Wal-Mart to Employees: Donate Food to Coworkers w/o Enough to Eat

case in point: Occupy Wallstreet had its headquartres INSIDE a famous German Bank on Wallstreet.

check this out.



THAT is what is really going on, right here, right now. we have a choice between communism or fascism both are forms of socialism.

well gee thanks mr socialists. : /

undo

bigfatfurrytexan

buster2010
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

Just that everyone has it in for Wal Mart, who seems to be the poster child for the hated corporation.

That happens when a company lives up to the nickname small town killer.

Every person who buys goods from Wal Mart is to blame for it killing small towns. Wal Mart doesn't kill anything. It is just the method of suicide that a small town may choose.

Who kills small towns? The people who live there.

nonsense. socialists kil businesses. they have so many regs and policies and taxes and special taxes, and permits and violations that they drive businesses out that aren't propped up by mega corp dollars. the socialists are working hand in hand with the globalist capitalists, who want complete say over everything. e.v.e.r.y.t.h.i.n.g

I don't disagree with this.

We were talking about Wal Mart being a town killer. And that the people make that decision by shopping at Wal Mart. People are town killers.

bigfatfurrytexan

undo

bigfatfurrytexan

buster2010
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

Just that everyone has it in for Wal Mart, who seems to be the poster child for the hated corporation.

That happens when a company lives up to the nickname small town killer.

Every person who buys goods from Wal Mart is to blame for it killing small towns. Wal Mart doesn't kill anything. It is just the method of suicide that a small town may choose.

Who kills small towns? The people who live there.

nonsense. socialists kil businesses. they have so many regs and policies and taxes and special taxes, and permits and violations that they drive businesses out that aren't propped up by mega corp dollars. the socialists are working hand in hand with the globalist capitalists, who want complete say over everything. e.v.e.r.y.t.h.i.n.g

I don't disagree with this.

We were talking about Wal Mart being a town killer. And that the people make that decision by shopping at Wal Mart. People are town killers.

but they wouldn't be if they had any other choices. but they don't because other businesses can't compete with their prices, propped up by mega corp dollars, while also struggling against the heaps of regulations and taxes and permits and oh my gosh it's ridiculous what businesses in america have to go thru now.

the reason why there's only a handful of capital globalists who win this scenario is because they will be providing everything for the countries in question, and the socialist governments will force their own citizens to work for them for free. why can't people get this thru their heads.

reply to post by MystikMushroom


Funny how that works...I detest Wally World than the next guy, but come on, where else am I going to find another Loki action figure?

undo

bigfatfurrytexan

undo

bigfatfurrytexan

buster2010
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

Just that everyone has it in for Wal Mart, who seems to be the poster child for the hated corporation.

That happens when a company lives up to the nickname small town killer.

Every person who buys goods from Wal Mart is to blame for it killing small towns. Wal Mart doesn't kill anything. It is just the method of suicide that a small town may choose.

Who kills small towns? The people who live there.

nonsense. socialists kil businesses. they have so many regs and policies and taxes and special taxes, and permits and violations that they drive businesses out that aren't propped up by mega corp dollars. the socialists are working hand in hand with the globalist capitalists, who want complete say over everything. e.v.e.r.y.t.h.i.n.g

I don't disagree with this.

We were talking about Wal Mart being a town killer. And that the people make that decision by shopping at Wal Mart. People are town killers.

but they wouldn't be if they had any other choices. but they don't because other businesses can't compete with their prices, propped up by mega corp dollars, while also struggling against the heaps of regulations and taxes and permits and oh my gosh it's ridiculous what businesses in america have to go thru now.

the reason why there's only a handful of capital globalists who win this scenario is because they will be providing everything for the countries in question, and the socialist governments will force their own citizens to work for them for free. why can't people get this thru their heads.

edit on 19-11-2013 by undo because: (no reason given)

No need to be rude, madam. Assuming a position of intellectual superiority is very unbecoming.

Larger companies leverage bulk buying power.

When Wal Mart moves into a town, there are plenty of other choice. Being from a small town with a Supercenter, I know how it works. You go to where the prices are lower. I don't shop at Wal Mart because HEB has better groceries for the same price. HEB isn't a really small company...but they certainly aren't Wal Mart.

