Printable View
Tommy it is not a trick it is a way to do business. If you don't want to work at Wal-Mart nobody has a gun to your head. Many of those part timers are retirees anyway. Don't try to paint Wal-mart as this big bad thing for employees. Like I said there is no gun pointed at your head to work there. They are the same as any other big retail operation, my mother was an executive with TSS and they did the same thing and how long ago was that?Quote:
Originally Posted by t-bird76
I agree with Nick. I don't blame Walmart. We live in capitalism and if a company has a way to make more money, then that's the point.
The thing to do is to remove the incentive for companies like Walmart to do that, and to give decent-paying jobs to the Americans who need them.
Nick and Phil you both make one critical error in your statements about Capitalism. We do not live in a pure Capitalist society, our economy is regulated by the gov't therefore it is not a pure capitalist society.
Oh btw Nick your flip flopping. I said the same thing about the TSA, that no one is forcing them to stay at their jobs and you went on about how that was a thankless job, and that working with the public is hard and what not. Try to keep to one view.
There is a difference here that I really think the two of you need to do some research before making statements like "there is no gun pointed at your head to work here" and "if a company has a way to make more money, then that's the point. " In towns all over the Midwest where people have lived, raised a family, and worked all their life and all of a sudden bye bye Ford plant and now Walmart comes in and that's the only place hiring, where else do you go Nick? Please don't post that "oh you just move” That’s BS and something easier said then done. When there's only one company that's hiring you might as well have a gun pointed to your head if the you need to pay your mortgage.
Phil your statement lends the reader to believe you feel whatever a company has to do to make money they should be allowed to. Does that include changing accounting figures, moving operations overseas, incorporating overseas, and contracting out work to cheaper foreign labor? As I stated we do not live in a pure capitalist country, business has been and always will be regulated for the protection of the worker and society. Look back 120 years ago when we didn’t regulate company’s it wasn’t pretty.
There's also something called Social Responsibility that many companies follow, Walmart is not one of them or it doesn't appear so. Social Responsibility gives back to the communities they serve by helping the communities directly and also the workers. Many of Walmart's actions in the past 10 years have not been in favor of the community or the worker.
As far as saying Walmart is this big bad company, you know I believe they are, just like Ford, GM, Standard Oil, and the Railroads were in the early 20th century. Its narrow mined to believe a company can't employ modern day tactics to maximize profits at the expense of their people.
I don't shop at Walmart because of how they treat their people. Am I, one little person going to make a difference, no but it’s my principles and I stand by them. Will Walmart fail, no absolutely not. Sadly with all crap Walmart is dragging behind them, i.e. child labor in the Far East, lawsuits here for breaking workers rights they will continue to succeed. The mind of most American's towards Walmart goes something like this "oh that really is too bad.....WOW THAT'S A GREAT PRICE."
Walmart is an integral part of our economy but they need to be held to certain standards so that the people they serve are treated fairly.
You grouped outsourcing to cheap foreign labor with switching account figures? One is illegal, and one is very common practice. One is flat out wrong, and the other we just wish that they wouldn't do it.
No one wants our companies to go overseas, but it's allowed. And you're right, until regulation is made that forces them to dootherwise, it can be labelled only as something that sucks for middle class workers.
I know we live in a regulated system. And because of that, we need to create regulation that prevents companies from paying immigrants less, forcing them to choosed more skilled workers.
We're on the same page, but the fix isn't getting mad at Walmart. The fix is taking advantage of the fact that we need to create regulation to prevent thigns from happening that are currently very legal and not as unethical as you imply.
Tommy there is no flip flopping. These are two statements that are totally independent of each other. As far as the TSA my point had nothing to do with that. It had to do with your comments that insuated that the TSA was trying to hurt biz travelers. The TSA has nothing to do with this discussion. It is true that none of them are forced to work there and that their job is thankless. These are both facts but should be left in that thread. Has nothing to do with this.Quote:
Originally Posted by t-bird76
Tommy, these things happen. How about when IBM outsourced? Or the steel plants closed? Big companies go through growth and then go through cuts it's the way it is. So your saying that since Wal Mart is the biggest employer for a said geographical area that they have to hire all full timers? Do things a certain way? No they don't. They are not a bad company at all. As for your "just move" comment you may not want to accept this but sometimes you have to move to areas that have more potential for good jobs. You wouldn't understand this because we live in an area that for the most part if you are able bodied you can get a decent job to live on in a number of fields and companies. Yet someone in a town in the sticks has little or no oppurtunities. Why do people from the midwest move to LA or NY? It happens all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by t-bird
Tommy take off your "Walmart is evil" cape already. Do you have any idea how many companies use child labor from the far easy? Nike, Kathy Gifford and many others use it. It's no secret, to try to single out Walmart for using them is foolish. Walmart is not only about price but selection too. WalMart and Target are great stores and are for good reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by t-bird76
Acutely Phil to use Enron and WorldCom as examples some of the things they did were perfectly legal. What Enron did was to state sales for lets say the third quarter they felt were almost certainly going to be booked but weren't going to come in until the fourth quarter. What happened was some of those sales they put on the books never came through. So these companies were misstating facts and not going back and restating figures. It wasn't illegal then to state income you thought you were going to receive in one quarter for another quarter; the problem was it got out of control and collapsed on them. New rules and regulations now make that illegal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
This goes to your example that whatever companies need to do to make money they should. Should Walmart be allowed to do the same? Even if "TODAY" it’s legal. Not just to use Walmart as an example but your the big kid on the block your a target. In certain communities the gov't should force Walmart to provide "reasonable" benefits and wages to their people. Ok you can say Walmart will close up and move but I tend to disagree with that.
