• 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!

Supreme Court declines to take up Wal-Mart class action appeal….

gdgyva said:
you are more than welcome to open a business and hire as many as you like

pay them whatever wages you deem fair

see how long you can stay in business....

maybe, just maybe you can make it work

but paying someone just because they are a warm body is about as stupid as it gets

here....you EARN your wages....or you are out the door

that means being productive, and making the business money

see....that is the bottom line....profit

it is how i pay the some odd 180 other people who work here
Click to expand...

Profit is NOT the bottom line. At least the way you are talking about profit. How much profit is needed? WalMart's net profit, after all taxes, dividends, salaries etc. etc. are paid is between 14B and 16B per year. At what point do you say, gee golly that is a lot of money that could be spent. I am not saying that companies shouldn't make a profit. It has been a conspicuous product of trickle down economics that companies need to make as much profit as possible without regard to anything else. I am saying that is a flawed ideology. One that has help to erode our manufacturing base, led us to a disposable society and has decimated the middle class. It is an unsustainable ideology.
 
countryboy said:
It's quite obvious you don't shop there, because you haven't the slightest clue about what they carry.

Furthermore, you must not care at all about the poor who rely on Walmart's low prices. Gee, what a shock, another lib promoting ssomething which would hurt the very people they pretend to care about. :roll:
Click to expand...

The poor would be better off buying quality products for slightly more than buying more, more, more. What a shock another conservative complaining liberals don't care about the poor while your ideology pisses on them and tells them it is raining.
 
Master PO said:
you need to stay focused on what i am talking about if you going to speak on the subject i am on.

here it is:



no one forces anyone, to be forced means you have to do something becuase you have no choice, government, suppliers, workers have choices.

this reminds me of the stupid postings of the past like, " hobby lobby forces people to accept their religion" by not providing certain health care.
Click to expand...

I am focused on what you are talking about. You just don't realize the root problem. The root problem is not that people choose to work for low wages at WalMart. The root problem is that our policies allow for WalMart to use business practices that are detrimental to our society in multiple ways. We need to change our policies to prevent companies like WalMart from exploiting a system that is heavily stacked in their favor. We need to realize that social contract applies equally businesses as it does to individuals and governments in order to maintain a stable society.
 
smb said:
You mean the labor unions that have given us the 40 hour work week. You mean the labor unions that have given us paid vacation. You mean the labor unions that have successfully built a prospering middle class through paid labor by demanding living wages. Those unions have eroded the U.S. industrial base? I would agree with you that the U.S. government policies of trickle down economics have done almost irreparable damage to the U.S. industrial base. WalMart is a key example of that which is what I am arguing...so thanks for agreeing with me.

Again, ad-nauseum, this is not about the people who decide to work for WalMart. This about WalMart's business strategy.
Click to expand...

there is nothing wrong with walmarts business strategy they filled a need in the market that didn't exist before.
not everyone can shop at jc penny, khols, etc ...
 
smb said:
I would think a living wage is self-explanatory. If not then it is a wage in which an employee working for you can afford to have decent shelter, decent food and proper healthcare without having to rely on public assistance.
Click to expand...

what is a living wage. I can't pay what you just said. so what is a living wage?
if a job interviewer asks what you would like to make and you say a living wage they are going to look at you funny
and ask you again.

To your point that businesses owe us nothing that is just factually incorrect. They owe us payment for our labor.
Click to expand...
only if you work for them. a business doesn't owe you a job. a business owes you nothing.

They owe society the equivalent of what society allows for them. How many liquor stores, retail stores, grocery stores etc. etc. would their be if society did not provide for public policing? How many gas stations would their be, how many retail stores would be able to operate, how many restaurants would be open if society did not provide for roads in which to travel to these stores.
Click to expand...

umm those businesses pay for that as well. so again you are wrong. it isn't like they get that stuff for free.

The problem with your ideology is that is completely blind to responsibility. Business has a responsibility to the society at large and a responsibility to its individual employees. Your ideology assumes no responsibility for actions by businesses yet you hold individuals within the society to the strictest possible set of responsibilities. That is not how the social contract works. The social contract is a two way street. Your ideology seems to think it is a one way street. That is the problem.
Click to expand...

it isn't. a business doens' owe you a job. what the business pays you is basically what your skills and knowledge are worth to the business. if a business can't make money on you then you get fired or let go of or not hired at all.

there is no such thing as a social contract.

your flaw in logic is that you are owed something that you are not. if you want more pay then get better job skills.
 
smb said:
I am focused on what you are talking about. You just don't realize the root problem. The root problem is not that people choose to work for low wages at WalMart. The root problem is that our policies allow for WalMart to use business practices that are detrimental to our society in multiple ways. We need to change our policies to prevent companies like WalMart from exploiting a system that is heavily stacked in their favor. We need to realize that social contract applies equally businesses as it does to individuals and governments in order to maintain a stable society.
Click to expand...

my point is this...straight out.........no one is forced.

everyone has a choice, because no one physically holds a person and makes him perform an action.

a person makes choices after he weights his opitons
 
gdgyva said:
They force people into food stamps?

