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.

 

10,000 hopefuls keep eyes open for [400] Wal-Mart jobs

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by LightinDarkness
reply to post by indierockalien
 


At $10 an hour, 1/3 of your paycheck isn't disappearing. 0/3 of it is. The only people paying 1/3 of their paycheck are those with absolutely no deductions making 100+ grand a year.


This is incorrect. Making $10 per hour does not exempt you from income tax.


Originally posted by mattifikation
If Wal-Mart is going to hire somebody to sell something, they should hire somebody who knows something about it. I once had a manager flat out tell me that they don't take product knowledge into account when filling a position, because they will supposedly "learn it while they're on the job."


Im going to do my best here to not single out any particular group of people, but let's just say there are two common demographics in Wal-Mart.

1) people who know wal-mart is the cheapest for "product X," so they go there and buy it - already knowing what it is.

2) wal-mart-rats. Just like mall-rats, but they hang out at walmart instead looking for things to buy, and just hang out. These are the types of people that won't need to ask questions anyways, because you could just give them bad answers (which I'm sure usually happens at wal-mart) and they won't be any more informed.

The problem is that wal-mart is known for cheap prices, not knowledgeable people. They are known as the company that hires old people and handicapped people. Nothing against that at all, please don't get me wrong! Just pointing out that the type of people Wal-Mart hires are rarely the type that are qualified for the job (except greeters and cart-collectors maybe).

I commend you for still working there with the knowledge you have, without going postal and taking everyone in the store out. I can't stand being at wal-mart for more than 15 minutes, I couldn't imagine working there.




posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
Your post proves my point, to an extent. If you feel that you have no special skills that make you ideal for the job, then you are part of the reason they can justify paying dirt. If you feel we don't deserve to be paid more, then why on earth should Wal-Mart feel that we deserve more money?

I didn't know you were making a point, to be honest. It sounded like you were half boasting/half bitching.

What I think you deserve to be paid has no bearing on what Wal-Mart thinks you should be paid. How can I be "part of the problem"?

Wal-Mart pays lower-end wages because they can. If you're not happy, go elsewhere; they'll forget your name before you're out the door. And they'll have no problem replacing you.


Originally posted by mattifikation
Don't take this the wrong way, but you sound like the typical "good enough" worker that Wal-Mart is used to employing and barely paying. When I look at the people I work with in my store, the ones who do their job well say it's hard. The ones who think it's easy are the ones who are coasting through the job without really putting their heart into it. Guess who's picking up the slack?

Really? You were able to deduce all that from a few simple statements? I told you that you were in the wrong job.

Go elsewhere, because you're wrong about me, too.



Originally posted by mattifikation
I'm not saying we should be making the same cash flow as somebody at Raytheon with a Master's in rocket science. I'm just saying that we should be doing a little better than hovering just over minimum wage with terrible benefits. Don't let the propaganda they feed you at the grass roots meetings fool you, industry observers scoff at the pay and benefits Wal-Mart offers.

You should be making what your job will pay, depending on what is required. A typical Wal-Mart employee doesn't make that much.

And you are incorrect about industry analyst's opinion of Wal-Mart. It is studied in nearly every major business college and university in the world. The Walton family members are among the wealthiest on earth. And you scoff at this success?




Originally posted by mattifikation
At any rate, I think maybe you've slightly misunderstood my point. I'm not saying Wal-Mart should just hand out raises all of a sudden. I'm saying that Wal-Mart has low expectations, and that's why they offer low pay.

You're way off target here. Wal-Mart is the world's largest retailer. They didn't get that way by being stupid, or by setting low expectations.



Originally posted by mattifikation
Jsobecky:

I guarantee you that everyone on earth has met people that they think are either stupid or disgusting. The only thing that varies between different people is the way they handle the situation. What qualifies me for a job serving customers is how I TREAT people.

This is different. You had the audacity and bad form to call the majority of your customers stupid and disgusting.