Any company that is making money and will still make money will remain. The long term affects also will be positive for them. If your paying more and giving your people a stake in the company loyalty will develop, turn over will go down, the community will embrace them, and sales will go up. If a company is to do business in a community they need to be a part of it. Employee locals, pay them a fair wage, and give back to the community.
But that's just it. Laws were modified and REGULATIONS were created to prevent this kind of thing from happening again. The men who did that are in jail now. Though what they did was unethical but 'legal' in that way, htye paid the price. I'd say the American people one in the end, no?Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
Not what I meant. Of course I meant that they should exercise what they can do, within the law and fair ethical standards. Don't liek what they are doing? Then a new regulation needs to be made to change that. That's all.Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
There's no comparing Walmart's giving jobs to immigrants or changing workers to part-time, to the action of Enron or Worldcom. Walmart's actions are widespread and practiced by many. THe thing is that if you don't like, then we just need regulation.Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
While your community argument is true, the same doesn't hold true outside of middle America. Big cities like NY and others have too many options for shopping as opposed to one big Walmart supercenter. The thigns that will get people in the stores, or more importantly, keep them out, are high prices which will come from higher costs of labor.Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
I agree with you that changing to part-time employmees is not in the BEST interest of the average job-hunting American. I don't think it's as crushing as you imply.
I don't think that what a lot of companies are doing and have done (like in all the Flint, Michigans around the US), are so cut and dry. It's not that unethical of them to move production to overseas. All I'm saying is that we just need to make regulations to prevent them from doing it in certain ways.
Nick I'm using Walmart as the example; I agree that other companies use child labor and other practices that are not ethical. Walmart is the most visible and easily used as the poster boy.
I think it’s very unethical of companies to move large groups of production over seas to save a buck or to. Eventually it’s going to come back around and slap you in the face. If your closing plants, call centers, and other employment centers you’re destroying your customer base. Do you think it’s unfeasible that the hundreds of thousands that have lost their jobs are willingly going to buy from those companies?
I think GM and Ford are a great example of this backlash. They moved so much production to Mexico their quality has fallen off because of cheaper production methods used across the boarder. The fact is they're not selling cars here in the U.S. Just the opposite though, Toyota, Honda, Nissan are selling cars. They use highly skilled workers in either Japan or here and people are buying their cars. How are they successful using Americans and their own countrymen to build their products and GM and Ford aren't?
Ford and GM were already sucking before they moved. Cutting production costs was the only thing we could still do to compete around here, even among our own people.
Remember our need for better engineers? IF we can't make a decent product, then it doesn't warrnat paying someone $38,000 a year to make it.
The hiring of part-timers isn't a Wal-Mart-centric idea. Many retailers, even those with, gasp, union representation, hire as many part time employees as possible. Yes, Wal-Mart is the biggest single private employer, but still many more people work for other companies than work for them.
The thing that worries me most is that much of the consumer spending that is occuring is being financed with credit cards. I think much of the gas price increase has been absorbed not by consumers shelling out more cash, but by filling up using 20% interest cards. In the long run this can turn out to be a bigger problem for the economy...some go as far as predicting a collapse of our banking system should some of the large banks who issue all this credit falter as their cardholders default on their payments. I'm not sure that scenario would be allowed to happen, but there will definitely be some long term consequences.
As for the new Dow record, here's a good piece about how meaningless it is. Basically the author (a Dow Jones employee, as am I) points out that the 30 companies in the DJI are hardly representative of the equities market or the economy. The S&P 500, on the other hand, which is a much better barometer of the market, is nowhere near its all-time highs.
Matt excellent point about credit card spending. This is going to be our Achilles heal. Our credit card spending is just beyond control. However the banks don't help. I can't tell you how many offers I receive in the mail. As a test once I applied for three credit cards and got approved for all three with very high spending limits, far higher then I could afford to pay off if I maxed them out. My question why is this allowed to take place? Again perhaps some kind of regulation needs to be put in place to control credit card advertising.