I guess people don't have to work there....they can have no job

Would that be better?

walmart is a company....don't like their business practices....don't shop there

No one is holding a gun to their employees head and telling them they have to work for 10 bucks an hour

Most of them have no salable skills, and that is the best job they can find

Maybe they should have learned a trade, or maybe gotten a bit more education

No ones fault but their own
Click to expand...

gdgyva said:
so start a campaign to put them out of business

no one is stopping you

other than the american people....who like cheap junk

i dont shop there....never have

i dont shop at sams club or costco or any of those types of places

or open your own business, and do it better than they do....

i am sorry that so many people screwed the pooch by dropping out of high school

i am sorry so many of them never learned a trade, or never learned a skill that would let them earn a decent living

failure on so many levels.....but NONE of it is walmart's fault
Click to expand...

So you think everyone who works at a retail business like Walmart is a poorly educated idiot? Trade jobs pay top-dollar and are fully reliable sources of income? Wow - Earth to gdgyva.

A lot of trade jobs are seasonal and thus are not steady forms of employment. Beyond that, many trade jobs that require limited skillsets pay per hour just like working as a cashier at Walmart. So the same pay scale applies.

I don't know what's going on in your head - but it's clear you don't know what a 'trade job' really is - you're imagining they pay excessively well, but many don't.

You're also not taking into consideration that a vast majority of companies pay their employees within the same income brackets - So while everyone's focusing on Walmart here, the thins seen at Walmart apply to a vast number of employers out there: low wages.
 
smb said:
Profit is NOT the bottom line. At least the way you are talking about profit. How much profit is needed? WalMart's net profit, after all taxes, dividends, salaries etc. etc. are paid is between 14B and 16B per year. At what point do you say, gee golly that is a lot of money that could be spent. I am not saying that companies shouldn't make a profit. It has been a conspicuous product of trickle down economics that companies need to make as much profit as possible without regard to anything else. I am saying that is a flawed ideology. One that has help to erode our manufacturing base, led us to a disposable society and has decimated the middle class. It is an unsustainable ideology.
Click to expand...

walmart had sales at approx 480 billion each of the last 3 yrs

they made approximately 3-3.5% each year net

those numbers arent astounding or scary to me

a company selling almost a half of a trillion dollars a year should put 15 billion on the bottom line

my company put 5.2% net on the bottom line

if walmart did that their profits would be 23 billion +

profit is not a dirty word.....

btw....what do you do for a living?

and are we allowed to say what you make per year?
 
smb said:
The poor would be better off buying quality products for slightly more than buying more, more, more. What a shock another conservative complaining liberals don't care about the poor while your ideology pisses on them and tells them it is raining.
Click to expand...
I guess if making **** up is all you've got, it's all you've got. :roll:

Where can the poor shop for higher quality groceries at a "slightly higher cost"? Let's see some verifiable examples. Aaaaand.....GO!
 
Aunt Spiker said:
So you think everyone who works at a retail business like Walmart is a poorly educated idiot? Trade jobs pay top-dollar and are fully reliable sources of income? Wow - Earth to gdgyva.

A lot of trade jobs are seasonal and thus are not steady forms of employment. Beyond that, many trade jobs that require limited skillsets pay per hour just like working as a cashier at Walmart. So the same pay scale applies.

I don't know what's going on in your head - but it's clear you don't know what a 'trade job' really is - you're imagining they pay excessively well, but many don't.

You're also not taking into consideration that a vast majority of companies pay their employees within the same income brackets - So while everyone's focusing on Walmart here, the thins seen at Walmart apply to a vast number of employers out there: low wages.
Click to expand...

if the only job you can find is cashier work at walmart, then the issue isnt walmart

maybe that person needs to look in the mirror

figure out just what they didnt do....or need to do....to better their situation

if your iq is 80, and that is the best you can do....okay

but dont expect a company to pay you middle income wages

if that isnt the top of your potential, then maybe you need to figure out how to get to the next level

but asking for walmart, or mcdonalds, or any other company out there to pay for your mistakes isnt the answer

there are 4.5 million unfilled jobs currently in the US marketplace.....

and skills is what is separating most people from those better paying jobs
 
gdgyva said:
if the only job you can find is cashier work at walmart, then the issue isnt walmart

maybe that person needs to look in the mirror

figure out just what they didnt do....or need to do....to better their situation

if your iq is 80, and that is the best you can do....okay

but dont expect a company to pay you middle income wages

if that isnt the top of your potential, then maybe you need to figure out how to get to the next level

but asking for walmart, or mcdonalds, or any other company out there to pay for your mistakes isnt the answer

there are 4.5 million unfilled jobs currently in the US marketplace.....

and skills is what is separating most people from those better paying jobs
Click to expand...