I can guarantee that your condescending attitude manages to show through to your customers at times. I stand by my original assessment.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Yeah, and my entire post up UNTIL i wrote your name was directed at somebody else.

Honestly now... *shakes head*



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by jsobecky
 


I don't think mattifikation was responding to your post in particular, jsobecky, until he mentioned your name towards the end.

I think he just failed to direct the majority of his remarks towards the correct post.

I have my suspicions as to who that would be, but I think it would be best to wait for him to get off shift, log back in, and set the record straight.



Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by mattifikation
Jsobecky:

I guarantee you that everyone on earth has met people that they think are either stupid or disgusting. The only thing that varies between different people is the way they handle the situation. What qualifies me for a job serving customers is how I TREAT people.


This is different. You had the audacity and bad form to call the majority of your customers stupid and disgusting.

I can guarantee that your condescending attitude manages to show through to your customers at times. I stand by my original assessment.


I believe the quote above, from mattifikation, was the only part of his missive that was directed towards you.

Though bad form it may be, he's got a point.

Have you ever gone to Wal-Mart on a busy day and taken a good look at the majority of the heaving sea of humanity lumbering (and driving!) about, all on a quest to get that certain *thing* they've just gotta have, made by slave labor in some far off land?

That's their target demographic!

They even facilitate the grossly obese by providing little carts to drive around while they satisfy their urge to consume.

Yeah, I know, the carts are for the handicapped, but that's how it would seem, since the obese are the only people I ever see driving those things.

I guess the people who are actually handicapped, not just too lazy to walk around (you notice they managed to make it in from the parking lot under their own power, didn't they?), are too proud to use one, like me dear old Mum, or they bring their own.

And, yeah, I buy things at wak-mart, because I'm of modest means and have to stretch my federal fiat dollars are far as possible.

In fact, when I can, I prefer to shop late at night/early morning, just so I can avoid the heaving, sweaty, malodorous masses.

The only people there at the times I prefer to shop are the "associates" doing the night time stocking.

And you know, not a single one of them ever make eye contact with me, best I can determine, for one of two reasons:

1) They view me as a "scary" midnight shopper, or,

2) They're embarrassed to be seen working there.

But I don't ever go there with any expectation of receiving good service.


That's why mattifikation, judging from the integrity he exhibited in his post, strikes me as a person way undervalued by his employer and customers.

And more's the pity...

Edit to add:

Oh yeah, there he is now, what up matt? I was right, huh?







[edit on 11-1-2008 by goosdawg]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 06:33 PM
link   
Yes, what happened was for some reason the "reply to post by..." bit wasn't added to the beginning of my message. I noticed it when I was making the post, but I figured it would be clear from the content of my post who I was addressing anyways so I let it be.

At any rate, there is no question that Wal-Mart doesn't have a strict hiring process. I'm told that at one time they did. It seems their desire to cut overhead resulted in a refusal to continue keeping up with inflation, and that resulted in less and less qualified salespeople. By offering low pay they've alienated people who are qualified to work elsewhere.

I stand by my belief that more knowledgeable salespeople would lead to an increase in sales. I stand by my belief that an increase in sales would allow the company to pay its salespeople better. I stand by my belief that better pay and higher standards would result in better salespeople. If somebody can throw a kink in that logic, feel free. I can't.

It's not a circle. It's a spiral. The best place to start would be in the hiring process. It would be financial suicide to just offer raises and keep the same workers. The ones who aren't good at their jobs will eventually quit or be fired, and the spiral should begin with the hiring process. Hire people who are good at the job, not just people who will remember to smile while they muck it up.

Wal-Mart already offers profit sharing and a stock purchase program, which would be great benefits if their stock value hasn't been crapping out lately. (At least, every time I check, it's down from the previous day.) Through that alone, its associates could benefit from increased sales.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 07:40 PM
link   
This is a common site every time any new place around here opens up. They get a lot more applications than they have jobs open for. It has been this way for years because there are more and more places closing their doors as the years go by.

