It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The sins of Wal-Mart.

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by madmanacrosswater
You and many millions of Americans are willing to overlook this fact to save $1 on something. This type of nonsense is why this country has more EMPLOYED workers not able to receive any sort of health insurance.


So the workers themselves don't have any say in where they work? Last time I checked, where I decided to shop didn't make much difference in whether a company made it or not, and definitely didn't affect anyone's decision to work somewhere.

I'm still curious as to what is keeping these people employed there if the conditions are so terrible. Maybe I'm missing something, maybe I'm just in one of those apparently rare towns that has other places of business to work at, but I really thought that working at Wal-mart was optional.

Could someone clue me in as to why someone who's in such a bad work environment can't pack up and say "I'm going to work over here for the same amount of money, or less money but better work conditions?" We're not talking about kids in a sweatshop here--that's a different situation altogether, and I'm talking about people who can make decisions for themselves and (I thought anyways) lived in a quasi-free country where they could choose where they work.

Did I miss some legislation that required everyone to work only at walmart?




posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 11:04 AM
link   
FEMA, Ambient Sound has some great points and questions about your suggestion of Wal-Mart required to sell local products.

madmanacrosswater:

Perhaps you are one of the lucky people who can afford higher prices in this economy. Most of us are caught up in what the situation is at this moment and not what it ought to be. Wiping Wal-Mart out today will not solve today's problems. How about coming up with a way we can change what is happening without a socialistic form of government? Most of us can not boycott Wal-Mart now because we need these low prices.

I do not want National Health Service. I want to be able to work at a job, to earn my own way and pay my own expenses. I do not want a "nanny" government.

MCory1:

Perhaps you are fortunate to be able to choose your employment. There are many who are not in the same position today. Yes, a cashier probably could find work in another store, and I am sure the pay, benefits, and security would be the same. I think that employees at Wal-Mart may even have it better. On the other hand, an out-of-work manufacturing
production worker is vastly out of luck working at Wal-Mart. Yes, it is a
job, but this worker can not go where he/she can be paid for the skills they have acquired over their lifetime.

Following FEMA's link to "Vlasic", I found this interesting and informative article:

The Wal-Mart You Don't Know

Article here

From: Issue 77 December 2003, Page 68
By: Charles Fishman
Photographs by: Livia Corona

As you can see, this was written 2 years ago. It mostly concentrates on the effect Wal-Mart has on the companies it uses as suppliers. The point is made that Wal-Mart forces its suppliers to ever lower costing, eventually driving them out of business. We are then down to the lowest common denominator because the high cost items involving better quality which these suppliers produced are now longer available.

A quote from this article wraps up the main problem of "Wal-Mart sucking the life out of communities:


One way to think of Wal-Mart is as a vast pipeline that gives non-
U.S. companies direct access to the American market. "One of the things that limits or slows the growth of imports is the cost of establishing connections and networks," says Paul Krugman, the Princeton University economist. "Wal-Mart is so big and so centralized that it can all at once hook Chinese and other suppliers into its digital system. So--wham!--you have a large switch to overseas sourcing in a period quicker than under
the old rules of retailing.


Don't Blame Wal-Mart

article here

Print-friendly Page By Robert Reich
Published by the New York Times, February 28, 2005

Gripes against Wal-Mart.


In the eyes of Wal-Mart's detractors, the Arkansas-based chain embodies the worst kind of economic exploitation: it pays its 1.2 million American workers an average of only $9.68 an hour, doesn't provide most of them with health insurance, keeps out unions, has a checkered history on labor law and turns main streets into ghost towns by sucking business away from small retailers.



But isn't Wal-Mart really being punished for our sins? After all, it's not as if Wal-Mart's founder, Sam Walton, and his successors created the world's largest retailer by putting a gun to our heads and forcing us to shop there.

Instead, Wal-Mart has lured customers with low prices. "We expect our suppliers to drive the costs out of the supply chain," a spokeswoman for Wal-Mart said. "It's good for us and good for them."


Wal- Mart Wages and Worker Rights

Article here

This site concentrates on the employee problems of which Wal-Mart is accused. Unfair work policies, (part timer vs full time employees) low pay, poor health insurance policies, work demanded by Wal-Mart "off the clock", anti union policies and discrimination against women.