Stop defending corporate greed. :)
 
gdgyva said:
walmart had sales at approx 480 billion each of the last 3 yrs

they made approximately 3-3.5% each year net

those numbers arent astounding or scary to me

a company selling almost a half of a trillion dollars a year should put 15 billion on the bottom line

my company put 5.2% net on the bottom line

if walmart did that their profits would be 23 billion +

profit is not a dirty word.....

btw....what do you do for a living?

and are we allowed to say what you make per year?
Click to expand...

15B in NET PROFIT. If you can read their financials correctly you would see that their gross profit before paying taxes and dividends is over 20B. Again the question is how much profit does a company have to make? Your ideology and the ideology of the trickle downers is that no profit is too much. This is unsustainable. At some point when a company is making 15+ B a year but making that much off the subsidies provided by the society because they are unwilling to pay their employees then it is up to society to force the issue. You still seem to believe that businesses are somehow exempt from responsibility. They are not. They need to be held accountable for their actions just like anyone else. If I as an individual, was making over $100,000 per year based on government subsidies I am receiving and would only make $70,000 a year without those subsidies every conservative in America would be crying foul. Have a business do the same thing and somehow it miraculously transformed into free market principles. What a crock.
 
countryboy said:
I guess if making **** up is all you've got, it's all you've got. :roll:

Where can the poor shop for higher quality groceries at a "slightly higher cost"? Let's see some verifiable examples. Aaaaand.....GO!
Click to expand...

Target, Vons, Albertson's, Schnuck's, Winco, Stater Bros, etc. etc. etc. For retail products there are even more abundant choices. Boscov's, JCPenney's, Cal5 sporting goods, just to name a few. Sears has only moderately higher prices than WalMart and they have quality products. This isn't rocket science.
 
gdgyva said:
walmart had sales at approx 480 billion each of the last 3 yrs

they made approximately 3-3.5% each year net

those numbers arent astounding or scary to me

a company selling almost a half of a trillion dollars a year should put 15 billion on the bottom line

my company put 5.2% net on the bottom line

if walmart did that their profits would be 23 billion +

profit is not a dirty word.....

btw....what do you do for a living?

and are we allowed to say what you make per year?
Click to expand...


As far as what I do for living...I am business manager.

What I make...none of your effin business.
 
smb said:
15B in NET PROFIT. If you can read their financials correctly you would see that their gross profit before paying taxes and dividends is over 20B. Again the question is how much profit does a company have to make? Your ideology and the ideology of the trickle downers is that no profit is too much. This is unsustainable. At some point when a company is making 15+ B a year but making that much off the subsidies provided by the society because they are unwilling to pay their employees then it is up to society to force the issue. You still seem to believe that businesses are somehow exempt from responsibility. They are not. They need to be held accountable for their actions just like anyone else. If I as an individual, was making over $100,000 per year based on government subsidies I am receiving and would only make $70,000 a year without those subsidies every conservative in America would be crying foul. Have a business do the same thing and somehow it miraculously transformed into free market principles. What a crock.
Click to expand...

so a three percent return on sales is too much....

Btw....what do you do, and how much do you earn?

And would you consider it fair if conservatives got together and decided how much they thought you should earn annually?

You seem to want to make that decision for businesses and business people
 
smb said:
As far as what I do for living...I am business manager.

What I make...none of your effin business.
Click to expand...

Ok

So why is it your concern what a business makes?

Are you a stockholder?

If not, like you said, it is none of your Effin business

Go start your own company and make your own rules....

Stop trying to control other ones
 
smb said:
Target, Vons, Albertson's, Schnuck's, Winco, Stater Bros, etc. etc. etc. For retail products there are even more abundant choices. Boscov's, JCPenney's, Cal5 sporting goods, just to name a few. Sears has only moderately higher prices than WalMart and they have quality products. This isn't rocket science.
Click to expand...

What higher quality grocery products do any of those stores carry, specifically? Where's your evidence? You do realize every one of those stores stocks an abundance of cheap Chinese goods, right? They also carry many identical items which Walmart carries. You have demonstrated nothing, other than extreme bias, extreme ignorance, or both. :shrug:
 
gdgyva said:
so a three percent return on sales is too much....