All your other rant...sure. I guess. But you pulled something completely unrelated to what I was talking about and threw it in there like someone was missing your point.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


well that was my point (when i said, why can't people get this thru their heads, i meant those who embrace full out socialism. full out socialism only works for the handful of capitalists at the tippety top, and a few select politicians below them. that's why we're seeing them try to enforce horrible policies on everyone else while making themselves exempt. that is how socialism works. how they've (the socialists) pulled this off historically is to blame all the ill effects of their policies on all capitalists everywhere, while secretly supporting the richest capitalists in the world. it's a very evil partnership, it robs people of everything.

how that applies to stores like walmart is, that's the reason they are successful. let me give you an analogy. historically in the usa, business had to be grown from the roots up. it struggled to stay above water the first decade or so and if diligent and smart, would eventually succeed. but the socialists wanted to rid the world of the independent capitalist. why is that? because it was more money in the pockets of the already richest capitalist in the world who are their cohorts. it's all rigged. the socialists infiltrate the target country, particularly the universities and political stage, influence generations, create laws to squeeze out the competition and then make loop holes for their globalist cohorts.

reply to post by undo


I was going to reply to the thread in general but reading yours, I had to reply to you...

Fascism is the opposite of Socialism they are not synonymous... also there was no HQ for OWS. Some met inside an old bank, if you don't get the symbolism I don't know what to tell you.


Now to the thread. I haven't shopped in Wal-Mart in 3 years or better. They are toxic to our economy and our nation.

Daughter2

Bad Walmart math. First, Walmart made 15.7 billion dollars last year. If they gave everyone of their 2 million dollars a raise, they still have made 1.7 BILLION dollars.

And as for your hourly rate, most employees only work part-time. The extra 7,000 would raise their hourly to about $15.00 per hour.

If Walmart increases wages, it would force other places to kick up their rate too. From Target to fast food. Which would then trickle up to other professions.

People would have more money to spend and buy more which then result in Walmart's profits increasing.

Bad math on your part too. Assume 15.7 B of profit, 2.2 M of Walmart Employees, who work an average of 34 hours week , 52 weeks a year (anti Walmart website #'s
source). If you give each Walmart employee a $7,000 raise that would translate into a raise of $3.96 per hour for every employee. Doing the math you end up with 15.4 B of raise leaving only 300 million of profit left. I'm sure investors will be happy with a profit margin of 0.0671%.


Based on a average wage of $8.81 + the $3.96/hr raise you get a rate of $12.77.

$12.77 x 34 hours/wk x 52 weeks = $22,577 yearly salary for an Average Walmart Employee.

That puts a single person at just under 200% of the Federal Poverty Level or
Married couple at a 141% of the FPL or
A married couple with 2 kids is below the FPL by $973.

Even if you were to give almost ALL of Walmart's profits to their employees, you would barely be getting them over the Federal Poverty Level, in some cases, depending on family size, you wouldn't even do that.

Pretty sobering, isn't it?

Happy Thanksgiving, huh?

Kali74
reply to post by undo

 

I was going to reply to the thread in general but reading yours, I had to reply to you...

Fascism is the opposite of Socialism they are not synonymous... also there was no HQ for OWS. Some met inside an old bank, if you don't get the symbolism I don't know what to tell you.


Now to the thread. I haven't shopped in Wal-Mart in 3 years or better. They are toxic to our economy and our nation.

wrong, observe


Fascism borrowed theories and terminology from socialism but applied them to what it saw as the more significant conflict between nations and races rather than to class conflict, and focused on ending the divisions between classes within the nation

^ Griffin, Roger. The Nature of Fascism (New York: St. Martins Press, 1991) pp. 222–223.

it's the same dam thing. both forms of socialism use racism to get their way. in one glaring case ,the racism was used against the target population of jews. in the usa, its communist variety is used against the target population of whites. and as a result the other side is forming a sort of fascist front against it. it's two sides of the same socialist coin, choking the life out of the people

i saw actual footage of the ows headquarters inside the lobby of the deutsch bank.

