Posted on 05/26/2005 6:27:37 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Because of Wal-Mart's inadequate wages and benefits, Wal-Mart employees are eligible for $2.5 billion in Federal assistance, which comes from your tax dollars.
(Excerpt) Read more at wakeupwalmart.com ...
Blamed for everything, Rodney.
What about the economic benefit to the people who buy stuff at Walmart? There sure seem to be a lot of them.
and report back to us once a year. That should be a real education for you.
It isn't WalMart's fault that the people who work their don't have hardly any marketable skills.
If they can get a job with good pay, they would have one.
Nobody said working at WalMart gave you the ability to buy your own home, medical insurance and to have a maid.
More than likely, the common single WalMart employee would live with several people and RENT, could get health insurance but would have to clean their own dishes.
What a stupid website.
"You know, thinking back, last time I went to Wal-Mart none of the employees had chains on their legs. They seemed to be free to roam at will."
Exactly, these statists on the board think that an arbitrary standard of "fairness" trumps freedom.
First their = there
Last I checked, no one was forcing anyone to work at Wal-Mart or shop at Wal-Mart. And the Rosetta Whasername from Illinois, I have to call BS on her story from the start. None of the employees are "locked in" the Sam's Club stores overnight. One, that would be false imprisonment. Two, it would violate fire codes. The doors in every Sam's Club I've ever been in (and the majority of other retail stores for that matter) lock to prevent entry--not to prevent exit. Is Rosetta Whasername alleging that the "big, bad boss" chained the doors?
Poor comparison. Nobody's talking about killing babies.
Cheney locked the doors. Sam's Club is his secure location.
Please understand where these attacks are coming from. Her name is Mrs. HEINZ-KERRY. And .. she is funding ultra left-wing activist groups, through her Tides Foundation, who are attacking Wal-Mart.
She's all upset because the unions can't get a foothold inside Wal-Mart - and because Wal-Mart donates a lot more money to repubs than to dems.
People want low prices .. the only way that can happen is when the store owner keeps expenses LOW too. So .. Wal-Mart doesn't hire very many full-time employees and therefore doesn't have to supply the part-timers with health-care benefits. This keeps the costs down and keeps prices down.
Cheney locked the doors. Sam's Club is his secure location.
I like Wal-Mart.
I buy stuff for the troops there, and their generic meds are the most inexpensive, and they let me sit at a table in front during election years to pass out information on candidates.
Our unemployment rate here is around 20%, so the distribution center and the store have created jobs that were needed.
I don't buy their made in China items.
Just because their business practices are legal doesn't mean they are moral.
They, like others, use part-time employment to dodge having to pay benefits. Few except the upper echelon full-time employees are paid a living wage on that job alone.
I'd sign the petition if I saw any hope of changing. I don't like to shop there or any of the mega stores that look like warehouses no matter how many lights, bells, whistles and promos they have. I do make an exception to shop at Aldi's sometimes.
I think it means that some people who are eligible for social security work at Wal-Mart. The horror. The horror.
Looks like a hit and run from Clintonfatigued. I would be fatigued too going so many years without Clinton if I held his views.
The problem isn't Wal-Mart; the problem is the program that exists to pay them the balance of their income. If no such program existed, people couldn't afford to work there at less than subsistence wage. Many times in my adult life I was making "poverty level" wages and lived just fine, never took a handout from the government (i.e. never picked the pockets of anyone here or elsewhere). So the idea that if one is making "pverty level wages" means they're living in the street and starving is bunk--that's just a number the government uses for their purposes.
The answer isn't denouncing Wal-Mart. We live in a capitalistic society--I know that's shocking to some folks, though it shouldn't be, seeing how capitalism is the greatest system there is for bringing people out of poverty and allowing them to construct their lives as they see fit. How many immigrants to this country have worked low-money jobs, perhaps multiple ones, SAVED their money, and gone on to their own businesses, large or small?
If you don't want to make Wal-Mart money, don't work at Wal-Mart--THE END.
I save at least $50/month shopping at Walmart.
That's money I can pump into other sectors of the economy.
That means more people benefit from my shopping at Walmart than just me.
That's right. My grocery bill at Walmart is about $120 per week. Anywhere else it would be 160. Thats 40 bucks a week that I spend somewhere else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.