[RandomX]

I'm sure you've seen this, but I had to share it anyway...

15 Things to do at Wal-Mart while your spouse is taking their sweet time:

1. Get 24 boxes of condoms &randomly put them in peoples carts when they  aren't looking.    
2. Set all the alarm clocks in Housewares to go off at 5 minute  intervals.    
3. Make a trail of tomato juice on the floor leading to the restrooms.    
4. Walk up to an employee and tell him/her in an official tone, 'Code 3'  in housewares,...and see what happens.    
5. Go to the Service Desk and ask to put a bag of M&M's on lay away.  
6. Move a 'CAUTION - WET FLOOR' sign to a carpeted area.  
7. Set up a tent in the camping department and tell other shoppers you'll  invite them in if they bring some pillows from the bedding department.  
8. When a clerk asks if they can help you, begin to cry and ask 'Why can't you people just leave me alone?
9. Look right into the security camera, use it as a mirror and pick your  nose.    
10. While handling guns in the hunting department, ask the clerk if he  knows where the anti-depressants are    
11. Dart around the store suspiciously while loudly humming the theme  from 'Mission Impossible'.    
12. In the auto department, practice your "Madonna look" using different  size funnels.    
13. Hide in a clothing rack and when people browse through, say "PICK ME!  PICK ME!"    
14. When an announcement comes over the loud speaker, assume the fetal  position and scream "NO! NO! It's those voices again!!!"    
15. Go into a fitting room, shut the door and wait a while and then yell  loudly "There's no toilet paper in here".  

[D_U_S_K]

Those are relatively tame...

Hmmmm...

I'd say some of mine, but Wal-Mart has some sort of contract with me not to mention such to waive the costs of damages.

I hope they rebuilt the Gardening Department by now.

[Sadistyk]

I always like going to watch the [censored] getting their asses beat for misbehaving.  It seems like it always happens around 7 PM.  I'm not a parent, but I think that there is some secret code or notification that goes out telling people to whip their [censored] in Wal-Mart, because I always see a few there.

[Palomine]

Quote:
Get 24 boxes of condoms &randomly put them in peoples carts when they  aren't looking.    

There are lots of interesting applications of 'reverse shoplifting' ...I personally know both authors and musicians who've planted copies of their work in book and record stores for instance. In Walmart's case, I think it'd be more fun to slip some really hardcore European porn mags onto the magazine rack among the copies of Redbook, Time and Entertainment Weekly (say a few copies of those latex cat-woman fetish mags from Germany that feature fisting on every single page). Now, that'd be fun!

[Palomine]

Walmart has been running commercials here in the LA area ad nauseum to try to give everyone the warm and fuzzies about them opening more and more stores... they show lots of warm, soft-focus happy-faced people praising Walmart, and how it's brought 'respect' back to their communities, provided jobs, moved into abandoned buildings, etc... all in an effort I suppose to pre-empt (there's that evil word again) the protests it's encountered in some states where people don't want yet another big-box retailer in their community.

Of course, nowhere in the blatantly one-sided autobiographical PR fluff piece is there any mention of the fact that just about every single retail Walmart job pays far less than a living wage in any part of the country, let alone here in relatively expensive cost-of-living SoCal. Also, there's no mention of Walmart's ongoing policy of subcontracting the least-attractive and lowest paying (of the low) jobs out to 3rd party companies in order to avail themselves of below-minimum-wage labor from illegal immigrants AND avoid direct liability in the process. Nor does the commercial mention that Walmart instructs new employees on how to apply for public-assistance health-care programs in light of the fact that most cannot get any health coverage from the company itself, futhre increasing the tax burden on everyone. And as you might imagine, nowhere in the commercial is any mention made of the literally thousands and thousands of small, family owned businesses that have been put out of business by Walmart when they've moved into towns all across the country. And finally, no mention at all is made of the fact that for each $7. per hour/no benefits retail shelf-stocking job Walmart creates in a community when it opens a store, AT LEAST one higher-paying/usually-benefit-including and usually-unionized MANUFACTURING job is lost in America due to the fact that the vast majority of the THINGS Walmart sells are produced overseas by people (and often even children) earning less and working in conditions MUCH worse than even the youngest stockboy at Walmart.