Btw....what do you do, and how much do you earn?

And would you consider it fair if conservatives got together and decided how much they thought you should earn annually?

You seem to want to make that decision for businesses and business people
Click to expand...

Read above. As far as what I make it is enough.

I am not saying that WalMart cannot make a profit. You say 3% I say $15B. Again this is not about how much or how little profit they make. This is about responsibility. If I made $100,000/year and still forced my kids and wife to go to food pantries and manipulated my income taxes to allow for us to be subsidized by food stamps I would expect every conservative to have a problem with that. I would also be completely irresponsible.
 
gdgyva said:
Ok

So why is it your concern what a business makes?

Are you a stockholder?

If not, like you said, it is none of your Effin business

Go start your own company and make your own rules....

Stop trying to control other ones
Click to expand...

No it is my business because they make that profit as direct result of taxpayers, i.e. me, subsidies. What I cannot figure out is why conservatives defend this. Again conservatives cry bloody murder about welfare mom's but believe it is smart business practices when companies do the same thing. This is about responsibility. WalMart is able to make $15B a year free and clear of all expenses based on having the taxpayers subsidize their employees wages. WalMart makes what they earn my business by imposing upon me the extra tax burden.
 
countryboy said:
What higher quality grocery products do any of those stores carry, specifically? Where's your evidence? You do realize every one of those stores stocks an abundance of cheap Chinese goods, right? They also carry many identical items which Walmart carries. You have demonstrated nothing, other than extreme bias, extreme ignorance, or both. :shrug:
Click to expand...

That is not true. Winco buys directly from Central, CA providers so your argument fails on that respect. The quality of their meat, particularly their sausage is far superior to almost any other store and it is generally cheaper. The lunchmeat at Winco is half the price of what it is at WalMart and superior in quality. Target shirts are only marginally more expenses $12 versus $10 at WalMart. I still have Target shirts in my closet. My wife's Grandmother buys me shirts from Wally world. I wear them once and they are ok but a little itchy. My wife washes them and they turn into half shirts. While I enjoyed the a lot about the '80s I did not enjoy its fashion statements so I don't wear those shirts after washing them. Shirts I get from JCPenney are even better than Target's generic brand. They are very soft and very durable. They cost $15 but last me twice as long as the ones from Target. I could go on and on but what is the point...You are actually arguing that Wally World is a quality store...funny stuff.
 
smb said:
That is not true. Winco buys directly from Central, CA providers so your argument fails on that respect. The quality of their meat, particularly their sausage is far superior to almost any other store and it is generally cheaper. The lunchmeat at Winco is half the price of what it is at WalMart and superior in quality. Target shirts are only marginally more expenses $12 versus $10 at WalMart. I still have Target shirts in my closet. My wife's Grandmother buys me shirts from Wally world. I wear them once and they are ok but a little itchy. My wife washes them and they turn into half shirts. While I enjoyed the a lot about the '80s I did not enjoy its fashion statements so I don't wear those shirts after washing them. Shirts I get from JCPenney are even better than Target's generic brand. They are very soft and very durable. They cost $15 but last me twice as long as the ones from Target. I could go on and on but what is the point...You are actually arguing that Wally World is a quality store...funny stuff.
Click to expand...

You literally have no idea what you are talking about. Yes, Walmart brand clothing is not the best, but they also carry name brands such as Wrangler, and Dickies. Not to mention Hanes, and Fruit of the Loom. You know, the same as any of the big box stores you mentioned.

As for groceries, lunch meat and meat are your two examples? Really? How much of one's grocery bill are comprised of lunch meat and meat? Besides, Winco is one store, and there are certainly none of those anywhere near where I live. Where is your evidence for all of the stores you mentioned, and where is your evidence that their groceries are of vastly higher quality (even though they carry many of the same exact items Walmart carries) at "moderately" higher prices? Also, where is your evidence that Target et al pays any better than Walmart, or Sears, or JC Penny? I know for a fact that Kohl's doesn't pay any better than Walmart, worse in fact.

This is nothing more than made up BS from a typical biased Walmart hater.
 
countryboy said:
You literally have no idea what you are talking about. Yes, Walmart brand clothing is not the best, but they also carry name brands such as Wrangler, and Dickies. Not to mention Hanes, and Fruit of the Loom. You know, the same as any of the big box stores you mentioned.