Now as for Wal-mart in general.


I once worked at Wal-mart ten years ago and the pay was pretty sad. I left for an easier job with better pay starting out than I was making. Most of but not all of Wal-mart management does not respect nor value the employees working below them, maybe they are not getting paid what they are worth either though. The normal Wal-mart employee is seen as nothing more than a replaceable commodity making just above minimum wage. I made some very good friends when I worked there and none of them got paid what they deserved. I worked the midnight shift stocking, unloading a truck which is done at the store I worked at with bare hands and pallet jacks that only get their power from the person using them. I was not a job that requires a degree or even anything more than common sense but it was labor many don’t want to do. I do agree that working at Wal-mart you will see people (customers) who look at you with pity, disgust, or like a second class citizen because you are basically working for them also.

At the same time Wal-mart will hire anyone with a heart beat that can pass a drug test. Now saying that does not mean that everyone they hire will stick around most don’t. The employees spend time training and working harder to make up for the new hires just learning only to continue to do the same when that person turns out to be worthless when it comes to work values.

The fact that there are a number of people out there willing to find a job for a week or two until they get the money to pay for something or whatever is the reason Wal-mart will continue to pay low wages. It is not entirely their fault though they are to blame for not being more selective in their hiring. A lot of the blame can be laid on society today and how many have little or no regard for work values what so ever. Why would I want to pay someone good money who is most likely going to come in and do just enough to get by then leave in a few weeks after time and money is spent training them. On the other hand if Wal-mart were to be more selective they could weed out most but not all of these no class workers in the end saving themselves the trouble. But I guess really it is easier to just keep doing what they are doing and keep paying lower wages with little or no benefits.

I cannot vouch for every employee of Wal-mart or even the former ones but I know my story on Wal-mart. Some employees do not deserve to get better pay. But employees do deserve better treatment than they get, which is barely better than an illegal immigrant. This not only goes for Wal-mart but all places. I seen the remark on here you can expect that anywhere you go or something to that effect, but should we not desire better from our jobs? Should we not expect to go to work and be treated equally and respectfully? If the common idea is well that is everywhere you go it will never get better, somewhere there must be a middle ground where both employees and employers can both feel satisfied. True not everyone will be pleased but the greater majority can be.

Raist



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by goosdawg
 



Originally posted by goosdawg
I believe the quote above, from mattifikation, was the only part of his missive that was directed towards you.

Though bad form it may be, he's got a point.

Have you ever gone to Wal-Mart on a busy day and taken a good look at the majority of the heaving sea of humanity lumbering (and driving!) about, all on a quest to get that certain *thing* they've just gotta have, made by slave labor in some far off land?

That's their target demographic!

Look, I don't want to drag this out goosdawg. But that "heaving sea of humanity" is made up of human beings. Not every person is an Adonis or an Aphrodite.

Classifying people according to physical looks is akin to a practicing _ism.





Originally posted by goosdawg
In fact, when I can, I prefer to shop late at night/early morning, just so I can avoid the heaving, sweaty, malodorous masses.

The only people there at the times I prefer to shop are the "associates" doing the night time stocking.

And you know, not a single one of them ever make eye contact with me, best I can determine, for one of two reasons:

1) They view me as a "scary" midnight shopper, or,

2) They're embarrassed to be seen working there.

Or maybe they are just a little burnt out from working 2 low-paying jobs and going to school/raising a family or whatever to socialize.

Have some compassion, is all I'm saying.

It's how we treat the least of us in our society that is our true measure.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 



Originally posted by mattifikation
I stand by my belief that more knowledgeable salespeople would lead to an increase in sales. I stand by my belief that an increase in sales would allow the company to pay its salespeople better. I stand by my belief that better pay and higher standards would result in better salespeople. If somebody can throw a kink in that logic, feel free. I can't.

Why can Wal-Mart sell a pair of sneakers for $15 when their competitor charges $20 or more?