You know we've lost 3 million jobs in the past couple of years, right? That's THREE MILLION JOBS THAT ARE GONE... the people who had those jobs aren't gone of course, it's just their jobs that don't reside in America anymore. Just one of the many benefits of those lauded tax cuts I suppose, which despite what the administration apparatchiks might say, DO UNDENIABLY provide the vast majority of benefit to the tiniest minority of the wealthiest Americans. I don't shop at Walmart... not because I must 'buy American' in every instance, but because their behavior as a corporation is, IMHO, woefully unpatriotic in the extreme.

[DrHyde]

Plus, they can be dangerous places.....I witnessed at my Wal-mart, a shoplifter getting away, but instead of letting him get away and calling the police, one of the managers took it upon himself to chase the guy down and smash his head into a merry-go-round and then have another associate come and sit on him. Now, had said shoplifter had a gun, which he didn't, that manager could have found his brains somewhere in the parking lot. And even worse, the thief didn't even fight back and after a while, was just trying to get away from the beating he was being administered.

[BillN]

Nice one Jess.  I'm going to try those.

As soon as that restraining order is lifted.

[Rafe]

Quote:
I witnessed at my Wal-mart, a shoplifter getting away, but instead of letting him get away and calling the police, one of the managers took it upon himself to chase the guy down and smash his head into a merry-go-round

Frankly, I think this is the right thing to do.  Having recently been in close contact with a mugging, I'm feeling rather strongly pro-vigilante these days.

However, W-M is the retailer of last resort for me for many of the reasons PM mentioned, as well as my own personal arrogance that, even though I don't make much at my job, I don't want to be one of the drooling, mouth-breathing hordes.

[StormDancer]

Let me see: the big bad robber barons at Wal-Mart infiltrate their way into every town in America, mercilessly bribing the city counsels from coast to coast in order to build their economic fortresses and then procede to loose themselves upon the unsuspecting communities.  Specially trained Wal-Mart Auxiliary Recruitment Teams (WARTs?) cock their weapons and flood into the surrounding neighborhoods, BATF-style, conscripting slave labor to work under the guise of being "employees" in their stores and then force the poor, helpless slobs to labor away ad infinitum at menial jobs with a pitance for wages, no overtime pay, without any insurance whatsoever, and with no means for advancement.  And being the soulless corporate monolith that it is, it naturally "targets" the poor old Mom 'n' Pop stores with which to heartlessly crush into dust.  Oh, and have I even mentioned the millions and millions and millions and millions of customers that Wal-Mart suckers into coming into its stores -- again and again and again and again and again and again and again -- with lies, high prices and shoddy merchandise and with whom they exploit by giving them such a miniscule value in return?  Oh, the humanity!!!

Have I missed anything?  (I shouldn't have; I copied it down, word for word, from the Rich Dad, Robber Baron textbook.)

Sheesh, I think that you've been reading a tad too much Dickens over the holidays, son.

 

Quote:
Of course, nowhere in the blatantly one-sided autobiographical PR fluff piece is there any mention of the fact that just about every single retail Walmart job pays far less than a living wage in any part of the country, let alone here in relatively expensive cost-of-living SoCal.

1.  Why would you expect ANY company on Earth to give you anything other than a commercial that puts their own company in a good light?  I mean, if YOU'RE paying for the time, WHY would YOU put anything else up on the screen?  Huh?  Why?

2.  Far less than living wage?  What the heck is "far less" and where are you getting this info?  I have an in-law that's worked for Wal-Mart in their warehouse for over 12 years.  He's not in management and he makes a fine living for himself and his family.  (His wife doesn't even have to work.)  He's worked throughout the southwest -- including SoCal -- and now lives and works and owns his own home in Dallas (no slouch in the cost-of-living dept. itself).   He has always had insurance -- health, dental, and life -- available to him through Wal-Mart.  

Just curious: what exactly DO you expect the value is of someone who slides coded items over a scanner, bags them, and collects the money?  This ain't exactly brain surgery, you know?  Ditto with warehousing, customer service and other support jobs.  Were you to unionize these folks and double their salary, what do you think this would do to the cost of the products that Wal-Mart sells and that you -- excuse me, the rest of us -- buy?

