Walmart:11-21-06 Wal-Mart slashes food prices in half ahead of Thanksgiving

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
That's a good question, do have proof???

Proof of what?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

"Wal-Mart's decision to declare war on Democrats who are calling on the company to pay a better wage, provide affordable health care, and treat its employees with dignity and respect is a disgrace, and shows just how right-wing Wal-Mart has become," said Paul Blank, campaign director for WakeUpWalMart.com.

You'd think that a company who gets most of it.s products from cheap overseas labor would be able to afford to pay it's employees a decent wage. It sure seems to have the resources to hire anti-labor consultants. I think it should be illegal (on a federal level) for public corporations to contribute to political campaigns or pull political stunts like this.

Sounds good. I hope you'll include unions in that. My mother got bombarded with political crap from the union telling her to vote for Democrats when she was a public school teacher.

If she had to be in the union to have her job, then yes. If the union membership is voluntary, then no.

What's a voluntary union? I don't think I've ever heard of such a thing.

Then perhaps you should educate yourself on the history of unions.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Genx87
Dont worry about me, worry about the people you are paying slave wages to.
They need a "livable wage"

That's all you got?? You can't backup your claims so your defense is to continue to spout your f'in lies.

I expected more from a LIFER!! :laugh:

<crickets>

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

"Wal-Mart's decision to declare war on Democrats who are calling on the company to pay a better wage, provide affordable health care, and treat its employees with dignity and respect is a disgrace, and shows just how right-wing Wal-Mart has become," said Paul Blank, campaign director for WakeUpWalMart.com.

You'd think that a company who gets most of it.s products from cheap overseas labor would be able to afford to pay it's employees a decent wage. It sure seems to have the resources to hire anti-labor consultants. I think it should be illegal (on a federal level) for public corporations to contribute to political campaigns or pull political stunts like this.

Sounds good. I hope you'll include unions in that. My mother got bombarded with political crap from the union telling her to vote for Democrats when she was a public school teacher.

If she had to be in the union to have her job, then yes. If the union membership is voluntary, then no.

What's a voluntary union? I don't think I've ever heard of such a thing.

Then perhaps you should educate yourself on the history of unions.

What does the history of unions have to do with anything? In the here and now, every union shop I'm aware of forces employees to join the union. Find me a union shop where employees are free to join or not join as they please.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
That's a good question, do have proof???

Well lookie here...

Admittedly that was mid-2004 but I'm quite confident nothing has changed.

But wait. What have we here? Feinstein a big DRM media whore?

Money talks. You should know that Dave :laugh:

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
That's a good question, do have proof???

Well lookie here...

Admittedly that was mid-2004 but I'm quite confident nothing has changed.

But wait. What have we here? Feinstein a big DRM media whore?

Money talks. You should know that Dave :laugh:

The Recording Industry Association of America's current and former presidents, Cary Sherman and Hilary Rosen, have both given to Kerry this year.

But they're also the biggest contributors to the RIAA's PAC, which has given twice as much 2004 money to Republicans as to Democrats.
=====================================
Lame lame lame try.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

"Wal-Mart's decision to declare war on Democrats who are calling on the company to pay a better wage, provide affordable health care, and treat its employees with dignity and respect is a disgrace, and shows just how right-wing Wal-Mart has become," said Paul Blank, campaign director for WakeUpWalMart.com.

You'd think that a company who gets most of it.s products from cheap overseas labor would be able to afford to pay it's employees a decent wage. It sure seems to have the resources to hire anti-labor consultants. I think it should be illegal (on a federal level) for public corporations to contribute to political campaigns or pull political stunts like this.

Sounds good. I hope you'll include unions in that. My mother got bombarded with political crap from the union telling her to vote for Democrats when she was a public school teacher.

If she had to be in the union to have her job, then yes. If the union membership is voluntary, then no.

What's a voluntary union? I don't think I've ever heard of such a thing.

Then perhaps you should educate yourself on the history of unions.

What does the history of unions have to do with anything? In the here and now, every union shop I'm aware of forces employees to join the union. Find me a union shop where employees are free to join or not join as they please.

