Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by flgator2, Jan 11, 2018.
Our family rule is no Walmart visits after 9am. It’s ok at 7am.
I have been to both Costco has better quality merchandise. Sams typically has cheaper prices on lower quality goods.
Costco is a really good store, but the one in Jacksonville is so crowded. We're in BJ's a lot more often since it's closer. It's like Costco though not as good. And not as crowded.
Costco generally has a pretty upscale clientele compared to anything like it. It's always funny to see so many people who appear to have money lined up at the tasting tables for the next free pizza bite to come out of the toaster oven.
Forgot about BJs its kind of in between Walmart and Costco. I think they will get squeezed out. Maybe a potential Amazon purchase unless they are owned by someone else.
Not trying to be obtuse
But wouldn’t we be subsidizing those same people if they worked similar skill level jobs at mc Donald’s? Or if they worked at Mom and pop store?
I’m not sure the fault is with wal mart on that. They are just an easy target due to being a huge successful business.
Low skill wages are low skill wages. Those jobs were never meant to support families.
How does it treat its employees poorly? Is there any reason the employees cannot quit if it so bad? Or is it the only job they can get or are qualified for?
As for screwing over the communities how does it do that?
At a major fast food chain, likely yes. Which is an indictment on that industry. At a mom and pop store, that's difficult to answer because there's not going to be that sort of consistency across stores.
It's the fault of Wal-Mart because they're making massive profits while refusing to pay their employees a livable wage. Why should the American taxpayers have to sacrifice their money to pay Wal-Mart's employees? It's not like Wal-Mart lacks the money to do it.
Why else would a person work at Wal-Mart other than to pay the bills? Whether or not they were meant to be that, that's what they are.
Sure, they can quit. Wal-Mart will just replace them with someone else.
How does it treat its employees poorly? There's a lot out there on the internet that discusses this. I'll link you to a couple articles:
This is really the tip of the iceberg.
One of Wal-Mart's chief promises when it moves into communities is that the community will benefit greatly from the tax revenue it will pay. Yet, Wal-Mart has a history of fighting tooth and nail with communities over local taxes and even leaving when communities won't cut it a break.
It basically comes in, destroys the local businesses, and then tries to use its leverage to force the community to give it tax cuts. It's just a great embodiment of every bad thing people assume about massive corporations. Wal-Mart only cares about its profits.
My company has been a supplier to Wal-Mart since they started in the grocery business many years ago. Here are some facts that most people either don't know or have misconceptions about.
They pay on time, we receive our money within 10 days of delivery.
We have a contract that contains specs on our product that must be meet at delivery. These are mutually agreed upon when we enter into the contract. If we don't meet the specs, they will reject the product, if we meet it, they will accept the delivery.
We do not take returns, once they accept delivery they pay for it.
The buyers ask our advice on things and are willing to test new products in stores.
We can manage our orders, increase or decrease volumes into the warehouses if we think the order is not correct. They do have to approve it, but they almost always accept our recommendation.
We submit our price based on the specs they require. Both sides have to agree to the price and honor it for the length of the contract.
They do restrict my sales to them, in that we cannot sell them more than 25% of my annual sales to them. Wal-Mart has made us a better supplier to both them and our other customers.
More layoffs at Walmart
AS far as lo
So this would be a good thing in certain communities. Less management pay and more common laborer pay.
As far Wal-Mart being at fault for low pay and the subordination of its worker...I disagree.
Wal-Mart offers a competitive wage for the skill set of the laborer. Just because Wal-Mart is successful does not mean it needs to over pay someone under qualified. It isn't Wal-Mart's fault that men and women with families are only qualified or have the necessary skills to work as a cashier or stock boy. Wal-Mart isn't to blame for those that are under educated and over familied.
As far as fighting the communities over taxes and such...years Wal-Mart has been awful in certain cities and communities...especially where they know they are the only game in Town and hold all the cards. Then again...they are the only game I. Town and are offering to employ many more people than would have jobs if they left. It's a bad catch 22 for the communities. Dampened if you do Damned if you don't.
Dollar Stores have to be cutting into Wal-Mart sales.
It is Wal-Mart's fault that it doesn't offer wages and benefits sufficient to allow these people to live without taxpayer assistant. However, it's also our government's fault for allowing them to get away with it.
Regardless, Wal-Mart is to blame for what it pays its workers. It's only a competitive wage for their level of skill because we allow it to be. I know some seem okay with the notion that corporations owe nothing to this country and only exist to make profits. However, I believe if we're going to give them limited legal personhood, we have a right to expect more from them than solely acting in their own self interest.