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.
Walmart would not be as "successful" as it is, if it weren't for Chinese Communism.
Most of the China Mart Crap they sell come off the backs of poor labors that have had their land stripped from them by the Chinese State and Local Governments and forced to move to the cities to work.
Forcing them to relocate to the cities where they can churn out products for the vultures in China, Walmart and on Wall Street.
Not to mention I want even start with the exportation of the pollution and destruction of the land to make the vultures richer at others expense.
Walmart has all the thanks to give to the Commies in China, where China still owns the majority of business there.
Lots of Commie Supporters here to.
So the billionaire Waltons take advantage of people in America and China.
Quote:
When I was young, this country built things, there were unions to protect workers and make sure they had decent wages. After Reagan became President, things started to change. Alan Greenspan, the Ayn Rand, disciple, became powerful, and the American worker started to be viewed as a parasite. Now, many years later, people cannot get jobs, Teachers are viewed as the haves (that is just crazy) and this country is unrecognizable.
The people who aren't viewed as parasites, are the ones that brought this country down. They took sub prime mortgages, wrapped them all together, and sold them as AAA. They shipped jobs to countries where they could enslave the workers. These are the true parasites. They have their master (money) and they don't care how they hurt this country to get it.
???? Exactly! If those people can't survive on those low wages, they should just quit and get welfare so they can make more. Does that work for ya?
If those people cant survive on low wages, and the taxpayers werent subsidizing their income, do you think they'd take a job that doesnt offer enough to survive?
Well they did up the qualifications for food stamps to 130% poverty line and laxed some of the other requirements because of the Great Recession.
And the complaint isn't about the number of people, it's about auditing the program to remove fraud, greed and corruption.
And if you want a mandated livable wage then go cry to Congress to mandate it across the land.
Problem is Tex, that you are not going to get squat out of Congress unless you have the $$$ to back it up.
Personal Responsibility is for the little people to make it on their own, and the Big Dogs Responsibility is to not make it on their own but collude with politicians to rig the markets in their favor.
I dont think thats fair either. Wal Mart has a need for employees, so if welfare would be abolished, then Wal Mart would have to pay them more becuase their value would demand it.
But liberals whine and cry that the govenrment should be subsidizing these people, and then whine when they realize the outcome of their policies.
There isnt a dam ideology that Democrats dont support, that then they dont whine about the outcome.. Its like they dont have the ability to think 5 years down the road.
Taking away welfare wouldn't force WMT to pay more. The HS kid is going to start off the same as the HS dropout with 4 kids. Contrary to popular belief, WMT doesn't actually force women to have kids or stop them from getting an education. I do agree with you that Democrats/liberals are hypocritical on this issue though. I mean, you can't support welfare programs and then be surprised that the least educated people have the worst jobs and use those programs.
There is, I've noted it many times but it's not that some jobs are simply entry level low paying jobs.
More and more jobs are low pay. It is a downward cycle. More and more people are paid low wages, more and more people cannot afford to buy services or goods to support businesses, and more and more people need support from the government.
BTW, where will the Walton family be spending their Christmas this year?
I don't what the exact make up of that community is, but historically, big box businesses drive out small businesses and jobs.
So IKEA gets a sweet heart deal for land, probably gets a sweetheart deal for taxes, and justifies it by saying "we're bringing all this money."
A few years later, the city has lost more tax revenue from businesses that have closed and employees that have been fired than IKEA has generated. There are fewer workers b/c the closings. And there's a drain on the local economy from money being sucked into IKEA and spread out through their entire organization.
I'm not absolutely certain that this is the case this time, but it usually is. Is this still a good deal for the city?
Nice story. Do you dabble in fiction professionally, or just on city-data?
Know what's interesting? Every strip mall in Las Vegas that is anchored by a Wal*Mart or other big box store has full occupancy. There are tons of strip malls that aren't anchored by a big box store that are half empty or more.
My business competes directly with a very, very, VERY large company, whose products and/or services I guarantee you've used, even if you've never heard their name. Even in a crappy economy, our business has grown year after year, every year since we started it.
Back in the '90s, I ran a retail pet store. After working there a few years, a Petco opened up down the street. Did we whine and complain, and throw a tantrum about how unfair it was? No. We adapted, specialized and did just fine.
The "aww, the big box store put mom and pop out of business" thing is just an excuse. The businesses that fail when a major competitor moves in were destined to fail anyway. Most are/were run by people who couldn't think outside the box they'd built around themselves, and rather than admit that they failed to adapt to changing market conditions, they (or maybe just you) blame the competition.
Running a business is tough, and it's not a static environment. Conditions change, and if you're not ready, willing and able to adapt to those changes, you will fail. That's all there is to it. If you know that Wal*Mart, or Ikea, or Best Buy exists, and you know that they'd be competing with you if they moved in down the block, then it's just bad business if they do and you don't have a plan to deal with it. These stores also don't open up overnight - you get six months to several years of advance warning to figure out your plan and start to put it into effect.
And where is all your anger toward every single internet merchant? The internet has "hurt" local businesses far more than Wal*Mart ever could. No hate for Amazon? Hmm. Why is that, Eddie?
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.