Quote:
Also, there's no mention of Walmart's ongoing policy of subcontracting the least-attractive and lowest paying (of the low) jobs out to 3rd party companies in order to avail themselves of below-minimum-wage labor from illegal immigrants AND avoid direct liability in the process.

So Wal-Mart, out of the goodness of its corporate heart, should do -- what?  Violate discrimination laws by NOT hiring Mexican (-American?) workers whom the 3rd party companies assert are legitimate workers?  Gee, I wonder what dollar sum Wal-Mart would be liable for if/when some "people's champion" ACLU lawyer got ahold of that?  You're going to sit there and blame Wal-Mart for the flood of illegal immigration into SoCal and the damage that it's doing to your own (not to mention the rest of the country's) economy?  California LOVES these poor, oppressed Mexicans. After all, California is the same state that provides health care to illegals and which is entertaining the idea of issuing driver's licenses to the same illegals.  Is it any wonder that the state is, what, $34 BILLION in the hole?  You don't see ANY connection between deficits and socialism within your own economy?  You don't think that all of this "social justice" literally has a price tag?  Yeah, just blame Wal-Mart and capitalism instead.  All the heck Wal-Mart's been doing is what is voluntary, legal, and smart from a business standpoint -- and business is what they DO for a living.

Quote:
And as you might imagine, nowhere in the commercial is any mention made of the literally thousands and thousands of small, family owned businesses that have been put out of business by Walmart when they've moved into towns all across the country.

Ah, yes, one of the liberals' favorite staples:  poor little old Mom 'n' Pop versus the heartless corporate monolith.  Hardly a fair fight, eh?  A perfect example of how "progess" isn't worth it, right?

Yeah, right.

I had the occasion to work in Durango, Colorado a few years ago.  Durango was a typical mountain town with Mom 'n' Pop stores lining its Main St.  And, as I completed my work, construction was beginning on a new Wal-Mart at the edge of town.  I haven't been back since but I'd wager things have gone EXACTLY as you would fear: all those little Mom and Pop businesses -- the hardware store, the stationary store, etc. -- are GONE.  But WHY?

Because Wal-Mart offers the world comparable (or better) prices on the same goods and price is the primary determining factor for most people and businesses.  Sorry, but that's the truth.  People typically are willing to sacrifice customer service for price.  Sorry, but that's the truth.  But understand what's important here:

Wal-Mart isn't **77** ANYBODY to deal with them.  Every customer and every single employee walks through that door of their own free will.  All that Wal-Mart offers them is VALUES.  If these Mom 'n' Pop stores go out of business, it's not Wal-Mart that CAUSES it; it's the result of the choices made by every individual in the area.  NO ONE has ANY right to interfere with the voluntary economic choices made by individuals.

If Durango -- or SoCal or any place else -- wants to boycott them, they are FREE TO DO SO.  So why would the people of Durango go to the local hardware store and pay $7 for a hammer when they could go to Wal-Mart and buy the same hammer for $3.95?  If you want to pay $8 a pound for ham at the local butcher instead of $4 a pound at the Wal-Mart Supercenter, just so you can support "the little guy", then fine -- you may do so.  Welcome to America, competition and free choice.  But don't damn the rest of us who can't help but remember the same butcher was charging monopoly prices (the $8 a pound) when there wasn't any Wal-Mart (i.e., competition) around and who now wants my "sympathy" for all the years that he stuck it to me.

Yeah, Wal-Mart -- the heartless bastards.

Quote:
And finally, no mention at all is made of the fact that for each $7. per hour/no benefits retail shelf-stocking job Walmart creates in a community when it opens a store, AT LEAST one higher-paying/usually-benefit-including and usually-unionized MANUFACTURING job is lost in America due to the fact that the vast majority of the THINGS Walmart sells are produced overseas by people (and often even children) earning less and working in conditions MUCH worse than even the youngest stockboy at Walmart.