As for groceries, lunch meat and meat are your two examples? Really? How much of one's grocery bill are comprised of lunch meat and meat? Besides, Winco is one store, and there are certainly none of those anywhere near where I live. Where is your evidence for all of the stores you mentioned, and where is your evidence that their groceries are of vastly higher quality (even though they carry many of the same exact items Walmart carries) at "moderately" higher prices? Also, where is your evidence that Target et al pays any better than Walmart, or Sears, or JC Penny? I know for a fact that Kohl's doesn't pay any better than Walmart, worse in fact.

This is nothing more than made up BS from a typical biased Walmart hater.
Click to expand...

Did you see me mention Kohl's? I didn't think so. Still using strawmen to argue your ridiculous points.

You say I don't know what I am talking about but offer no counter arguments to my points except for fluff. Sure wally world has name brand goods but that is not what people who shop at wally world generally go there for.

You asked for specifics. I gave you specifics. Instead of countering those specifics you go off on a tangent about a store that I never mentioned. You seem to have an issue with Kohl's. That is fine so do I. That is why I don't shop there either. I prefer the mom and pop places. I can afford it and I get better service, better quality of product and I am actually helping the local economy. I understand that not everyone can afford to keep it local so there is a place for discount stores. There are discount stores that are not as cheap as wally world in almost all respects. Kohl's is not even a discount store so the only reason I can figure that you keep bringing them up is that you are disgruntled former employee. You should probably work on that. The resentment will eat you up.
 
smb said:
No it is my business because they make that profit as direct result of taxpayers, i.e. me, subsidies. What I cannot figure out is why conservatives defend this. Again conservatives cry bloody murder about welfare mom's but believe it is smart business practices when companies do the same thing. This is about responsibility. WalMart is able to make $15B a year free and clear of all expenses based on having the taxpayers subsidize their employees wages. WalMart makes what they earn my business by imposing upon me the extra tax burden.
Click to expand...

see...we disagree on this also

did walmart force the government to send anyone money?

did mcdonalds?

remember back a lot of years...before all the hand out programs

people lived on what they made....

some relied on charity

some relied on family

when we put all of these programs into place....it stopped the impetus for a lot of people to better themselves

i am not saying we need to do away with the programs....

i believe in a hand up when people are down

but dont blame companies for making a profit on the ills of america

they have been profitable for eons.....

the overall numbers may have gone up, but the percentages have basically stayed the same for decades and decades
 
gdgyva said:
see...we disagree on this also

did walmart force the government to send anyone money?

did mcdonalds?

remember back a lot of years...before all the hand out programs

people lived on what they made....

some relied on charity

some relied on family

when we put all of these programs into place....it stopped the impetus for a lot of people to better themselves

i am not saying we need to do away with the programs....

i believe in a hand up when people are down

but dont blame companies for making a profit on the ills of america

they have been profitable for eons.....

the overall numbers may have gone up, but the percentages have basically stayed the same for decades and decades
Click to expand...

When was that time in America when people solely relied on what they made, on family or charity?

So you are OK with people exploiting the welfare policies for personal gain like you are OK with companies doing the same thing? So you do not believe in personal responsibility as it relates to individuals? Collective responsibility of Companies and government as it relates to society at large? I can assume then you do not believe there is any such thing as social contract binding our society correct?

If that is the case then tell me what makes the U.S. a society?
 
smb said:
No it is my business because they make that profit as direct result of taxpayers, i.e. me, subsidies. What I cannot figure out is why conservatives defend this. Again conservatives cry bloody murder about welfare mom's but believe it is smart business practices when companies do the same thing. This is about responsibility. WalMart is able to make $15B a year free and clear of all expenses based on having the taxpayers subsidize their employees wages. WalMart makes what they earn my business by imposing upon me the extra tax burden.
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying, but it's almost like talking to a fence post over the points you've raised - it's just too ****ing logical for some people to grasp. It reminds me of all of the asshats who are against abortion, but want to end so many social services that impact children. That'll learn all of those dumbass women who have irresponsible sex - just use the kids to punish them. :roll:

If a lot of people work everyday, and still have to apply for social welfare - something is ****ing wrong. Walmart is playing the taxpayers...plain and simple. Walmart will pay huge sums to politicians to support their wage practices - and those politicians are using the taxpayers to prop up WalMart's business, which enables them to NET BILLIONS.

So if Walmart "net's" $8 billion instead of $15 billion and its workers of no longer applying for social assistance - and the taxpayers aren't victims of Walmart's lack of ethics...is Walmart going to be fatally damaged or will fall from the status of number one company in the world to number two? For those who support Walmart - I sincerely hope Karma comes back and bites them in the ass - hard and long.

This ain't rocket science...but then those who support Walmart haven't got enough snap to believe in science.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom