employees healthy to the tune of $1-Million a store? What do we tell Walmart? I already know how you feel about the employees.
 
I'm too lazy to google the Forbes articles referring to how much the average Super Walmart cost the American tax payer in food stamps, welfare, etc. (thereby subsidizing Walmart's profits), but if I remember correctly it is somewhere just under a $1-Million a year for each store. With thousands of stores, we are talking Billions going to the welfare state. And that's Billions in profit for Walmart.

Isn't Jerry Brown in court right now suing for the right to fine Walmart if they don't provide health coverage? The average Walmart worker get's like $6000.00 a year in state funded medical care, so he is going to fine them the same . . . or something like that, I am too lazy as i said before, to look it up. Plus, if it is against Walmart, I am jaded . . . I hate them for what they did to the Mom & Pop's (I'm conservative that way). Rumor is good enough for me. Sam Walton would be turning over in his grave if he knew how his store was being run now.

Logic and reason will not work with me . . . Walmart is evil.

Here is that information:
California taxpayers are spending $86 million a year providing healthcare and other public assistance to the state’s 44,000 Wal-Mart employees, according to a new study by UC Berkeley’s Institute for Industrial Relations.

The study, “Hidden Cost of Wal-Mart Jobs,” found that the average Wal-Mart worker required $730 in taxpayer-funded healthcare and $1,222 in other forms of assistance, such as food stamps and subsidized housing, to get by.

Even compared to other retailers, Wal-Mart imposes an especially large burden on taxpayers. Wal-Mart workers earn 31 percent less than the average for workers at large retail companies (more than 1,000 employees), the study found, and require 39 percent more in public assistance.

Employees who’ve been with Wal-Mart for at least a year (about 65 percent of the company’s workforce) make an average of $9.70 per hour, compared to $14.01 per hour for workers at other large retail stores. In addition, 23 percent fewer Wal-Mart workers are covered by the company’s health insurance plan than employees at large retail stores as a whole.

The wage and benefit differential is even greater when Wal-Mart employees are compared to workers at unionized supermarkets, where health coverage is nearly universal and wages average $15.31 per hour. New Study Finds Wal-Mart’s Miserly Wages Cost Taxpayers | Institute for Local Self-Reliance
 
Here is that information:
California taxpayers are spending $86 million a year providing healthcare and other public assistance to the state’s 44,000 Wal-Mart employees, according to a new study by UC Berkeley’s Institute for Industrial Relations.

The study, “Hidden Cost of Wal-Mart Jobs,” found that the average Wal-Mart worker required $730 in taxpayer-funded healthcare and $1,222 in other forms of assistance, such as food stamps and subsidized housing, to get by.

Even compared to other retailers, Wal-Mart imposes an especially large burden on taxpayers. Wal-Mart workers earn 31 percent less than the average for workers at large retail companies (more than 1,000 employees), the study found, and require 39 percent more in public assistance.

Employees who’ve been with Wal-Mart for at least a year (about 65 percent of the company’s workforce) make an average of $9.70 per hour, compared to $14.01 per hour for workers at other large retail stores. In addition, 23 percent fewer Wal-Mart workers are covered by the company’s health insurance plan than employees at large retail stores as a whole.

The wage and benefit differential is even greater when Wal-Mart employees are compared to workers at unionized supermarkets, where health coverage is nearly universal and wages average $15.31 per hour. New Study Finds Wal-Mart’s Miserly Wages Cost Taxpayers | Institute for Local Self-Reliance
Eh that study is just a lying, liberal, commie hit piece trying to make True red blooded all American Free Market capitalism look bad.:2razz:
 
Not at the two walmart stores I shop at.

Guess you're lucky.

Wal-Mart Returning To Full-Time Workers-Obamacare Not Such A Job Killer After All? - Forbes

For anyone who has not been following the Wal-Mart saga, sales have been sinking dramatically at the retailer as the company has turned to hiring mostly temporary workers (those who must reapply for a job every 180 days) to staff their stores while cutting full-time employees’ hours down to part-time status in order to avoid providing workers with healthcare benefits.

The result?

Empty shelves, ridiculously long check-out lines, helpless customers wandering through the electronics section and general disorganization at Wal-Mart store locations.
 
Sounds sad...but it's not like we don't know what Walmart is a low level and entry level job. You get the pay you work for and that level of pay is based on your work. Stocking a shelf....using a cash register....it doesn't take a genius to do these things. So really I don't know how to feel about this. Should they have done it? I don't know however I think it's comical we're all shocked by it like we haven't been treating it as some inconvenient truth.
 
Walmart Pays Workers Poorly And Sinks While Costco Pays Workers Well And Sails-Proof That You Get What You Pay For - Forbes
Perspective. By compensating employees generously to motivate and retain good workers, one-fifth of whom are unionized, Costco gets lower turnover and higher productivity than Walmart

The Forbes article is a thinly veiled editorial written by an admitted lib. What he neglects to tell you is that Wal Mart has far more employees per square foot than Costco. I also notice that he is comparing Costco to Wal Mart rather than SAMs which would be the proper comparison.
 
I doubt WalMart workers in countries like China get paid that much a year.