Care to explain to us where you got the statistic that by offering one $7/hr job, Wal-Mart necessarily causes the loss of AT LEAST one "better" job?  It's a grand assertion with which to pummel your opponents but where are you getting your information -- from those sober, objective folks at the AFL-CIO?  The solution to "losing" manufacturing jobs is to bring the costs of production down.  Yet your solution, by implication, is to pay a union employee stratospheric wages and a bloated benefit package?  Oh, yeah -- THAT will bring costs down...

Quote:
You know we've lost 3 million jobs in the past couple of years, right? That's THREE MILLION JOBS THAT ARE GONE... the people who had those jobs aren't gone of course, it's just their jobs that don't reside in America anymore.

Again, where are you getting this information?  The first two pages of a search for this topic on Google is filled with nothing but liberal sources.  Geez, even the AFL-CIO is only claiming the loss of 1.5 million (and we all know how objective the information that they provide really is.)   Have I missed that the unemployment rate has surpassed 6, 6.5, or 7%?  The Dept. of Labor even wants to blame the current administration because the "majority" of this loss (whatever total they're quoting) occured within the first three months of taking office!  Trust me, I have NO reason to applaud the Bush administration and I have NO desire to start pointing fingers at Clinton, but -- sheesh! -- expecting ANY administration to turn the economy on a dime is absurd.

Quote:
Just one of the many benefits of those lauded tax cuts I suppose, which despite what the administration apparatchiks might say, DO UNDENIABLY provide the vast majority of benefit to the tiniest minority of the wealthiest Americans.

I would deny it.  This country has had an increasingly government-controlled economy for at least the last 35 years (more likely, the last 70 years) yet you still won't admit that all of the overt socialist regulation of the economy MAY be the source of economic inequality.  Instead, you simply regurgitate the tired old bromides about the "greedy rich" and their tax cuts.  *Sigh*

If you've got a problem with the economy -- and if you have a pulse, you should have -- you'll understand that bashing Wal-Mart is futile.  Wal-Mart -- and their corporate practices -- are an effect, not a cause.  If you don't like Wal-Mart, then for God's sake, don't buy from them.  Organize a boycott; it's a free country.  But they're just trying to make a buck under this pig of a semi-socialist economy that we're having to endure.  Economic regulation and increased unionization aren't going to help us keep jobs in the US.  

But that's fodder for another topic...          

[Palomine]

Quote:


Let me see: the big bad robber barons at Wal-Mart infiltrate their way into every town in America, mercilessly bribing the city counsels from coast to coast in order to build their economic fortresses and then procede to loose themselves upon the unsuspecting communities. Specially trained Wal-Mart Auxiliary Recruitment Teams (WARTs?) cock their weapons and flood into the surrounding neighborhoods, BATF-style, conscripting slave labor to work under the guise of being "employees" in their stores and then force the poor, helpless slobs to labor away ad infinitum at menial jobs with a pitance for wages, no overtime pay, without any insurance whatsoever, and with no means for advancement. And being the soulless corporate monolith that it is, it naturally "targets" the poor old Mom 'n' Pop stores with which to heartlessly crush into dust. Oh, and have I even mentioned the millions and millions and millions and millions of customers that Wal-Mart suckers into coming into its stores -- again and again and again and again and again and again and again -- with lies, high prices and shoddy merchandise and with whom they exploit by giving them such a miniscule value in return? Oh, the humanity!!!

Have I missed anything? (I shouldn't have; I copied it down, word for word, from the Rich Dad, Robber Baron textbook.)

Sheesh, I think that you've been reading a tad too much Dickens over the holidays, son.

Quote:

Of course, nowhere in the blatantly one-sided autobiographical PR fluff piece is there any mention of the fact that just about every single retail Walmart job pays far less than a living wage in any part of the country, let alone here in relatively expensive cost-of-living SoCal.

1. Why would you expect ANY company on Earth to give you anything other than a commercial that puts their own company in a good light? I mean, if YOU'RE paying for the time, WHY would YOU put anything else up on the screen? Huh? Why?

2. Far less than living wage? What the heck is "far less" and where are you getting this info? I have an in-law that's worked for Wal-Mart in their warehouse for over 12 years. He's not in management and he makes a fine living for himself and his family. (His wife doesn't even have to work.) He's worked throughout the southwest -- including SoCal -- and now lives and works and owns his own home in Dallas (no slouch in the cost-of-living dept. itself). He has always had insurance -- health, dental, and life -- available to him through Wal-Mart.