One of the facts highlighted by this site is that because Wal-Mart does not pay well enough to support a family the rest of the cost falls on the taxpayers to pay, as welfare benefits, to these workers.

Another problem is the trickle down effect from having a Wal-Mart in the community seems to be that employees do not have much money to spend so other businesses suffer also.

Other charges made are: Wal-Mart stifles competition, destroys the environment, increases traffic and therefore higher cost to taxpayers for the infrastructure of the community, and then, of course, there are all the empty retail stores (out of business because of Wal-Mart) which makes a community look like a ghost town.

The Wal-Mart You Don't Know

Article here

From: Issue 77 December 2003, Page 68
By: Charles Fishman

This additional quote from the Charles Fishman article wraps it up:


Wal-Mart has also lulled shoppers into ignoring the difference between the price of something and the cost. Its unending focus on price underscores something that Americans are only starting to realize about globalization: Ever-cheaper prices have consequences. Says Steve Dobbins, president of thread maker Carolina Mills: "We want clean air, clear water, good living conditions, the best health care in the world--yet we aren't willing to pay for anything manufactured under those restrictions."


No, I don't know the answer. It sounds like we are damned if we do and damned if we don't. By shopping at Wal-Mart and the lower prices we need, we have driven competition out of the picture. This puts more people out of work or working the lower paying jobs and so needing the low prices at Wal-Mart even more.

I don't subscribe to a socialist form of economy by making laws which would curtail War-Mart's policies. There are laws already on the books for some of that. I look up some of these:

Promoting Competition, Protecting Consumers:

A Plain English Guide to Antitrust Laws


web site

I read through this site quickly and came away with the feeling these restrictions don't apply to Wal-Mart because they (Wal-Mart) offer the low prices which benefit the customer. There are some restrictions on mergers and harm done to suppliers because of mergers. Perhaps there would be something there which would stop us "shooting ourselves in the foot" type
behavior.


Promoting Competition, Protecting Consumers:
A Plain English Guide to Antitrust Laws

www.ftc.gov...
Wal-Mart losing PR War
www.tpmcafe.com...
Wal-Mart on PR offensive to repair image
www.chinadaily.com.cn...
The Wal-Mart You Don't Know
www.fastcompany.com...
Don't Blame Wal-Mart
www.wakeupwalmart.com...
Wal-Mart Wages and Worker Rights
www.wakeupwalmart.com...

[edit on 12/12/2005 by Mahree]

[edit on 12/12/2005 by Mahree]



posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Walmart is not evil, it is the epitome of good. Walmart is what division of labor is all about. Low value services deserve low pay. Does it really make sense to pay a chashier $30K a year plus health benefits when most customers are perfectly happy to check themselves out using a machine that costs $5K? Does it make sense to a customer to pay $4 for a gallon of milk in order to subsidise a job that barely even makes any sense to have someone staffing in the first place? Efficiency is good, not evil.

People in the west have forgotten how to think for themselves and simply expect to have a high paying job assigned to them without the need to take any risks or put forth any effort, as if mere existence entitles one to a house, a late model SUV, healthcare and a big screen TV with cable service. Walmart and others who have relentlessly pursued lower costs and higher efficiency are the reason we are not all subsistence farmers.

Personally, I remember the pre-walmart days of going into the local supermarket and being floored by the outrageous prices. They deserved to be run under. We remember the 'mom and pop' stores with rose colored glasses, yet if they were still around, most of you would accuse them of price gouging.

No-one is compelled to shop or work at a Walmart, and after reading through this thread, I get the impression few people know what the word 'exploit' means either. It is not exploitation to pay someone to work for you. It isn't Walmart's fault that adults are trying to raise families having never bothered to make themselves more marketable than a 12 year old.

I find it ironic that no-one complains when jobs are eliminated altogether through automation, yet those jobs that are just barely beyond the grasp of automation are expected to pay well? If you have a low pay job, odds are in a few years you will have no job at all as you are replaced by a machine.

[edit on 12-12-2005 by spamandham]



posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 02:33 PM
link   

You have voted spamandham for the

Way Above Top Secret award.

