Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-19-2013, 06:40 AM
 
17,401 posts, read 11,973,897 times
Reputation: 16155

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime View Post
You do realize that these are the same people that many people are ranting about who just want "free stuff" from the government don't you? Many people take jobs like Walmart because there are no other choices.
Because THEY have no other choice, because they don't have the skills to get a better paying job.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-19-2013, 06:46 AM
 
17,401 posts, read 11,973,897 times
Reputation: 16155
Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime View Post
No I do realize this, but the point remains is that they still do not pay their employee's a living wage. This particular event just happened at that Walmart which does not say that other Walmart employees are rolling in the bucks
So what exactly is a "living wage"? If I want to "live" by owning a 6000 sf house, drive a luxury vehicle or three, take a couple of pricey vacations every year, wear designer clothes, eat in fancy restaurants - should my employer pay me enough to live that way?

No business exists to provide a certain lifestyle to anyone. They exist to sell a product or service, for a fee. If they become successful, they will need more employees, as a byproduct of that success. Period.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2013, 06:54 AM
 
Location: Florida
23,173 posts, read 26,194,030 times
Reputation: 27914
Quote:
Originally Posted by mackinac81 View Post
Again, there you go. Always making assumptions about people who don't make much money yet still are working...the working poor. Always assuming it's the EMPLOYEE'S fault. Always. You prove my point.

Conservatives.
Most everybody is responsible for themselves. Maybe that's why we keep saying it.
And I believe the word is 'responsibility not 'fault'.
The use of 'fault' being an emotional thing...too often the basis of the 'bleeding-heart" contingent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2013, 07:21 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,176,592 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post
Who is "we?" You aren't "subsidizing" anybody at Walmart, and neither is anybody else. You are reall messed up in the head.



More bull crap! The taxpayers are not picking up any "unpaid tab."

You are totally clueless and uniformed.

Walmart's main competition would be Target. I can tell you they are roughly the same. My wife worked at Target many years ago as a manager. I think I know what I'm talking about here.

My wife was in retailing her entire life. When we were married, she was a sales person (a real sales person, not just a floor worker). She worked her way up to Store Manager (that is General Manager) of one store in a large Southern CA retail chain on the order of Dillard's. For those of you familiar with Southern CA, it was Buffum's. She managed the Fashion Valley store, then the Grossmont Center store, then after a short time with Target, she managed the Lomas Santa Fe Buffum's, a new store near Rancho Santa Fe, CA.

So, I know what I'm talking about.
If the majority of Walmart's employees are on welfare programs, then we, the tax payers, are subsidizing their workers while the heads of Walmart cash in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2013, 07:29 AM
 
Location: CHicago, United States
6,933 posts, read 8,493,093 times
Reputation: 3510
The America-haters just love to distort facts to fit their arguments against the country, and our people. That Wal-Mart store director/manager should be congratulated, not criticized.

Quote:

"This store has been doing this for several years and is for associates that
have faced an extreme hardship recently
," spokesman Kory Lundberg told
us.

Lundberg says an example of this would be a recent layoff in the family
or some other financial hardship.
More employers/people should be helping one another ... not attacking one another.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2013, 07:49 AM
 
Location: On the Group W bench
5,563 posts, read 4,261,937 times
Reputation: 2127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Cooper View Post
lol.

OK, you talked me into never giving a single thing to anyone, ever again. Why should I if it won't permanently solve a single problem?

Every single company I've ever been involved with has done charitable drives for other employees.

You honestly don't know what a dumb argument yours is. I'm so glad I don't live in your disgraceful little world.
B-b-b-but … you cons always tell us that private charity DOES solve the world's problems! Are you saying they're wrong?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2013, 08:01 AM
 
Location: On the Group W bench
5,563 posts, read 4,261,937 times
Reputation: 2127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kreutz View Post
There were exactly 0 mass famines in the US before the welfare state. Apparently private charities managed the Spanish Flu epidemic, the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl.
Aye yi yi! First, no one's talking about famines, we're talking about managing hunger. Congratulations on a marvelous straw man.

Next, you leap to major disasters and say that "apparently" private charities managed just fine, entirely without any proof.

Then you pretend that the New Deal to manage the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl era never existed.

Finally, you ignore the historical facts of the Spanish flu pandemic in which doctors and scientists, both public and private, not to mention the Navy and other government agencies, managed the crisis.

You seriously want to stand by your ridiculous post?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2013, 08:02 AM
 
Location: Texas
872 posts, read 827,833 times
Reputation: 938
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
If the majority of Walmart's employees are on welfare programs, then we, the tax payers, are subsidizing their workers while the heads of Walmart cash in.
As taxpayers, then we need to STOP shopping at Walmart and other stores that do not pay very well. We all know that Costco and even Sams pays better wages then Walmart....

I do not shop at Walmart/target, I rarely go to a fast food restaurant, I grocery shop in specialty grocery stores. I grow most of my vegetables and herbs - what I don't grow, I get at the farmer's market. I buy beef and chicken directly from a ranch. I shop for clothes and shoes at local (not chain stores). There are other options. Problem is, most people want it for as cheap as they can get it.....and will not stop shopping at Walmart and the likes, then turn around and complain about them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2013, 08:03 AM
 
Location: On the Group W bench
5,563 posts, read 4,261,937 times
Reputation: 2127
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyronHarpoons View Post
Perhaps you could take a chunk of your salary to compensate for others?
What does you post have to do with what I said, and how do you know I don't already donate heavily to charity?

I just don't believe it's the answer to the world's problems, nor do I refer to the social safety net as "theft."

Anyway, the silly "private charity only" argument is just camouflage for ignorance and greed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2013, 08:05 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,176,592 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tassy001 View Post
As taxpayers, then we need to STOP shopping at Walmart and other stores that do not pay very well. We all know that Costco and even Sams pays better wages then Walmart....

I do not shop at Walmart/target, I rarely go to a fast food restaurant, I grocery shop in specialty grocery stores. I grow most of my vegetables and herbs - what I don't grow, I get at the farmer's market. I buy beef and chicken directly from a ranch. I shop for clothes and shoes at local (not chain stores). There are other options. Problem is, most people want it for as cheap as they can get it.....and will not stop shopping at Walmart and the likes, then turn around and complain about them.
That is actually really good of you to do. I agree, I wish more American consumers would shop with more of a conscience when it comes to things like that because that is the easiest way to force companies to either evolve of disappear.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:17 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top