Because of their business model. About all the salesperson needs to know is, "Do you have this in a size 9?"

Low prices, low wages, manufactured overseas at low labor costs. That's their model.

The fact is, Wal-Mart doesn't need better salespeople. They're not selling BMW's, they're selling tee-shirts and rakes.

If they invested in the training to make sales more knowledgeable, those $15 sneakers would suddenly rise in price to $18 to cover the expense. Suddenly, paying the extra $2 at Target is a more likely option for the consumer. Sales fall, and the stockholders get cranky.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 11:48 AM
link   
It works fine. If you don't like working at Wal-Mart, get a job elsewhere. If you can't you can't really complain - your skills, or what other people see as your skills - don't warrant a better job.

You, mattifikation, seen intelligent and knowledgeable in electronics. That's a very good combination, and one that could make you a lot of money. Go get a degree in electrical engineering, then make 40-50k a year to start with high demand for your skills. Go to a cheap school if you have to, or even start at a community college - do well, and the better schools will offer you some nice money. And even if they don't, an engineer's salary will erase your debt in a very reasonable amount of time if you don't spend it all.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 



So quit!

I'm sure a bright an industrious person like yourself would have no problem finding a better job



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 



Originally posted by Johnmike
You, mattifikation, seen intelligent and knowledgeable in electronics. That's a very good combination, and one that could make you a lot of money. Go get a degree in electrical engineering, then make 40-50k a year to start with high demand for your skills. Go to a cheap school if you have to, or even start at a community college - do well, and the better schools will offer you some nice money. And even if they don't, an engineer's salary will erase your debt in a very reasonable amount of time if you don't spend it all.

Good advice. And spend your summers and free time working in the industry as an intern at a hi-tech place. That spices up your resume' big time. You'll do well if you apply yourself.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 01:38 PM
link   
I will show you how easy it is to work second shift in Electronics.

Department manager handles the majority of price changes and reverse pick during the day. Second shift (2pm-11pm) has probably the highest customer flow starting around 5pm.

Primary responsibilities? Stock movies, games, and accessories that come off of UPS and Fedex truck during the day. in a typical weekday, that is only one rocket cart or L-cart. I start that the moment I walk into the department at 2pm, and am done by 3 at the latest, considering there is help and that that time is less customer interruption.

As I am doing that, I take ntoes of any price points that may eithe rbe missing on items or incorrect. When it is finished I take the telxon, login and go about printing the labels. Takes 5 minutes or less to get that done (if the stupid telxon is not broken due to negligent handling by the other apes that work in the area). Once that is taken care of, the primary responsibility is to maintain good customer service and a safe and sanitary work environment.

Of course maintaing a clean work area is just too simple. So I make it a point to go into the backroom to stock up whatever Freight I can that is coming off the trucks. Again, very simple. I just grab the two wheeler, and grab the big stuff or the easily stacked so as not to have too much clutter on the salesfloor. I only taske a little at a time so that I am not overwhelmed from helping the customers, who ALWAYS come first and foremost. Whoever wants to call that corproate propoganda, tell when how often you want to go shopping and be treated like dirt by those you are paying to help you? Anyone? Anyone at all? Thought not.

After a cuople of hours bakc and forth, knowing what is entering my department and whatnot so as to reduce any possibioity of shrinkage, I have already reduced the workload for the overnight stockers by at least 50% almost on a daily basis. And this is without having to over exert myself or put in SOO much extra effort. I also speak Spanish, so yes, I am frequently helping shoppers as I do live in Tampa, FL and alot of them like to claim they dont speak English.

At the end of the night, I just cleans of the glass cases, finish the returns I have been working on throughout the day, and zone the department. there is absolutley nothing special. Yes I hook up TV's occasionaly. Yes I test things for people occasioanly. Yes I even occasionally help shoppers over the phone. How is this any different than doing a favor for any of your friends? Well you are being paid for it for starters.