You have one more vote left for this month.




posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mahree
MCory1:

Perhaps you are fortunate to be able to choose your employment. There are many who are not in the same position today. Yes, a cashier probably could find work in another store, and I am sure the pay, benefits, and security would be the same. I think that employees at Wal-Mart may even have it better. On the other hand, an out-of-work manufacturing
production worker is vastly out of luck working at Wal-Mart. Yes, it is a
job, but this worker can not go where he/she can be paid for the skills they have acquired over their lifetime.


I'm able to choose my employment just as much as the next person. I have skills in many areas like everyone else, and like everyone else I'm great at some things and I'm worse at others. About the only things I may have going for me in that area is my ability with computers, and since more people are using computers that benefit is dwindling.

That said, I've spent a lot years and a lot of money on learning my particular trade (programming), and for all intents and purposes it's wasted because I wasn't able to finish school and get my degree. If I hadn't have said "screw it" and took the risk of starting my own business, I'd be flipping burgers, filing memos, or restocking shelves, in spite of how well I may be able to write code. Even as it is, I'm having to look at doing something along those lines anyways. I know what it's like to have spent lots of time and money to get experience in a field and it ends up being useless--I can relate to that production worker you're talking about.

If a job is bad enough though, you leave it. You start looking for something else on your lunch break, your days off, whatever. I may end up flipping burgers to pay the bills, but if I don't like it for whatever reason, I buy a paper every morning and read the classifieds before I start my shift.

One thing that was mentioned earlier was quality of life, and how poor it must be working for minimum wage (or slightly better). Same principal applies--if you don't like how things are, you change them. You get a second job, or you look for a better job. You take night classes so you can get that piece of paper that says you know what you're doing, even if it's just something to move you a little higher up the food chain.

Or you could be lazy like me, and just do what you have to do so and then complain about not being able to get ahead in the world. Just remember, if you do that, you need to blame society for holding you back, your employers for not noticing the high amounts of effort you put into your 3 hours on the internet (visiting ATS), your parents for not being able to put you through school, so on and so forth. Can't take responsibility for your own actions now.



posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by MCory1

Originally posted by Mahree



That said, I've spent a lot years and a lot of money on learning my particular trade (programming), and for all intents and purposes it's wasted because I wasn't able to finish school and get my degree. If I hadn't have said "screw it" and took the risk of starting my own business, I'd be flipping burgers, filing memos, or restocking shelves, in spite of how well I may be able to write code. Even as it is, I'm having to look at doing something along those lines anyways. I know what it's like to have spent lots of time and money to get experience in a field and it ends up being useless--I can relate to that production worker you're talking about.

Yes, I can see where you can relate to the production worker.


If a job is bad enough though, you leave it. You start looking for something else on your lunch break, your days off, whatever. I may end up flipping burgers to pay the bills, but if I don't like it for whatever reason, I buy a paper every morning and read the classifieds before I start my shift.

You haven't said if you are married and with a family to support. The transition of learning/finding new employment could be difficult with a family dependent on you. However, employment at Wal-Mart is at least some money coming in while you try to find something better.


One thing that was mentioned earlier was quality of life, and how poor it must be working for minimum wage (or slightly better). Same principal applies--if you don't like how things are, you change them. You get a second job, or you look for a better job. You take night classes so you can get that piece of paper that says you know what you're doing, even if it's just something to move you a little higher up the food chain.


I agree with you 100%. I have done all of the above myself. And, as I have said before, I don't believe that the employees, cashiers, etc are getting a bad deal at Wal-Mart.


Or you could be lazy like me, and just do what you have to do so and then complain about not being able to get ahead in the world. Just remember, if you do that, you need to blame society for holding you back, your employers for not noticing the high amounts of effort you put into your 3 hours on the internet (visiting ATS), your parents for not being able to put you through school, so on and so forth. Can't take responsibility for your own actions now.


Somehow, MCory1, I don't think that you are lazy at all.

I don't think you can deny the problems we are now having in the US. The loss of manufacturing and production jobs to outsourcing. This leaves a big hole where these employees are without the income and benefits they have had for all their working lives.

Getting rid of Wal-Mart is not going to change these facts. Neither is calling Wal-Mart or other "top of the heap" corporations "evil, greedy, etc.

Where do we go from here. This appears to be the new economy, or culture. What do the coming years look like? What do we need to replace these jobs? Do you have any ideas about this?