<sigh>

I guess you never hear of "right to work" states??

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
I guess you never hear of "right to work" states??

Fat lot of good that does for people who live in the 28 out of 50 states where joining the union is mandatory. Get back to me when that's a federal law.

Edit: Or are you telling me that one should be expected to move to a different state if you don't want to join a union? To that I say, if WalMart employees don't want to be told they should vote for Republicans, they should find another employer. What's good for the goose...

 

[Ferocious]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
I guess you never hear of "right to work" states??

Fat lot of good that does for people who live in the 28 out of 50 states where joining the union is mandatory. Get back to me when that's a federal law.

Edit: Or are you telling me that one should be expected to move to a different state if you don't want to join a union? To that I say, if WalMart employees don't want to be told they should vote for Republicans, they should find another employer. What's good for the goose...

umm wrong as usual


Right to work laws mean right to mooch. They have nothing to do with protecting workers. They simply allow people to freeload by enjoying all the benefits of union membership without having to pay for it.

In Non RTW sates, people do NOT have to members of the union. But the lack of RTW (right to mooch) laws means they still have to pay a fair portion of the dues.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Ferocious

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
I guess you never hear of "right to work" states??

Fat lot of good that does for people who live in the 28 out of 50 states where joining the union is mandatory. Get back to me when that's a federal law.

Edit: Or are you telling me that one should be expected to move to a different state if you don't want to join a union? To that I say, if WalMart employees don't want to be told they should vote for Republicans, they should find another employer. What's good for the goose...

umm wrong as usual


Right to work laws mean right to mooch. They have nothing to do with protecting workers. They simply allow people to freeload by enjoying all the benefits of union membership without having to pay for it.

In Non RTW sates, people do NOT have to members of the union. But the lack of RTW (right to mooch) laws means they still have to pay a fair portion of the dues.

Don't bitch at me, I'm not the one who threw RTW out there as an excuse for unions being able to stump for politicians. I only brought up unions because some people feel it's wrong for WalMart to tell their employees who they should vote for. Until unions are stopped from doing the same thing, that would be a double standard. Unfortunately I know how Democrats love double standards as much as Republicans do, so I'm not expecting any rationale discourse on the matter.

Edit: And after reading your post again, I have come to the conclusion that... you are simply an idiot. Where in my post did I say anything about RTW laws protecting workers?

You need to STFU, moron. Take your "wrong as usual" and shove right back up the ass you pulled it from.

 

[tw1164]

Originally posted by: Ferocious

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
I guess you never hear of "right to work" states??

Fat lot of good that does for people who live in the 28 out of 50 states where joining the union is mandatory. Get back to me when that's a federal law.

Edit: Or are you telling me that one should be expected to move to a different state if you don't want to join a union? To that I say, if WalMart employees don't want to be told they should vote for Republicans, they should find another employer. What's good for the goose...

umm wrong as usual


Right to work laws mean right to mooch. They have nothing to do with protecting workers. They simply allow people to freeload by enjoying all the benefits of union membership without having to pay for it.

In Non RTW sates, people do NOT have to members of the union. But the lack of RTW (right to mooch) laws means they still have to pay a fair portion of the dues.

I'm currently playing 1.01% of my salary for my "fair share", the normal rate is 1.5%.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Ferocious

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
I guess you never hear of "right to work" states??

Fat lot of good that does for people who live in the 28 out of 50 states where joining the union is mandatory. Get back to me when that's a federal law.

Edit: Or are you telling me that one should be expected to move to a different state if you don't want to join a union? To that I say, if WalMart employees don't want to be told they should vote for Republicans, they should find another employer. What's good for the goose...

umm wrong as usual


Right to work laws mean right to mooch. They have nothing to do with protecting workers. They simply allow people to freeload by enjoying all the benefits of union membership without having to pay for it.

In Non RTW sates, people do NOT have to members of the union. But the lack of RTW (right to mooch) laws means they still have to pay a fair portion of the dues.

