Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The job of any retailer is to deliver a wide array of products with as little cost as possible added to the suppliers price. Wal Mart excels at their mission.
The job of any retailer is to deliver a wide array of products with as little cost as possible added to the suppliers price. Wal Mart excels at their mission.
And, despite prompting, you remain completely oblivious to (or just dismissive of) all other issues here.
So you'd be okay if, say, Alibaba opened giant stores coast to coast... as long as their prices were lower than WM?
As a customer, I support the retailers most efficient at maintaining low prices. Wal Mart does that.
I notice you carefully avoided the second part of the question. Since the only obligation of a retailer, at all, is to provide the best values for customers, I'm sure you'd have no problem with a massive invasion of a Chinese-owned, -staffed and -run competitor that waives, ignores or is exempt from more business requirements than WM, as long as they're cheaper and you really like shopping there.
I notice you carefully avoided the second part of the question. Since the only obligation of a retailer, at all, is to provide the best values for customers, I'm sure you'd have no problem with a massive invasion of a Chinese-owned, -staffed and -run competitor that waives, ignores or is exempt from more business requirements than WM, as long as they're cheaper and you really like shopping there.
Wrong, if any employer fails to obey DOL and IRS laws, they should be severely penalized.
Now if any retailer wants to come here and obey all such laws, they should be welcome with open arms.
PS: The peasant insurance laws should be eliminated, as they cause no harm to employer or employee.
I can only conclude that 50 years ago, this crowd would have been vehemently defending Dow Chemicals, because they were so profitable and employed so many people.
I can only conclude that 50 years ago, this crowd would have been vehemently defending Dow Chemicals, because they were so profitable and employed so many people.
And what do you have against Dow?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