Even if you and I both know all about everythign every electronic device does in our department,that knowledge is nothing more than a commodity. It is a product that can be bought or sold, traded or taken a loss on. Because it aint nothign any person couldn't read in a book or online and learn in a 24 hour period.

As a valued Wal-Mart associate, from one to another, if you are finding your fellow associates lacking in their productivity, tell them straight up man. I do not hesitate for a moment to tell of my peers when I notice them slacking, and I will call em out in front of shoppers and co-workers alike. Maybe it is embarrasing to them and it should be. A workign adult has no place to slack off in his/her workplace when they are being paid a fair wage for their skill level.

If you want to make more money, then get innovated. Wal-Mart is one of the most awesomest places to have your ideas heard. I wotn go into too much etail, but me and my store manager are personall working on a project that we will be requesting in a meeting with our market manager for new security measures across the store. Store #5220 having being the first prototype Urban 99 supercenter ( that is an attempt at a supercenter under 100,000 sq ft due to city ordinance laws), we feel confident that this new program may be granted for "test" purposes at the very least.

Let me just be clear, I have no qualms about submitting my finger prints to my employer, and in the future, you should not too. Especially if this plan is implemented company wide, which i hope it will .

the empire must live on!



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:34 PM
link   
My only response to that... I'll trade you managers.

Please?



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Ehe, if you could barely stand the shoppers, I dont believe you will enjoy this manager.

Shes kinda a hardcore beaurocrat, and pretty darn rough too. You have to be a really experienced people person to break through her boundries and let you in, otherwise she will just kind of intimidate and delegate you back to work like she does to 90% of our store.

Or you can merge your lips with her behind and wallow in her merciless dialogue and become her pet. Only one of our assistants is like that, its almost hilarious. I cant help laugh when the two of them approach me together.

My advice to you, is to simply wake up everyday and find all the fun and enjoyable good things life has to offer when meeting new peopel everyday.

Anytime you feel a complaint rising up, it is just the loser in people attempting to break us down. So the moment you feel a complain building in your head, tell it to stfu and dissapear, and transform that complain into an initiative. Make it something that will drive you and not upset you.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
The Walton family members are among the wealthiest on earth. And you scoff at this success?


"Scoff" is too kind of word for what I feel, how about "revulsion?"

If success is to be defined as personal enrichment centered around the exploitation of underpaid workers and poor countries, virtual slave labor, and the destruction of local small businessmen, then I'll have no part of the adoration of this "success," thank you.

I do not define success in the shallow terms of material wealth.

If that puts me at odds with the majority, so be it, it wouldn't be the first time the "majority" was wrong.

And I hold no admiration for parasitic entities who "ride to glory" on the backs of those they hold in arrogant disdain.

The values held dear by Wal-Mart, as a corporate entity, IMHO, are what have led directly to the disappearance of the American middle class, and the gross disparity between the haves and have nots.

Even now, this world holds enough wealth for everyone who puts forth a little effort, to have a taste of the pie, if it was fairly distributed.

Problem is, a select, self appointed few, think the pie should be all theirs, and "their" slaves can just fight for the crumbs.


Originally posted by jsobecky
Look, I don't want to drag this out goosdawg. But that "heaving sea of humanity" is made up of human beings. Not every person is an Adonis or an Aphrodite.

Classifying people according to physical looks is akin to a practicing _ism.


Nor do I wish to drag this out.

Having said that, do allow me the opportunity to expand upon the reasoning behind my disdain.

They were sold a bill of goods, and they swallowed it, hook line and sinker.

The condition of these poor, simple people is a direct result of the American corporate "profit at all costs" mentality.

In the pursuit of ever-growing "market-share," irresponsible corporate entities sell unsustainable consumption, ignorance in the public school systems, and slavish devotion to the (corporate-owned) mass media.

The morbidly obese represent to me a personification of all that is wrong with the insatiable gluttony that defines the essence of "corporate profits."

Ever growing, non-stop expansion; isn't that analogous to cancer?

How long can a cancer grow before it consumes it's host and destroys itself?