Nor does any other Chinese worker.

If you understand averages, then the US workers are doing well and the Chinese workers pull down the average.
 
By no means is it 'Walmart's fault.' No forces anyone to work at Walmart. If you cant survive on Walmart's pay....DONT WORK THERE. But people do...and then abuse the safety net of public assistance. That is the individual, not a corporation.

They don't abuse public assistance, they qualify for it.
 
Walmart drive down wages in the communities where they are located. Before Walmarts moves in, people generally work for smaller employers and get better pay. Often those businesses go under due to Walmart low prices. If all employers were required to pay a minimum wage that is a livable wage then Walmart would not be able to drive their competition out of business so easily and tax payer subsidies for so many of their employees would not be necessary. Yes, their prices would not be so low, but that savings for individuals is negated by the overall cost to the community. This is why many communities are trying to stop Walmart from moving in.

Damn that heartless, efficient capitalism thing.

Know what you sound like? You sound like one of these southern rednecks down here who fear change. Their tried-and-true methods have worked "for them" since they can remember, and anyone who comes around with something bigger, better, and more current is strange and makes them afraid.

Wal-mart is keeping up with the times - although it seems like some people are afraid of that.
 
There's no reason why we should have to accept every change that the corporations impose on us.
 
There's no reason why we should have to accept every change that the corporations impose on us.
It's not imposed, and they aren't asking for your acceptance.

You are not opposing corporations, you are opposing a naturally occurring fact of reality:
Economies of scale - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ultimately you would need to build a reasonably case why your personal preferences about this subject trump other peoples individual freedom in the marketplace. That seems like a hard case to make.
 
"Re-localization movement" LOLOLOL

That has been mankind's survival strategy since we evolved. Migrate to the food, the resources, the jobs. The last major migrations took place in the US during the Industrial Revolution and then from farms to cities in the 40s-50s. So it's nothing new and makes total sense. And that's also why it BS that people say that they dont have a choice when they work for years at Walmart.
Yes, but I'm not talking about migrations...which are still going on today if you haven't read the news; and migrations will intensify in the years to come as millions try to flee dry, overheating tropic zone regions that become virtually unlivable.

What's happening now, is that the masters of the universe, the people who work mostly behind the scenes and buy politicians rather than step up and engage directly in politics, thought they were engineering their way to a world where international corporations would make nation state governments obsolete and irrelevant....at least regarding their interests! But, instead, what has happened is that rising energy costs and resource prices, keep putting the brakes on economic growth when it rises too high. From what I've read in recent years, higher oil prices have put a crimp in China's plans for mass exporting of steel products to western and other foreign markets. Higher transportation costs start to outweigh the cheap prices of production by low wage earners. Steel is heavy and entails higher transportation costs for obvious reasons, so it's no surprise that international trade in steel would be first affected by the problem of Peak Oil. But, agribusiness is also getting whacked with the same stick, as growing fruits and vegetables in California and shipping them across the country, used to undercut the prices of locally produced produce....but, not anymore! Now, there has quietly been a revival in local, small scale agriculture again, and a lot of the reason is simply that it is once again cheaper to buy local produce when it's in season.

What many trend analysts see for the future is a winding down of large cities and more people moving back to small towns that were almost abandoned in recent decades, and starting up small farms or small businesses. This is a relocalization that is occurring, not by planning or design, but as a response to changing times. My point was that some of the changes to adapt to a future world of scarce resources is already starting to happen; but the question is still will change back to sustainable agriculture and relocalization be fast enough to avoid a crash?

To me, the silver lining here regarding corporate avarice by Walmart is that they will be big losers in the future, as there schemes of slave labour production of cheap products starts losing to high transportation costs, plus higher transport costs mean empty shelves in stores that are run using Just In Time inventory control systems. The mom and pop stores may be on the way back, while Walmart and similar edifices of globalization become empty warehouses!
As for communal living...have at it. I believe in socialism or any other basis for an economic system as long as it's not our govt doing it. Coops and socialist-type businesses and orgs can do very well economically. There are some very good models, for both services and goods. I'm all for it, as long as it remains private and not something the govt forces on us.

The problem for coops is that they don't have the clout with government that the corporations who do, who already own most of the politicians. From some recent reports from Spain I've read, the Mondragon Cooperatives are in peril right now, because the government of recession-ravaged Spain is willing to sacrifice them in the interests of their corporate masters.

When it comes to living in communes....that's really stretching further off the topic, because, as previously mentioned, the levels of trust required to maintain a viable commune make it a living arrangement that won't work in the transient society we live in today. However, if we consider a relatively recent phenomena of younger people who have decided to divide up monster homes, that were designed as single family dwellings in the pre-recession days, maybe communal life is closer than we think!
 
Yes, but I'm not talking about migrations...which are still going on today if you haven't read the news; and migrations will intensify in the years to come as millions try to flee dry, overheating tropic zone regions that become virtually unlivable.