Don't bitch at me, I'm not the one who threw RTW out there as an excuse for unions being able to stump for politicians. I only brought up unions because some people feel it's wrong for WalMart to tell their employees who they should vote for. Until unions are stopped from doing the same thing, that would be a double standard. Unfortunately I know how Democrats love double standards as much as Republicans do, so I'm not expecting any rationale discourse on the matter.

Edit: And after reading your post again, I have come to the conclusion that... you are simply an idiot. Where in my post did I say anything about RTW laws protecting workers?

You need to STFU, moron. Take your "wrong as usual" and shove right back up the ass you pulled it from.

LOL, maybe you should think about taking a couple of days off. There are just so many angry "tightie righties" on this forum.

A business like Walmart is an entirely different entinity the a union. The union is a political organization in the first place, formed by a vote of the workers to represent the workers.

A publicly held corporation is owned by people of all political persuasion. If they want to send out a letter endorsing canidates, then they need to let the shareholders vote on it. The unions already have so there is no double standard, there is just blind partisianship as usual.

Oh, I live in a RTW state and an employer here can fire you because they didn't like the color of the shirt you wore to work. What do I have to do to have the same rights as workers in other states, move??

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

"Wal-Mart's decision to declare war on Democrats who are calling on the company to pay a better wage, provide affordable health care, and treat its employees with dignity and respect is a disgrace, and shows just how right-wing Wal-Mart has become," said Paul Blank, campaign director for WakeUpWalMart.com.

I wonder how many of those Democrats who say they want better wages also want to open the borders wide open, allowing illegal immigration (and wage arbitrage and higher taxes to pay for them) and also support foreign outsourcing and increasing the number of foreign work visas (H-1B, L-1, etc.).

I would be willing to bet that many of the Democrats (and lots of Republicans too) who claim they want to raise lower class Americans' wages support exactly the policies that will lower them via global labor wage arbitrage.

 

[Uhtrinity]

Originally posted by: Ferocious

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
I guess you never hear of "right to work" states??

Fat lot of good that does for people who live in the 28 out of 50 states where joining the union is mandatory. Get back to me when that's a federal law.

Edit: Or are you telling me that one should be expected to move to a different state if you don't want to join a union? To that I say, if WalMart employees don't want to be told they should vote for Republicans, they should find another employer. What's good for the goose...

umm wrong as usual


Right to work laws mean right to mooch. They have nothing to do with protecting workers. They simply allow people to freeload by enjoying all the benefits of union membership without having to pay for it.

In Non RTW sates, people do NOT have to members of the union. But the lack of RTW (right to mooch) laws means they still have to pay a fair portion of the dues.

I live in a right to work state, which adopted the law about 15 years ago, and most people hate it. When it was first proposed it was touted as a good thing for protecting you against unions. Not that anyone I know, including my father who was in a Railroad Union for 30 years, would take non union over what they had. Sure, he paid dues, but he also recieved top notch health care, a decent pension, and union protection when he hurt is back 3 years short of retirement. The Union was able to keep him working within the union so he could complete his time and get his retirement. Something you don't see most non union businesses doing.

What do non unions jobs pay under RTW? $8 - $15 / hr in this state, most with no benefits, 401k with no or little contribuition if your lucky, and you get to sign a little piece of paper that states the company can release you from employment for ABSOLUTELY ANY REASON, though of course you have the right to leave for absolutely any reason if you choose, guess that balances it all out. :roll:

Right to Work here = right to pay slave wages

 

[1EZduzit]

In this state, employers do everything they can to make it hard for wokers with any senority. They nust love ton get rid of anybody over the age of 45 because they are getting to the age where their health costs are going to start rising, they have a lot of vacation built up, and they've become wise to all the lying they do.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
LOL, maybe you should think about taking a couple of days off. There are just so many angry "tightie righties" on this forum.

Wow, I'm a righty now? Brilliant deduction there, fool. :roll: The only thing that makes me a "righty" is the fact that I hate wankers on the left like you. People on the right think I'm a lefty because I can't stand those wankers either.

A business like Walmart is an entirely different entinity the a union. The union is a political organization in the first place, formed by a vote of the workers to represent the workers.

A publicly held corporation is owned by people of all political persuasion. If they want to send out a letter endorsing canidates, then they need to let the shareholders vote on it. The unions already have so there is no double standard, there is just blind partisianship as usual.

Horseshit. A union is no different than a business. They provide services for their members, which those members pay for. You're just in favor of the one that supports your agenda and can't see what's outside your blinders.

Oh, I live in a RTW state and an employer here can fire you because they didn't like the color of the shirt you wore to work. What do I have to do to have the same rights as workers in other states, move??

If you have the option to join the union and choose not to, that's your problem. At least you're given the option. That's far preferable to being forced to join a union, pay their dues, and have your money given to a political candidate you don't support. Talk about coercion, unions are right up there with large corporations for slimy underhanded techniques.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
LOL, maybe you should think about taking a couple of days off. There are just so many angry "tightie righties" on this forum.

Wow, I'm a righty now? Brilliant deduction there, fool. :roll: The only thing that makes me a "righty" is the fact that I hate wankers on the left like you. People on the right think I'm a lefty because I can't stand those wankers either.

A business like Walmart is an entirely different entinity the a union. The union is a political organization in the first place, formed by a vote of the workers to represent the workers.

A publicly held corporation is owned by people of all political persuasion. If they want to send out a letter endorsing canidates, then they need to let the shareholders vote on it. The unions already have so there is no double standard, there is just blind partisianship as usual.

Horseshit. A union is no different than a business. They provide services for their members, which those members pay for. You're just in favor of the one that supports your agenda and can't see what's outside your blinders.

Oh, I live in a RTW state and an employer here can fire you because they didn't like the color of the shirt you wore to work. What do I have to do to have the same rights as workers in other states, move??

If you have the option to join the union and choose not to, that's your problem. At least you're given the option. That's far preferable to being forced to join a union, pay their dues, and have your money given to a political candidate you don't support. Talk about coercion, unions are right up there with large corporations for slimy underhanded techniques.

Your just a loser, that's why no one likes you. Go whank your own whanker and quit wasting the bandwidth around here.

 

[Uhtrinity]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
In this state, employers do everything they can to make it hard for wokers with any senority. They nust love ton get rid of anybody over the age of 45 because they are getting to the age where their health costs are going to start rising, they have a lot of vacation built up, and they've become wise to all the lying they do.

The semiconductor plant I used to work at is now notorius for that. They wil gladly push experience out the door and replace them with lower paid workers. State law allows it and the stockholders love the increaed revenue. That was one of the reasons I left, why stay someplace if there is no job security.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Your just a loser, that's why no one likes you. Go whank your own whanker and quit wasting the bandwidth around here.

Awww, poor widdle baby doesn't wanna pway anymore. Don't cry, it's ok to admit when you're wrong.

 

[dmcowen674]

10-23-2006 Wal-Mart to slow pace of store openings

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. will slow the pace of new store openings next year in what analysts called a nod to Wall Street calls for greater focus on rekindling faltering sales and earnings growth at its existing 6,700 stores worldwide.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Your just a loser, that's why no one likes you. Go whank your own whanker and quit wasting the bandwidth around here.

Awww, poor widdle baby doesn't wanna pway anymore. Don't cry, it's ok to admit when you're wrong.

If I was wrong I'd admit it. What's your excuse?

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Your just a loser, that's why no one likes you. Go whank your own whanker and quit wasting the bandwidth around here.

Awww, poor widdle baby doesn't wanna pway anymore. Don't cry, it's ok to admit when you're wrong.

If I was wrong I'd admit it. What's your excuse?

I said nothing about the pros or cons of unions until you and Ferocious decided it was time to
start setting up strawmen. I simply said that unions should be held to the same standard as corporations. Neither should be allowed to tell their employees who they should vote for. Both organizations are about a concentration of power for the good of it's members (be they stockholders or employees) and we all know the saying about power.

So if you and Ferocious are done trying to disparage me by putting words in my mouth, maybe this conversation can continue?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Your just a loser, that's why no one likes you. Go whank your own whanker and quit wasting the bandwidth around here.

Awww, poor widdle baby doesn't wanna pway anymore. Don't cry, it's ok to admit when you're wrong.

If I was wrong I'd admit it. What's your excuse?

I said nothing about the pros or cons of unions until you and Ferocious decided it was time to
start setting up strawmen. I simply said that unions should be held to the same standard as corporations. Neither should be allowed to tell their employees who they should vote for. Both organizations are about a concentration of power for the good of it's members (be they stockholders or employees) and we all know the saying about power.

So if you and Ferocious are done trying to disparage me by putting words in my mouth, maybe this conversation can continue?

And I told you that if they are forced to join a union then I agree. If being in the union is optional, as it is in my state, then I disagree. So you go off on some tirad about where there are voluntary unions. I point out where and you still won't admit that in many places belonging to a union is voluntary. So then you go off on your strawman.

OK, for the last time, Unions are not public coporations. Get it?? A public coporation does not get to arbitraily get to decide who it's employees should vote for. If they want to support a certain canidate/party, then the stockholders (whom they are representing and who are the actual owners of the corporation) should get to vote on it. If not then skip the politics and concentrate on running the business.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Your just a loser, that's why no one likes you. Go whank your own whanker and quit wasting the bandwidth around here.

Awww, poor widdle baby doesn't wanna pway anymore. Don't cry, it's ok to admit when you're wrong.

If I was wrong I'd admit it. What's your excuse?

I said nothing about the pros or cons of unions until you and Ferocious decided it was time to
start setting up strawmen. I simply said that unions should be held to the same standard as corporations. Neither should be allowed to tell their employees who they should vote for. Both organizations are about a concentration of power for the good of it's members (be they stockholders or employees) and we all know the saying about power.

So if you and Ferocious are done trying to disparage me by putting words in my mouth, maybe this conversation can continue?

And I told you that if they are forced to join a union then I agree. If being in the union is optional, as it is in my state, then I disagree. So you go off on some tirad about where there are voluntary unions. I point out where and you still won't admit that in many places belonging to a union is voluntary. So then you go off on your strawman.

Fine, unions are voluntary wherever you're from. Here they are not. So will you admit that your state laws have nothing to do with my mother being pressured to vote for certain candidates by a non-voluntary union?

OK, for the last time, Unions are not public coporations. Get it?? A public coporation does not get to arbitraily get to decide who it's employees should vote for. If they want to support a certain canidate/party, then the stockholders (whom they are representing and who are the actual owners of the corporation) should get to vote on it. If not then skip the politics and concentrate on running the business.

WalMart isn't forcing people to vote any certain way. They can't. That would be illegal. According to the original article, they're encouraging employees to vote and have distributed lists with the names of candidates who have attacked WalMart. I see that as every bit in line with unions telling their members to vote for certain candidates because they're for education.

Again, because you seem to have trouble with this, unions are the antithesis of corporations. Unions as doing for their members only what corporations do for their stockholders, maximize profit. They're different sides of the same coin. Unions are not a political organization first, and a business organization second as it seems you think. Exactly the opposite, modern unions are all about wages and benefits. Fighting against dying in coal mines and working 80 hour weeks in sweatshops happened many decades ago. Things have changed, and now it's all about dollars one way or the other. Corporations and unions are both fighting for dollars, there's no noble cause behind either of them. To say one should be able to throw their weight around politically and the other can't is disingenuous.

 

[dmcowen674]

This obviously means we have been getting ripped on prices:

11-21-2006 Wal-Mart cuts prices on food in half ahead of holidays

Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the largest seller of food in the United States, slashed prices on hundreds of grocery items on Tuesday, putting more pressure on traditional grocers just two days before Thanksgiving.

The prices of some items for Thanksgiving dinners are being slashed.

A six-ounce box of Kraft's Stove Top stuffing sells for 88 cents, down from $1.44 to $1.74 per box. A can of Ocean Spray cranberry sauce is now 88 cents, down from $1.14