What's wrong with sustainable development?

The grossly obese weren't born that way, they were conditioned to become what they are, and that is why I feel it's incorrect to play the "_ism" card on this hand.

I do not hate them, I pity them, as the victims of the corporate elite.


Originally posted by jsobecky
Or maybe they are just a little burnt out from working 2 low-paying jobs and going to school/raising a family or whatever to socialize.

Have some compassion, is all I'm saying.

It's how we treat the least of us in our society that is our true measure.


If the corporate piggies at the top would more fairly distribute the wealth, generated by the labors of the masses, the little guys wouldn't have to work two jobs to "get by."

Frankly, I think my compassion is in the right place, I have none whatsoever for the corporate oppressors, while my heart goes out to the downtrodden, for I, and everyone I know, are among their number.

When it comes to the treatment of "the least of us in our society" how do our corporate "masters" measure up?







[edit on 12-1-2008 by goosdawg]



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by goosdawg
 


goosdawg

I didn't realize you were such an avid socialist. Nor do I wish to discuss your intolerance for those whom you deem inferior to you because of physical traits. That is an inhumane, puerile attitude, and smacks of elitism and snobbism.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by jsobecky
 


What's so wrong with those on the top being socially responsible to the little people who float one's boat?

Or, in this case, one's yacht?

We can spill blood and spend trillions on useless stupid wars that only serve to enrich the few and kill the poor, but we can't even finance healthcare for the people who foot the bill. Or drive the carts at wak-mart.

So far as your other comment goes, you can spin it anyway you like but apparently, you have confused my stated compassion for the disenfranchised with my absolute intolerance for the corporate elite and their inhumane, puerile attitudes, smacking of elitism and snobbery, looking down from their lofty heights on those they deem inferior.

Suggestion:

"Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars" - A Must Read Article For ATS

See if your attitude evolves after having read the above thread.

In truth, I look around and all I see are the walking dead, who don't even know they're just meat on the table to the self-appointed elites.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by goosdawg
 



Originally posted by goosdawg
reply to post by jsobecky
 


What's so wrong with those on the top being socially responsible to the little people who float one's boat?

Or, in this case, one's yacht?

In your world, I envision a million moist mouths all straining for the same teat that they are "entitled" to. They will never be weaned. That's the world of socialism.




Originally posted by goosdawg
We can spill blood and spend trillions on useless stupid wars that only serve to enrich the few and kill the poor, but we can't even finance healthcare for the people who foot the bill. Or drive the carts at wak-mart.

So far as your other comment goes, you can spin it anyway you like but apparently, you have confused my stated compassion for the disenfranchised with my absolute intolerance for the corporate elite and their inhumane, puerile attitudes, smacking of elitism and snobbery, looking down from their lofty heights on those they deem inferior.

Don't talk to me of compassion for the disenfranchised. You're only trying to save face after saying such trash as:



Have you ever gone to Wal-Mart on a busy day and taken a good look at the majority of the heaving sea of humanity lumbering (and driving!) about, all on a quest to get that certain *thing* they've just gotta have, made by slave labor in some far off land?

That's their target demographic!


And then there's this:



Yeah, I know, the carts are for the handicapped, but that's how it would seem, since the obese are the only people I ever see driving those things.

I guess the people who are actually handicapped, not just too lazy to walk around (you notice they managed to make it in from the parking lot under their own power, didn't they?), are too proud to use one, like me dear old Mum, or they bring their own.
:
In fact, when I can, I prefer to shop late at night/early morning, just so I can avoid the heaving, sweaty, malodorous masses.



Did you try to conveniently forget what you wrote earlier?

Compassion for the disenfranchised. Pffft!



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 11:27 AM
link   
The problem with socialism is powerfully ideological and sociological, as it requires a rich, powerful state entwined with big business, forcing government reliance on everyone. But it also is simply economic - the reason we have this much wealth to go around is because of the ability to run your own business responsible for your own success. It creates an optimal resource allocation and gets us closer to a perfect economic system ("perfect" being that anyone can instantly get any demand for free - which is obviously impossible, but it's economic perfection).