We need innovative ideas. We don't need calling names or a nanny government. And, I am pretty sure, we can't turn back the clock until it is now like it used to be.



posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 01:10 AM
link   
Sorry, but saying that I shouldn't shop at Walmart, because they don't pay squat, makes no more sense to me, than saying I should shop at Nordstroms...because they pay GREAT!! (actually I have NO IDEA what they pay...but it better be good!)

Also, let me ask of the Walmart haters, do any of you folks ever eat at Mcdonalds? Consider every place you do business with over the course of a week. Certainly no fast-food joint pays its employees 9.25 an hour. How about that shoe clerk at the "other" shoe source? Now be HONEST! How about that guy ringing up the beer over at Seven-Eleven?

The harsh truth at Walmart, as at so many other businesses, is when the hired help REALLY DOES come a dime a dozen, you absolutely will NOT find a really decent wage. The answer of course is DON'T WORK THERE! Save it for the kid looking for a summer job.



Or you could be lazy like me, and just do what you have to do so and then complain about not being able to get ahead in the world. Just remember, if you do that, you need to blame society for holding you back, your employers for not noticing the high amounts of effort you put into your 3 hours on the internet (visiting ATS), your parents for not being able to put you through school, so on and so forth. Can't take responsibility for your own actions now.


Hey...wait a minute...I ain't getting paid for this??


[edit on 13-12-2005 by Toelint]



posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 01:47 AM
link   
Define sin, better yet define God.

Go on Spamandham I know you can do it. I actually do.

You've been a believer in the 7 day theory[/Tupac Shakur]

I've said too much but my cup is half empty.

I'm mad, but I'm speaking in riddles that make sense to me and to you.

Call this 'the truth' or call this 'the epitome of delusion' but allow yourself to fill in the gaps.



posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Simon_the_byron
Define sin, better yet define God.

Go on Spamandham I know you can do it. I actually do.


Since you asked...

God does not have a single definition. As many people as there are that believe in gods, that's probably how many definitions there are.

As for sin, it's whatever you believe it is as well.

I do not have a personal definition of god. Since I do not believe that ethics are defined in some non-earthly or non-human dimension either, the word "sin" is meaningless to me as well.



posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Did I miss some legislation that required everyone to work only at walmart?


No, you haven't missed that legislation. However you have missed the point. Wal-Mart in some small towns may be the only place to gain employment since they have driven all the small businesses out.

Your line of thinking is in line with typical management style of today. That is why there are over 40,000,000 uninsured workers today.

Have you checked on your health care system? Have you checked on the relationship between the insurance industry and the health care system.

Do some homework. If you are a compassionate person you will come away shocked. If not you will just think you are saving a $1 while actually costing yourself $1,000s.



posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by spamandham

Originally posted by Simon_the_byron
Define sin, better yet define God.

Go on Spamandham I know you can do it. I actually do.


Since you asked...

God does not have a single definition. As many people as there are that believe in gods, that's probably how many definitions there are.

As for sin, it's whatever you believe it is as well.

I do not have a personal definition of god. Since I do not believe that ethics are defined in some non-earthly or non-human dimension either, the word "sin" is meaningless to me as well.


I'm glad we have an understanding.



posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by spamandham. We remember the 'mom and pop' stores with rose colored glasses, yet if they were still around, most of you would accuse them of price gouging.

[edit on 12-12-2005 by spamandham]


Rose colered glasses? It's obvious you have never been a retailer or else to young to have experienced the social interchange that the M&Ps afforded. Sorry that you missed hanging out in an old style hardware store or tackle shop. It established a sense of community that is lost.



It's a brave new world, welcome to the monkey house.



posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Mahree--
Actually, I openly admit that I am quite lazy
Honestly--and I hope this doesn't come off sounding arrogant--I could be doing pretty well for myself if I put my various skills to proper use. There's plenty of people in this world who are less qualified for many jobs I could do quite well, and are making much more than I've ever hoped to make. I have all the knowledge and resources to make my home business into a really profitable venture. The fact is though, most of the time I'd rather just do what I need to do to get by, and it seems to me that that's something I have in common with a lot of people.

From my experience--albeit sheltered I'm sure--most people drive themselves into a crummy situation, such as a bad job (where ever it may be at) and then just spend their spare time complaining about it. They'd rather have the $9 p/hr and something to be worried about than to put the effort into getting themselves into a better spot in life.