What's happening now, is that the masters of the universe, the people who work mostly behind the scenes and buy politicians rather than step up and engage directly in politics, thought they were engineering their way to a world where international corporations would make nation state governments obsolete and irrelevant....at least regarding their interests! But, instead, what has happened is that rising energy costs and resource prices, keep putting the brakes on economic growth when it rises too high. From what I've read in recent years, higher oil prices have put a crimp in China's plans for mass exporting of steel products to western and other foreign markets. Higher transportation costs start to outweigh the cheap prices of production by low wage earners. Steel is heavy and entails higher transportation costs for obvious reasons, so it's no surprise that international trade in steel would be first affected by the problem of Peak Oil. But, agribusiness is also getting whacked with the same stick, as growing fruits and vegetables in California and shipping them across the country, used to undercut the prices of locally produced produce....but, not anymore! Now, there has quietly been a revival in local, small scale agriculture again, and a lot of the reason is simply that it is once again cheaper to buy local produce when it's in season.

What many trend analysts see for the future is a winding down of large cities and more people moving back to small towns that were almost abandoned in recent decades, and starting up small farms or small businesses. This is a relocalization that is occurring, not by planning or design, but as a response to changing times. My point was that some of the changes to adapt to a future world of scarce resources is already starting to happen; but the question is still will change back to sustainable agriculture and relocalization be fast enough to avoid a crash?

To me, the silver lining here regarding corporate avarice by Walmart is that they will be big losers in the future, as there schemes of slave labour production of cheap products starts losing to high transportation costs, plus higher transport costs mean empty shelves in stores that are run using Just In Time inventory control systems. The mom and pop stores may be on the way back, while Walmart and similar edifices of globalization become empty warehouses!


The problem for coops is that they don't have the clout with government that the corporations who do, who already own most of the politicians. From some recent reports from Spain I've read, the Mondragon Cooperatives are in peril right now, because the government of recession-ravaged Spain is willing to sacrifice them in the interests of their corporate masters.

When it comes to living in communes....that's really stretching further off the topic, because, as previously mentioned, the levels of trust required to maintain a viable commune make it a living arrangement that won't work in the transient society we live in today. However, if we consider a relatively recent phenomena of younger people who have decided to divide up monster homes, that were designed as single family dwellings in the pre-recession days, maybe communal life is closer than we think!

The communist governments around the world just never could get that economics thing to agree with them. Economics does not agree with you either.
 
The big kids have rigged the economy so that the top players take home 99% of the pie and everyone else gets ****ed and then right-wingers spend 40 pages justifying it with whatever bs they can spin. You guys think you're part of the a-team but you're just patsies that are being taken for a ride with everyone else.
 
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 see nothing wrong with what WalMart is doing.

They advertise jobs at a legal wage.

People voluntarily apply (and some are accepted) for those jobs.

Realizing that many of their employees do not make enough money to have a Christmas dinner, they start a food drive.

There is nothing remotely illegal or immoral with anything there.

No one put a gun to their employees heads to work there for those wages, the decision was completely their own...as is there decision to continue to work there.


WalMart does not owe anyone a living. They are under zero obligation to make sure their wages cover all their employees expenses.

Their job is to legally make as much money for the shareholders/owners as possible. That is all they ethically need to worry about. And that is all they should worry about. Free enterprise best works when legal greed is allowed to flourish.

And if people do not like the way they do that, then they can stop shopping there. If enough stop shopping their, Walmart goes out of business.

But considering Walmart is gigantic and growing, obviously huge numbers do not object to their business model.


And btw - I could care less what people call Christmas.
 
The communist governments around the world just never could get that economics thing to agree with them. Economics does not agree with you either.

Not that it has anything to do with the topic here, but tell me about your economic theories and how helpful they can be for the world today!
 
The big kids have rigged the economy so that the top players take home 99% of the pie and everyone else gets ****ed and then right-wingers spend 40 pages justifying it with whatever bs they can spin. You guys think you're part of the a-team but you're just patsies that are being taken for a ride with everyone else.

I sometimes wonder if it's just an aspect of how conservatives are authoritarians at heart, and love to worship the powerful, or whether the rumours I read a few years back are actually true that some conservative think tanks go beyond funding favourite right wing bloggers, to actually giving cash rewards to useful drones that parrot their propaganda on forums and news site comment threads!
 
I sometimes wonder if it's just an aspect of how conservatives are authoritarians at heart, and love to worship the powerful, or whether the rumours I read a few years back are actually true that some conservative think tanks go beyond funding favourite right wing bloggers, to actually giving cash rewards to useful drones that parrot their propaganda on forums and news site comment threads!

Nah, I think the majority of them support economic-authoritarian pseudo-libertarians.

"Such people simply want to get rid of minimum wage laws, worker safety regulations, anti-trust regulations, regulations on pollution, and any other regulations that enforce good business practices, without replacing them with non-governmental libertarian solutions such as property rights and the right of self-defense, such that they can create a situation of de facto dependence-based tyranny to force anything onto workers, customers, and/or the environment. They also want to get rid of income taxes and capital gains taxes, just so that they can keep all of the money that they steal. Such types often support the Unfair Tax, and they often venerate Ayn Rand and her selfishness-is-a-virtue dogma."Pseudo-libertarian - Libertapedia, the libertarian encyclopedia
 
Back
Top Bottom