Just curious: what exactly DO you expect the value is of someone who slides coded items over a scanner, bags them, and collects the money? This ain't exactly brain surgery, you know? Ditto with warehousing, customer service and other support jobs. Were you to unionize these folks and double their salary, what do you think this would do to the cost of the products that Wal-Mart sells and that you -- excuse me, the rest of us -- buy?

Quote:

Also, there's no mention of Walmart's ongoing policy of subcontracting the least-attractive and lowest paying (of the low) jobs out to 3rd party companies in order to avail themselves of below-minimum-wage labor from illegal immigrants AND avoid direct liability in the process.

So Wal-Mart, out of the goodness of its corporate heart, should do -- what? Violate discrimination laws by NOT hiring Mexican (-American?) workers whom the 3rd party companies assert are legitimate workers? Gee, I wonder what dollar sum Wal-Mart would be liable for if/when some "people's champion" ACLU lawyer got ahold of that? You're going to sit there and blame Wal-Mart for the flood of illegal immigration into SoCal and the damage that it's doing to your own (not to mention the rest of the country's) economy? California LOVES these poor, oppressed Mexicans. After all, California is the same state that provides health care to illegals and which is entertaining the idea of issuing driver's licenses to the same illegals. Is it any wonder that the state is, what, $34 BILLION in the hole? You don't see ANY connection between deficits and socialism within your own economy? You don't think that all of this "social justice" literally has a price tag? Yeah, just blame Wal-Mart and capitalism instead. All the heck Wal-Mart's been doing is what is voluntary, legal, and smart from a business standpoint -- and business is what they DO for a living.

Quote:

And as you might imagine, nowhere in the commercial is any mention made of the literally thousands and thousands of small, family owned businesses that have been put out of business by Walmart when they've moved into towns all across the country.

Ah, yes, one of the liberals' favorite staples: poor little old Mom 'n' Pop versus the heartless corporate monolith. Hardly a fair fight, eh? A perfect example of how "progess" isn't worth it, right?

Yeah, right.

I had the occasion to work in Durango, Colorado a few years ago. Durango was a typical mountain town with Mom 'n' Pop stores lining its Main St. And, as I completed my work, construction was beginning on a new Wal-Mart at the edge of town. I haven't been back since but I'd wager things have gone EXACTLY as you would fear: all those little Mom and Pop businesses -- the hardware store, the stationary store, etc. -- are GONE. But WHY?

Because Wal-Mart offers the world comparable (or better) prices on the same goods and price is the primary determining factor for most people and businesses. Sorry, but that's the truth. People typically are willing to sacrifice customer service for price. Sorry, but that's the truth. But understand what's important here:

Wal-Mart isn't **77** ANYBODY to deal with them. Every customer and every single employee walks through that door of their own free will. All that Wal-Mart offers them is VALUES. If these Mom 'n' Pop stores go out of business, it's not Wal-Mart that CAUSES it; it's the result of the choices made by every individual in the area. NO ONE has ANY right to interfere with the voluntary economic choices made by individuals.

If Durango -- or SoCal or any place else -- wants to boycott them, they are FREE TO DO SO. So why would the people of Durango go to the local hardware store and pay $7 for a hammer when they could go to Wal-Mart and buy the same hammer for $3.95? If you want to pay $8 a pound for ham at the local butcher instead of $4 a pound at the Wal-Mart Supercenter, just so you can support "the little guy", then fine -- you may do so. Welcome to America, competition and free choice. But don't damn the rest of us who can't help but remember the same butcher was charging monopoly prices (the $8 a pound) when there wasn't any Wal-Mart (i.e., competition) around and who now wants my "sympathy" for all the years that he stuck it to me.

Yeah, Wal-Mart -- the heartless bastards.

Quote:

And finally, no mention at all is made of the fact that for each $7. per hour/no benefits retail shelf-stocking job Walmart creates in a community when it opens a store, AT LEAST one higher-paying/usually-benefit-including and usually-unionized MANUFACTURING job is lost in America due to the fact that the vast majority of the THINGS Walmart sells are produced overseas by people (and often even [censored] ren) earning less and working in conditions MUCH worse than even the youngest stockboy at Walmart.