Originally posted by madmanacrosswater

No, you haven't missed that legislation. However you have missed the point. Wal-Mart in some small towns may be the only place to gain employment since they have driven all the small businesses out.


The fact that you're using that as a roadblock means that you as well have missed the point I was trying to make. Everyone has the potential to be successful in their life. It's just a matter of how badly you want it and how hard you're willing to work for it. If you live in an area where you can't get a decent job, then you move. You take the jobs that you can and then you save every possible penny of it--which can be quite a bit once you take out all of the so-called "necessities" of life.

I was in a situation last year where there was something I really wanted--to move my fiance out here with me. I scrimped every penny I could--if one can of soup at the store was 5-cents cheaper than one that I'd rather have, well I'd go for the cheaper one. No movies, no cable, no video games. The only luxuries I allowed my self were my cigarettes--always the cheapest possible--and a six-pack of the cheapest beer I could find every couple of days. Even then I felt guilty as hell for spending $4 on smokes when that was $4 I could've been closer to my goal with.

If there's something you really want, then you'll do it. You eat ramen for lunch everyday--to hell with the taste or whether you want it--because it's cheaper. You walk where you have to go when you can, or you ride the bus to save gas money if there's a bus system. The last thing you do is make up excuses like "there's no job here that pays $20 an hour, I'm never getting out of here." You take the $5.15 an hour, get another job if you need to, and tell your kids "no, you can't have that $50 video game, we need to save money."

If you want a better life, you'll do what you have to do to get a better job. The hard part is being honest enough with yourself to say "Yeah, that'd be nice, but I don't want to go through the hassel." Like I said above, I could be doing a lot better than I am right now, but I don't want it bad enough.



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 12:10 AM
link   
Well, I don't know where to start. I have been away from this thread for a couple days and there are a lot of questions to discuss.

Let's start here: Ambient Sound, good and thoughtful post, points well considered. Though I don't recall them all I'll try and share some thoughts on a general level.

With regard to Mal-Mart being forced to sell a manufacturer's products it's a tough call. For instance you surfaced a good point: "What if those products are inferior?" You're utterly right. In such a case I suspect those products would remain in the shelf for two reasons. When I posted I suggested that Wal-Mart seel the city products along with the other imports. The idea being to allow the town and area people to buy accordingly. It's not a perfect idea, but allows Wal-Mart to carry both and let the market decide.

I forget who made this point, but it revloved around the manufacturer not being able to keep up with the sales of Wal-Mart. From my perspective most manufacturing facilities supply more than one distributor. A single Wal-Mart in a single town, would very unlikely tax a manufactuer who already supplies many distributors. We are not talking about the town's manufacturer supplying the Wal-Mart chain, just the one in their town.

Back to Ambient Sound. I just recalled a point you made regarding a opportunity for abuse of rules put in place to compel Wal-Mart to sell certain products. You are most correct. That possibility could certainly surface. I guess it boils down to integrity on both sides of the fence.

The issue is not one of Wal-Mart being the anti-Christ of business, nothing of the sort. It's a matter of Wal-Mart being a responsible business entity. To date, volumes have been written regarding the preditory practices and pricing of Wal-Mart and the associated fallout. Are we to dismiss - out of hand - the concerns, practices, possible outcomes if left unchecked, that these stories expose?



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 04:22 PM
link   

The fact that you're using that as a roadblock means that you as well have missed the point I was trying to make. Everyone has the potential to be successful in their life. It's just a matter of how badly you want it and how hard you're willing to work for it. If you live in an area where you can't get a decent job, then you move. You take the jobs that you can and then you save every possible penny of it--which can be quite a bit once you take out all of the so-called "necessities" of life.


Again another missed point. One of the "necessities" of life is health care. Do you not agree that it is a TRUE necessity or are you one of the "survivol of the fittest" guys? Hitler was one.

Every citizen of this nation deserves access to AFFORDABLE health care. Again you are advocating saving $1 and costing yourself $1,000s. Do you have any comprehension of how much the health care industry and insurance industry are in bed with each other? I think not.

Yes, move from town to town, place to place to move yourself up. Just make dad burned sure you don't herniate a disc moving your stuff because the moving ends there, and they toss you on the street like a useless piece of meat.

