Why America is Severely Broken - Meet Alice Walton

reply to post by rockymcgilicutty


Oh, there are several of them. Its funny though, on the rare occasions that I go there, I dont see anything like this.

reply to post by The Old American


I can answer a bit of that I believe. When walmart first hit in St.Louis it was touting itself as carrying American made goods,and people flocked to the store to buy them.This was the old ideology of they're father Sam.Then once they had people hooked on the lower prices they charged, people started finding things that actually were made in china. Walmart came through and admitted as much telling people that they 'couldn't find comparable prices in the USA 'they've kept they're prices low to keep people coming back after running out all the mom and pop business.Now when I go in there I see that a lot of prices aren't really lower than other competitors.But they don't have to worry after knocking out a lot of the competition.Bring them in with super low prices,get them hooked,let them find out your deception once they are regulars,then jack up the prices now that you have a monopoly in that area. They do still have competition here in St.Louis but I know in small towns..forget it.

corporate welfare at it`s worse, and that`s exactly what this is, it`s a backdoor way for corporations to siphon money from the tax payers.

reply to post by Juggernog


Butt once again thank you.I'm working on my posting skills.The best one IMO was the first one by Jessica French in 2011.

Originally posted by rockymcgilicutty

I don't know how to link it.But go to u-tube search the "people of walmart".When you get done laughing please post the video here.

This is America that goes to Wal-Mart....SO is the Walton nut job at fault for America's troubles because her stock is worth 21 billion, or do our troubles have more of this foundation?

Alice Walton is worth $21billion - on paper - in WalMart stock. She does not have $21billion liquidity sitting in a bank account. Let's get real clear on what net worth is, okay? Wealth redistributors love to give you the false perception that these people have giant vaults of cash.

Having said that, could WalMart pay their employees more? They sure as hell could.

reply to post by Xtrozero


Because they are closer due to being more of them per capita, therefore drowning out competitors, one stop shopping (tires, food, gas, household supplies, electronics, movies, crafts, makeup, clothes, pharmacy) and gas is expensive?

reply to post by Xtrozero


Wrong video, that was posted by someone who can't have a original idea.

Originally posted by Xtrozero

Originally posted by superluminal11
Seems there are still many Crony Capitalism fans out there that want to run it all into the ground at any cost.

If they truly had their way they would have the masses being grateful to have a job making 15 cents a week.


Hopefully a celestial event will end it all soon...ie: Black Hole, Asteroid, Solar Flare, Super Nova nearby etc.

Let me ask you...let's say I have a small shop and I want to hire 4 people. How much should I pay them if they need no skills to do the job, but to show up to work on time and not be drunk or high, and do a full day of work?

No skill or education past high school needed...I will teach them in one day all they will need to know to do the job...how much should I pay them for that job....

edit on 6-1-2013 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)

According to several people here it's your obligation to not only pay them a "living wage" (some arbitrary, emotionally charged do-nothing term), but to not take home any pay yourself for the privilege of being allowed to run a business in Utopia.

/TOA

I've always thought that a major step towards an American economic recovery would be to reinstate tariffs on imported goods. That's what the country did before the Federal Income Tax. We could tax imported goods enough to raise their costs enough to offset the fact that they are made by slave or prison labor. American manufacturers could then afford to hire people at decent wages and put out a superior product for the money. And the government could take in enough money to lower taxes and pay down the debt. It's a win for everybody.

reply to post by Xtrozero


I think the tenor of the discussion was how Walmart produces its business success.

Originally, Walmart sold only American made products. Obviously that has changed to increase short term profitability. Matter of fact if you want to sell at Walmart, Walmart will tell you where to produce your products.

Whether Walmart pays minimum wage or a dollar or two more is irrelevant. If such a healthy percentage of its employees qualify for food stamps (and I am assuming claim those benefits), the American taxpayer subsidies Walmart profitability to a degree.

While I understand some of where you and others are coming from with text book references on how business and capitalism work, the OP is trying to point out there are those who claim the moral high ground of capitalism and hard work, but produce profit quite differently.

to me the problem is the hoarding of the resources. if they spent more, we'd all be a little better off i think

it doesn't do much good just being numbers on paper

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
to me the problem is the hoarding of the resources. if they spent more, we'd all be a little better off i think

it doesn't do much good just being numbers on paper

Yes, if we took her entire $21 billion and distributed it evenly to everybody in the US, we would each get $60.

Balance that with closing down Walmart and the loss of 2.1 million jobs.

reply to post by newcovenant


There are 2 Americas, one for the rich and one for the rest of us. Like they say "money talks", and I'm sure she let her money do the talking to stay out of jail. I can think of a number of "rich" who have escaped jail time because they were able to afford the best lawyers, power or celebrity status.

When our own congressional representatives would rather increase taxes on the majority that are just getting by, instead of having the rich pay their fair share, you know our system is bought and paid for by the rich. What's sad, is probably some of the same people who are just getting by with a measly paycheck are voting to put representatives in office who support these unfair tax policies that cater to the rich.

It's no longer "for the people and by the people, it's for the rich and by the rich".

Originally posted by rockymcgilicutty
reply to post by The Old American

 

The blog quoted many sources.I guess you have a research deficiency.I can tell because you failed to finish.Or you would have mentioned Snapper.They saw what was comming and walmarts pressure to make a cheaper more throw away lawnmower.So people would come back year after year to buy" cheap" inferior product.

I also noticed you can't see your own errors.Remember your comment about the limited shift caca.Well I responded with a answer,by your comment it was obvious you had no idea what I was talking about (back to
your research deficiency?) no you just threw out a insult.

You seem like a person who just takes a stance with no real idea of the subject.Are you mean and lonely
and just want to argue?

No deficiency at all. I answered the question you asked. If you wanted me to answer another one, you should have asked it and I would have been glad to. But I'm not clairvoyant.

As to Snapper, Wier gave himself another outlet other than WalMart. He's what's called a "smart, responsible businessperson".

He actually had foresight, knowing that in a few years WalMart would have him in their snare. He decided to take his business and run.

Wier had two things going for him: First, he had another way to get his lawn mowers to customers--a well-established network of independent lawn-equipment dealers that accounted for 80% of Snapper's sales. And Wier had the courage, the foresight, to take an unblinking view of where his Wal-Mart business was heading--not in year 3, or year 4, but year 10.

All of this arguing back forth doesn't change the fact that WalMart sells billions of dollars a year of what consumers want. Again, if they didn't want it, WalMart would be out of business. Yet you blame WalMart for "running other businesses out town" and harumphing about it! RAWR! All it takes is people not going to WalMart but going somewhere else.

I'd be ecstatic to see WalMart shut down and numerous small businesses take over. Better many small, homey stores than one big, faceless cold entity. But that's never going to happen because of two reasons:

1) People buy what they sell and,
2) People continue applying for crappy jobs there.

So, keep on whining about the big bad wolf, guys. But until you come up with a plan and do something because it's time to stop and enough is enough, they aren't going anywhere and they're not required to hire anyone for any kind of wage except minimum.

/TOA