Care to explain to us where you got the statistic that by offering one $7/hr job, Wal-Mart necessarily causes the loss of AT LEAST one "better" job? It's a grand assertion with which to pummel your opponents but where are you getting your information -- from those sober, objective folks at the AFL-CIO? The solution to "losing" manufacturing jobs is to bring the costs of production down. Yet your solution, by implication, is to pay a union employee stratospheric wages and a bloated benefit package? Oh, yeah -- THAT will bring costs down...

Quote:

You know we've lost 3 million jobs in the past couple of years, right? That's THREE MILLION JOBS THAT ARE GONE... the people who had those jobs aren't gone of course, it's just their jobs that don't reside in America anymore.

Again, where are you getting this information? The first two pages of a search for this topic on Google is filled with nothing but liberal sources. Geez, even the AFL-CIO is only claiming the loss of 1.5 million (and we all know how objective the information that they provide really is.) Have I missed that the unemployment rate has surpassed 6, 6.5, or 7%? The Dept. of Labor even wants to blame the current administration because the "majority" of this loss (whatever total they're quoting) occured within the first three months of taking office! Trust me, I have NO reason to applaud the Bush administration and I have NO desire to start pointing fingers at Clinton, but -- sheesh! -- expecting ANY administration to turn the economy on a dime is absurd.

Quote:

Just one of the many benefits of those lauded tax cuts I suppose, which despite what the administration apparatchiks might say, DO UNDENIABLY provide the vast majority of benefit to the tiniest minority of the wealthiest Americans.

I would deny it. This country has had an increasingly government-controlled economy for at least the last 35 years (more likely, the last 70 years) yet you still won't admit that all of the overt socialist regulation of the economy MAY be the source of economic inequality. Instead, you simply regurgitate the tired old bromides about the "greedy rich" and their tax cuts. *Sigh*

If you've got a problem with the economy -- and if you have a pulse, you should have -- you'll understand that bashing Wal-Mart is futile. Wal-Mart -- and their corporate practices -- are an effect, not a cause. If you don't like Wal-Mart, then for God's sake, don't buy from them. Organize a boycott; it's a free country. But they're just trying to make a buck under this pig of a semi-socialist economy that we're having to endure. Economic regulation and increased unionization aren't going to help us keep jobs in the US.

StormDancer,

Once again, if you're not already working as a paid apologist for the Bush administration, you've missed your true calling.

First, let me introduce you to a little thing called sarcasm.... it's something that people can use as a device when making a point. You see (and I'll explain this slowly): I don't really expect Walmart or any company to actually explain the true costs, actual nature and/or long term consequences of their business practices ever, let alone in their paid advertising. Hence, I point out the omission of such information in Walmart's very own propaganda.

That's called sarcasm, buddy. I'm sure that you're not quite as ignorant of the concept as your post would have us believe... and the fact that you'd wilfully ignore the intent of its application in order to rail against me for 'complaining' that Walmart leaves certain facts out of its own ads is telling.... to me, it indicates that your position on the issue as a whole is so tenuous that you must resort to feigning ignorance of my (sarcastic) intent in order to have an excuse to take it literally so as to have something to discredit. That's pretty weak, even for a first shot, don't you think? What's next, you're going to call me a 'stupid doody-head' or something?