Yea, I've worked myself up etc. However, I have many medical problems. If this company decided to get rid of me I would be up s--t creek without a paddle. YOU are in the same situation just don't realize it yet.

Meanwhile someone is making $1,000,000,000's and could give a hoot whether their employee is hurt or not. Just throw them in the dumpster and get another.

IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING? If so I pray that you never get seriously hurt or injured. As soon as you do you are taken off the list of being covered for whatever. I hope your family stays healthy.

Take off the blinders and see what is going on. The average IQ of an American is much, much lower than one would expect. This DOES limit their capacity for monetary compensation whether one wants to believe it or not.

There are no straight lines in the area of health. One day you will find that out I'm afraid the hard way.



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by madmanacrosswater
...One of the "necessities" of life is health care.
...
Every citizen of this nation deserves access to AFFORDABLE health care.


This would seem to be a plea in favor of universal health care, rather than a specific jab at Walmart. Is that a fair assessment?



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by spamandham
[other posts on this thread I've read, too]

This would seem to be a plea in favor of universal health care, rather than a specific jab at Walmart. Is that a fair assessment?




Wha...?

We...We...agree?

When I heard about this issue of Jesus not shopping at Wal-Mart, and a bunch of pastors getting on board, I was curious what the problem with Wal-Mart was this time. Looked into it a little bit, listened to an interview with one of the reverends involved, and came to an interesting conclusion.

If what they claim to be the issue, health care, wages, and employee benefits in general, then why aren't they taking on CostCo? Target? TruValue? Walgreen's? ToysRUs? Any retail chain in the nation? What is so wrong with Wal-Mart that makes Jesus hate that company and He would never shop there, but Target is perfectly fine?

I'll tell you what, and this use of religion sickens me. Unions. Wal-Mart has never played ball with unions. They have been smeared for a long time now, using various tactics. This latest one, Jesus hates people who shop at Wal-Mart and you're not being a good Christian if you shop there is just another example of union propaganda slamming one company while ignoring others doing worse but working with the unions while screwing the employees.

You are absolutely entitled to believe that Wal-Mart should provide health care. Higher wages, as well. Heck, you can even believe Wal-Mart should incorporate unions into its business model. However, using these religious whores to promote a union's agenda under guise of Christianity is unacceptable. If Jesus wouldn't shop at Wal-Mart because Wal-Mart doesn't give health care to its workers or pay its workers an equal portion of the profits that the CEO gets, then Jesus would have to live on a commune and not shop anywhere.

Wal-Mart is not the only company to not be offering health care. The only reason they're being singled out is because they don't work with the unions. Don't let the unions become your new pastor, they have an alternate agenda. They're not looking out for your best interests, they're looking out for theirs.

Boycott Wal-mart if you want, but do it for the right reasons. Don't boycott because some corporate hack tells you your God hates it, boycott because you believe they're wrong. Then, be intellectually honest and boycott every company that does that.



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by madmanacrosswater
Again another missed point. One of the "necessities" of life is health care. Do you not agree that it is a TRUE necessity or are you one of the "survivol of the fittest" guys? Hitler was one.


I dunno, I've lived my full quarter century without health care, my parents have never had health care (to my knowledge at least), and the vast majority of those I know don't have health care. I've had some pretty good jobs that give no benefits, but pay pretty well (given I have no degree) and are great workplaces. Given that I'm still alive, I'd have to say that health is a benefit, as it's normally listed on most employment agreements. A benefit and a necessity are two entirely different things.



Every citizen of this nation deserves access to AFFORDABLE health care. Again you are advocating saving $1 and costing yourself $1,000s. Do you have any comprehension of how much the health care industry and insurance industry are in bed with each other? I think not.


I agree that everyone--not just Americans as I'm assuming you mean by "this nation"--deserves full health care. I'd go so far as to say free health care and not just affordable, excepting only elective surgery.

However, I still don't understand why me wanting to be able to afford rent or food will ensure that I'm never able to pay a hospital bill. Maybe the fact that I have to scrape by implies that I never will, but just because I do my custom at a company that gives little-to-no benefits to their employees doesn't mean I'll never have insurance.



Yes, move from town to town, place to place to move yourself up. Just make dad burned sure you don't herniate a disc moving your stuff because the moving ends there, and they toss you on the street like a useless piece of meat.