Now your argument about helping others...that's a noble one, and why I'm a strong supporter of charity.

Voluntary charity.

Government-mandated wealth redistribution is not charity, and is not productive like charity. It just discourages hard work and success, encourages failure, laziness, and apathy, and requires and forces people (especially the poor) to be completely at the mercy of an impossibly powerful state.



Originally posted by goosdawg
What's so wrong with those on the top being socially responsible to the little people who float one's boat?

We've already tried that.

It's called feudalism.




[edit on 13-1-2008 by Johnmike]



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by jsobecky
 



Originally posted by jsobecky
In your world, I envision a million moist mouths all straining for the same teat that they are "entitled" to. They will never be weaned. That's the world of socialism.


That sounds an awful lot like the system in place now for the tax breaks and subsidies given to the big agri/chemical/oil/you-name-it corporations, and the wealthy elite.

I guess it's only "socialism" if the resources go to the people who need it the most, eh?


Please don't presume to spin up an extreme world view based upon what you think you know about me from one rant.

True social responsibility lies in everyone taking care of each other, not just "getting yours" and then kicking everyone else to the curb to beg for the "trickle down" crumbs.

But without a "slave" class, I suppose it would be difficult for the self appointed elites to live like gods on earth, wouldn't it?

What's wrong with a flat tax, so that everyone pays a straight percentage of what they've taken out of the system, to be put back into the system for the good of everyone?

With no loop-holes for anyone or any entity.

They made their fortunes on the backs of the poor, what's wrong with them giving a humane and fair portion back, instead of exploiting loop-holes designed to allow them to pay nothing at all?

Sure, my comments about the morbidly obese were harsh, but thats tough.

The morbidly obese are a product and a physical manifestation of what is wrong with America.

These centralized corporate controlled food-chain policies have been conditioning Americans to consume ever-increasing amounts of over-processed, chemical-laced, toxic garbage disguised as food for years, and this is the result:


Percent of noninstitutionalized adults age 20 years and over who are overweight or obese: 66.3

Percent of noninstitutionalized adults age 20 years and over who are obese: 32
Source | National Center for Health Statistics

Two-thirds of adult Americans are overweight, and even more appalling, a full third are obese!

A rhetorical question for us all: where do you find yourselves in this equation?

How do you think we got there?

Did we make a conscious choice to be overweight, or were we led by the nose, like trusting cattle being fattened for the slaughter, by the soulless, rapacious corporations who's only overarching motivation lies in making a profit at any cost.

A disproportionate amount of the overweight are poor and as a result, they are forced to shop at, you guessed it, wak-mart.

That's why, when I go there, I wear steel-toed boots and a grim demeanor.

BTW, when was the last time you shopped at a wak-mart?

As modern sensibilities evolve, we've targeted unhealthy "life-style choices" such as excessive alcohol consumption and smoking, and made them socially unacceptable.

It's not difficult to envision a world where unhealthy eating along with an unhealthy BMI will be targeted as well, and also become socially unacceptable.

It's already happening, look at the healthy changes being made on menus at fast food enterprises.

But that's due to education and consumers "voting with their pocketbooks," corporate entities only make changes to deflect the hurt put on their "pocketbooks."

If they can get it away with it, whatever "it" is that increases their "market share" or profits, they will continue to get away with it.

As long as corporations continue to supply and condition us, without restrictions, to eat the garbage they peddle, it'll be an uphill battle.

In a corporate controlled representational "democratic" republic, if the poor are unable to "vote with their pocketbooks" I guess that's just tough, huh?

How's that for a good model of "compassion," eh?

 


Shhhh, do you hear that?

That, that....whirring sound?

It's Sam Walton spinning in his grave, at the thought of what his beloved America and his company have become.







[edit on 13-1-2008 by goosdawg]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join