Another thing that seems to speak volumes about the weakness of your position is your complaining that by using google, you could only locate 'liberal' sources of information regarding the loss of American jobs. That's pretty funny (must be the 'liberal' media flexing their iron grip on the entire internet again ....btw, this is sarcasm too.... just in case you're already tempted to pullquote that last sentence as my admission of some vast left-wing conspiracy). What's far more likely to be the case is that the facts (about job loss) are so clear on this issue that ALL outlets you might stumble across in a relatively finite google search have no choice but to agree to one extent or another (that we've lost a huge number of jobs in this country of late) regardless of their partisanship, credentials (or lack thereof), etc.... Your conviction that ALL those sources you checked are liberal (and by implication, wrong on the facts about job loss) once again says more about the weakness of your argument than anything I could possibly write. Just because you don't like a fact, or the only facts you can find don't support your side of the argument, doesn't necessarily mean that those facts are untrue. And it IS TRUE: the US has lost the better part of 3 million jobs in the past few years, and from what I understand, a dispropotionate percentage of them were in the manufacturing sector. Again, I suppose that's just more liberal disinformation at work, right? And I'm just a big bleeding heart, lefty, commie traitor to my country too.   Rather than blame google (which itself must be in on the vast liberal conspiracy I suppose, from how you tell it) why not just look a little harder? I'm sure that even google's left-wing information monitors must have missed something ...one brave webmaster somewhere must have been able to put up some statistic for you... a ray of truth that will once and for all lay waste to the liberal fiction of job loss in America. Just look a little harder for it, OK.... try Rush, or Ann or Sean.... perhaps one of those brave freedom fighters, those few true patriots, has managed to thwart the controls of those big bad all-powerful liberals filtering the whole internet to keep the truth from us? (just a little FYI for you: I'm guilty of it again right there... more sarcasm... I'm sorry, it must be a result of all those years I spent being conditioned in the socialist public education system ).

It's called plausible deniability by the way. You know, that thing that lets Walmart take advantage of illegal immigrant labor and still not bear the ultimate responsibility for doing so. It also comes in handy regarding working conditions and labor practices in the factories overseas where all those Tshirts, sneakers, toaster-ovens, etc... that fill Walmart's shelves are made. You know: out of sight... out of mind. Since the people (again, many of them [censored] in countries where [censored] labor laws and unions don't exist) making all those products aren't employees of Walmart itself, and the guys bussed in overnight to mop the floors in its stores don't get their paychecks from Walmart directly, the company itself bears no responsibility whatsoever for these things. In fact, I suppose that it's Walmart's patriotic duty as an American corporation to do anything and everything it can (regardless of the human impact) to bring those jeans to it's shelves with every penny possible shaved from the cost to the American shopper, right? (oops, there I go again... sorry!)

You know what anecdotal evidence means? If not, you might want to look it up before the fellas at dictionary.com take a page from the google.com boys and filter it out. It basically means that your heartwarming tale of an in-law who's manned the Walmart warehouse floor for years and made a 'fine living' for himself and his family is lovely and sweet but essentially meaningless. Even if true (I suppose all four of his [censored] are in private school and he drives a Bentley too, right? ) it has no bearing whatsoever on the big picture... the fact is that most of the jobs at Walmart are low paying service industry jobs that offer few if any benefits... McJobs in the classic sense. Is Walmart evil for providing McJobs? No, of course not.... however, more Walmart does mean more McJobs, and thus an increasing percentage of Americans working at the bottom rungs of the service industry. There are some people who might not look on that as some sort of economic salvation in the long run, you know. Not you of course, but some folks might find that prospect just a wee bit troubling.

BTW, I'm deeply charmed by your attempt to cast the American small businessman as the bad guy.... exploiting his postion to grossly overcharge consumers for hammers and ham and whatnot!   That's really beautiful! Karl Rove would be proud of you 'son'! The "hammers and ham" conspiracy! ...I LOVE IT! Yep, I suppose Walmart's freeing us from the tyranny of the American small-business owner in just the same way that the good folks at ConAgra, ADM, etc... have saved all of us from the manipulative doings and evil machinations of the family farmer. You know, I heard that those three guys: the small businessman, the family farmer and the guy that runs google were all frat brothers together at some liberal college back east... you heard that too, right? Maybe I read it in a Paul Gigot editorial, which was then promptly picked up and run repeatedly on Fox News until a majority of the U.S. public actually believes it to be a fact... yes, that must be where I heard about it....

SD, I hope that you'll forgive my overworked liberal fingers if I don't sit here and comment on what you assert to be the ills of "my" "socialist" economy here in Caiifornia right now, ok? I mean, I'd have to peck at the keys for another chunk of time and point out that California is one of only 48 states in the red just like the federal government itself (which squandered a truly huge budget surplus in record time btw) and therefore, perhaps the condition of the local economy here might have just possibly something to do with issues other than ACLU-defended, socialist influences promoted by the morally bankrupt entertainment elite? But perhaps some other time, ok?

