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.
Good grief! Carter was elected 33 years ago, 1/3 of a century. I know everything ties together, but to blame this recession on Carter's policies is ridiculous!
To blame it on Bush is just as rediculous! Let's
quit driving off the road, a recession has nothing to do with Walmarts and Unions? For that matter the Unions have been around longer than anything and have more to do with the demise of businesses than any single politician and their policies.
Fine. Kohl's doesn't carry them. A lot of us like to try on our shoes before we buy.
Do you think any retailer pays health insurance for a lot of its employees? Specifically, do you think these "Mom and Pops" provide insurance for their employees? My educated guess is "no". Back in the heyday of Mom and Pop stores, most people did not have health insurance. It was not a business expense at the time.
What you say about Wal Mart has been said about Sears and Penney's in the past.
If anyone's job is in the league of what is being offered at Walmart they have a whole bunch of other problems. I'd focus on getting a better job not a min wage job.
I could name off a long list of sources which provide business analysis of Wal-Mart but you obviously don't know anything about (nor have paid access to) secondary research sources so that would be pointless. Look, I've already altruistically spent time defending myself against your ridiculous assertions. You have nothing of value to offer if you challenge others on their sources but provide no information about yours or why you've filled this thread with pro-Wal-Mart/anti-Union propaganda. Take a look for yourself at this thread and you'll see that the overwhelming majority of posters disagree with your opinions. You're on the wrong side of the argument regarding Wal-Mart, that's the truth. It's one thing to be anti-Union, but it's quite a leap of logic to say that anyone who sees problems with this "Wal-Mart world" of ours must be pro-Union. You've made a connection that doesn't exist for at least this poster (and I suspect most others). Lastly, the only personal benefit I can see happening by describing how Wal-Mart is harming the US and Global economies is that I'll increase awareness of the problems generated when unfettered growth of single corporate retail entity to worldwide proportions is allowed to progress too long. They are simply too big and too influential and they are in fact continuing to grow at an unprecedented pace which is not good for any of us or our children.
You list 'em, I'll pay for access to them. I'm not anti-Union, at all. I haven't said that anyone who sees problems with Wal-Mart is pro-union. I have said that a disproportionate amount of the criticism leveled at Wal-Mart is criticism that applies to the retail industry as a whole. And that unions, in the guise of public service, have consolidated and organized that criticism to tell a story that is not balanced or fair. And they have paid out millions of dollars to disseminate that story far and wide. And they have good reason to do so, since union membership has been declining drastically, and Wal-Mart's resistance to unionization deprives the unions of millions of potential members.
Pointing out that unions are at war with Wal-Mart and are using tactics like propaganda and misinformation may not sit well with you. But it's the truth, like it or not.
They are simply too big and too influential and they are in fact continuing to grow at an unprecedented pace which is not good for any of us or our children.
The only way to sustain the unprecedented pace of growth - people shop there, they like it, they get value for their money, especially in these difficult times. A lot of people work there too, with decent jobs for the minimal skills and experience and lack of education they have. You would like to see those people in the unemployment line instead? You would like to take away their livelihood?
You would like to take all that away from those that patronize Wal-mart?
Average wage of a service worker (store clerk, bagger, etc). in 1979: $2.92 hour.
Average wage in 2009: $8.78 per hour.
I cut and paste these numbers from Uncle Sams website.
Assume 3.5% inflation for 30 years, and you end up with ($2.92 * (1.035^30)) = $8.19 an hour. By the govt's numbers, today's employee at Wal-Mart makes about the same or better as his pre-Wal-Mart brethren did 30 years ago. Tell me again how Wal-Mart has driven down wages?
That is wrong I work at Wal Mart and I started out at 7.50. Maybe you should check facts before you post stuff
Since when is ANY COMPANY responsible for your family? Where is it written that ANY COMPANY "has to pay" a so called "livable" wage?
since DC starting running an under the table NAFTA as directed by the corporations, bout 30 years ago. bout 21 million illegals ago. do you follow the walmart news?? bout the 130 some odd illegals busted here subcontracting to walmart. not to single out walmart they are one of many.
Let me see now "Walmart undercuts all the competition by paying the workers low wages"
Wonder where that intelligent statement came from?
Obviousley from someone who has never owned or operated a business with employees and the various business expenses to keep the doors open.
Payroll is a large expense in any operation.
What is better...sell one item at 25% profit or a gross (144) at 10% profit. These are just numbers off the top of my head so as not to confuse people that have never operated a business and the needs of a whlse to retail price and a margin of profit nneded to keep the doors open.
People are spouting a lot of speculation without the foggiest idea of what they are talking about.
Mom and pop stores may buy any where from one to ten cases of an item to sell in three months while Walmart buys train box car loads to sell in one weekend thru many of it's outlets.
I was in the Inventory field for 23 yrs (owner for 15) and have seen large operations a little smaller then Walmart and understand the complications involved in their operations.
People need to have the shoe on the other foot to fully appreciate the complexity of a large operation such as Walmart...Sears...J C Penny and the like.
It is no piece of cake and as such there is more to see then meets the eye. Steve
I could name off a long list of sources which provide business analysis of Wal-Mart but you obviously don't know anything about (nor have paid access to) secondary research sources so that would be pointless. Look, I've already altruistically spent time defending myself against your ridiculous assertions.
Somehow, I never felt defending one's self was "altruistic".
PokerPlayer, what's being pointed out to you is that the OP you responded to stated an AVERAGE wage. Your remark that you earned less than the AVERAGE doesn't disprove the AVERAGE. It shows that you earned on the lower end of the RANGE. Not because you are of lesser intelligence, but probably because in your region of the country, earnings tend to be on the lower end of the RANGE. Pay scales in New York or California or even in specific locales like Palm Springs are on the higher end of the RANGE. So the AVERAGE falls in the middle.
Last edited by Ibginnie; 02-25-2009 at 06:06 PM..
Reason: Deleted quoted post
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.