Or, you could be moving to where the jobs that do give benefits are, instead of staying in a town with apparently only one operational business. I dunno, if the only thing that existed in my town was Walmart, I'd move for reasons other than just employment.



Yea, I've worked myself up etc. However, I have many medical problems. If this company decided to get rid of me I would be up s--t creek without a paddle. YOU are in the same situation just don't realize it yet.


No, I do realize it. If I broke my leg tomorrow I'd be screwed. But that's my problem, not yours or anyone else's. That's because of decisions I've made, for better or worse. It's because I gave up on school when my dad wasn't able to pay instead of applying for scholarships and grants. It's because I'd get a job and get complacent instead of trying to push my way to the top.

I don't have a family to worry about, and if/when I ever do then that's when I need to get my act together. And if I can't get my act together, I have to live with the fact that I failed them for the rest of my life. That'll be more than enough punishment, and definitely not something I want to go through.



Take off the blinders and see what is going on. The average IQ of an American is much, much lower than one would expect. This DOES limit their capacity for monetary compensation whether one wants to believe it or not.


So what do you propose? I start spending an extra $200-$400 a month on groceries because someone else doesn't care whether they work at Walmart or not? Fine, if you'll foot the bill.



posted on Dec, 15 2005 @ 11:58 AM
link   

No, I do realize it. If I broke my leg tomorrow I'd be screwed. But that's my problem, not yours or anyone else's. That's because of decisions I've made, for better or worse. It's because I gave up on school when my dad wasn't able to pay instead of applying for scholarships and grants. It's because I'd get a job and get complacent instead of trying to push my way to the top.


You are young. 25 years old. You will experience much and learn much in the coming years. A broken leg? Child's play. It doesn't effect me if you broke your leg? If you only knew the relationship between the health care and insurance industry. Do you realize if you with no health insurance went to get your leg set it would cost you 500% more than a person with insurance?

I dare you to do some investigation on health care-insurance-corporations. It is enough to make one puke.

Ever pay $100 for a bottle of aspirin? That's what they charge in a hospital and the insurance companies pay it. There is a good start on your quest.

We have the best health care in the world and the worst system. Many of the politicians run and hide under the table when health care is brought up. Most want to keep the "employment" health care deal. However, the problem is more and more corporations don't want to spend on it. Where does that leave the average worker?

YES, my friend spamman I definitely advocate National Health Insurance.

Those that blame unions for our problems are barking up the wrong tree. If it had not been for the advent of labor unions the average American worker would still be treated like s--t today. Unions have done nothing but raise the standard of living for the average American. As they decline one can easily see so does the living standards of the everyday worker.

One could easily put two charts together, and see that with a decline in the membership of unions there is also a marked decline in the standard of living, wages, etc for basic items that we all need to exist. In other words REAL WAGES have stagnated or declined the last 30 years in a parallel with the lessening clout of the union.

Do your homework guys. It is fun and disgusting to find info out.

I suffer from cervical problems. Went looking for a "tens" machine and found one at www.tens.com priced $59. Called around in town and finally found one at a medical supply house. Price? $339 and MUST have a prescription. Why a prescription? Easy insurance will reimburse over $300 for a $60 machine. Who is paying for this? Everyone with and without health insurance.

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE ROSES-THEY STINK LIKE ANYONE'S A-- CONNECTED TO MAKING OBSCENE PROFITS OFF OF PEOPLE'S POOR HEALTH.

One want to speak of morality? I don't mind anyone making a living and living well. However, those that make $1,000,000,000s off of people's poor health I consider immoral.

Ask Senator Frist. His family has done it for years.



posted on Dec, 15 2005 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by madmanacrosswater
You are young. 25 years old. You will experience much and learn much in the coming years. A broken leg? Child's play. It doesn't effect me if you broke your leg? If you only knew the relationship between the health care and insurance industry. Do you realize if you with no health insurance went to get your leg set it would cost you 500% more than a person with insurance?


I may not know the exact figures, but I do know that if I had insurance I wouldn't have to pay anywhere near as much for getting my leg set. That's why I said I'd be screwed--I'd be stuck with either a broken leg that I'd just have to let heal on it's own (and I know how stupid of a move that would be) or a hospital bill I'd never be able to pay.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join