While I go and try to enjoy what's left of my Sunday (actually, I'm working today... just like so many folks wearing Walmart smocks) why don't you go try some other search engine (one that might have escaped the 'liberal' information cleansing you assert has so thoroughly neutered google) to come up with some 'facts' to support the fairness and legitimacy of Bush's tax cuts, ok? If, like mine, your fingers get a little tired too, do yourself a favor and just sit back and take in some O'Rielly Factor or Hannity and Colmes... soon enough they'll provide you with all the info you need to prove, even beyond the shadow of any liberal/socialist doubt, that Bush's tax cuts (even in this time of record expenditures and vanishing surpluses) ARE for the benefit of all those regular Americans who comprise 90% of the adult citizens in this country, and not for those few percent at the very top who reap the majority of their revenue from capital gains, salary bonuses, corporate honorariums, etc... Good luck!

Signed,

Palomine, your friendly (small-business owning, investment-making, personal and corporate income-tax-paying) commie-pinko-lefty-socialist-bleeding-heart-liberal Moderator

[steveo]

Whoa! I actually agree with 90% of that. Entertaining too (that frat brothers thing - heh heh!) The attachment shows, we have been losing manufacturing jobs since the 1980's... NY and NJ are really hit hard. This chart ends in 1999, but has been dropping since, I think... you can interpolate. The reason? Probably a lot of 'em, but I think most experts believe the economy is changing, we are becoming more of a service economy and there are lot more small businesses now -- that is a good thing!

An interesting question might be, is the manufacturing job loss because of competition, efficiency (automation), or are people just not interested in that kind of work anymore? Are we making the ecomomy change or is it changing despite us?

Oh, almost forgot... I found that chart, using Google  

[Artican_Velbades]

Back on the original topic, those sounds pretty interesting, especially considering that in Arkansas, Wal-Mart is the major entertainment center for many towns. ^_^

[Gilroy]

Has anyone ever put on a toupe and told a Walmart manager that they're fired?

I know that the two have nothing to do with each other, but I'm beginning to suspect that they'd actually believe you, what with all the TV exposure.

Plus, it would be a nice twist.






Anyway, about what was said a long, long time ago:

I hate big corporations, and I constantly tell people this.

The problem is that I still go to these places.

When I have the option of going to a small and friendly bookstore over the 5-story book depot, I usually choose the depot.

It's the wrong decision, and I know it, but it still happens.  

[Palomine]

Quote:


I hate big corporations, and I constantly tell people this.

The problem is that I still go to these places.

When I have the option of going to a small and friendly bookstore over the 5-story book depot, I usually choose the depot.

It's the wrong decision, and I know it, but it still happens.  

In response:

I don't 'hate' big corporations as a matter of practice, but I DO dislike corporations of any scale that exploit loopholes in laws (or break them outright), provide miserable service/products, etc... at the expense of the public, their customers and/or employees. Walmart is a perfect example of a repeat offender in this area. McDonald's is another. As are most of the big-name major telecommunication companies (AT&T, Adelphia, Comcast, etc...). Thus, I cannot see the sense in rewarding such predatory and exploitative entities with my hard-earned consumer dollars and thus, it is WORTH the extra effort to take my business elsewhere.

Despite the considerable inconvenience I no longer shop at Home Depot any more... too many years of receiving miserable service there to justify my continuing to spend $10K+ in their stores annually. I don't eat at McDonald's anymore either for the same reason (poor products and service, to say nothing of their miserable record as a corporate citizen of planet Earth) despite the fact that I count junk food among my guilty pleasures. Nor will I ever be a customer of AT&T or any of it's subsidiaries ever again, etc... etc... etc... And of course, I will never ever shop at a WalMart store.

YES, this voluntary personal boycott on my part IS sometimes an inconvenience. However, the stress that the extra drive to Lowes, In'N'Out, etc... results in is NOTHING compared to how unpleasant it'd feel to give my money to companies who have behaved so badly.  

[JizzTits]

ooh yeah, In N' Out rocks! don't you guys have them everywhere in SoCal though?

it's about a 30 min drive away for me to get to one... but oh so worth it.