undo
the reason why there's only a handful of capital globalists who win this scenario is because they will be providing everything for the countries in question, and the socialist governments will force their own citizens to work for them for free. why can't people get this thru their heads.

edit on 19-11-2013 by undo because: (no reason given)

Even in communistic USSR people were paid reasonable salary. Salaries were dependent on skills, although no one recieve very high salary. Nobody worked for free. For many older people currently living in Post-Soviet countries, during Soviet time they were able to afford significantly more. The food costs were incredibly low compared to salaries, there were no homeless people, as when somebody had no place to live government provided an apartment. Currently many older people have to starve more due to low salaries and high rent/food costs. Luxuries on the other hand - exotic foods, tech, clothes, cars, private houses cost incredibly lot. Of course there many very negative sides to the system and that is far from being a good working system, although certain ideas of it should be also applied in capitalism.

In Communism there were no corporations, just one large company called the country, who earned its budget from every financial activity in the country by owning means of production.

What you are referring to is the last phase of unregulated capitalism. At first free markets are good, as there are many companies competing, although in years when there are no competition some companies grow very large up to the point where for small new companies it is impossible to compete with them price-wise due to low revenue. The company who pays the least salary to its employees can afford signficantly lower prices than others -> wins.

if you don't get the symbolism I don't know what to tell you.

oh i get the symbolism alright. a bank, a wallstreet bank no less, allowed a bunch of protestors to congregate inside its building and set up a base station for directing the activities of their protestors. a bank.

let me repeat that, a bank. and not just any bank, but one of the big globalist banks.

reply to post by Cabin


not buying it.

for example, food prices were cheap because 1) they worked their farmers to the point of starvation and then starved them to death when they had nothing more to give, just ask the ukranians, and 2) they forced millions of their own citizens into labor camps to work for free, in some cases without even common humanitarian needs like food shelter medicine and clothing. lenin and particularly stalin, made hitler look like a cub scout and our own media didn't tell us a thing about it! it didn't come out until recently, and then only because it was too late as most people are flipping brain washed.

undo
reply to post by Cabin

 

not buying it.

for example, food prices were cheap because 1) they worked their farmers to the point of starvation and then starved them to death when they had nothing more to give, just ask the ukranians, and 2) they forced millions of their own citizens into labor camps to work for free, in some cases without even common humanitarian needs like food shelter medicine and clothing. lenin and particularly stalin, made hitler look like a cub scout and our own media didn't tell us a thing about it! it didn't come out until recently, and then only because it was too late as most people are flipping brain washed.

edit on 19-11-2013 by undo because: (no reason given)

My relatives were farmers there... They were forced to join the kolhozes, but what they paid for the milk/meat was more than currently the companies pay for. Although there were rules, a´la no one is allowed to have more than 2-3 cows etc. If you had more and government found out, you were punished etc. Farmers lived reasonably well though, better than small farmers do nowadays. For a months salary or sales of meat/milk, one at least my relatives were able to afford 1000 large meals (100 rubles was salary, 0,10 cost a meal) at cafeterias. That was very cheap. And that was low salary for a household. Electricity, oil, housing were without additional costs.

Labor camps existed as punishment. Like jails. Although yes, activists against the system were sent there. If you obeyed the authorities and did not talk back, you were not sent anywhere... No free speech.

reply to post by Cabin


stalin had a list everyday from which he would just pick 100 people at random to be sent the labor camps. often for no reason at all. just a human lottery. when the ukranians were starved to death, his lovely proletariat made bets on whether the traditionally religious ukranians would succumb to cannabalism to survive.

reply to post by undo


Stalin was evil, I agree. When the soviets came they sent over 30k people from this country to Siberia in animal trains, everybody who were considered a threat to system - smarter people/business owners etc.

Although I was not talking about Stalin period, WWII period. My relatives are not that old... Stalin died in 1953, if I remember correctly.Afterwards it was significantly softer - krustsov, breznev etc were not animals like him. There was strong propaganda and the system was corrupt and rigged, but the starving and gulags remain in the Stalin era during WWII after countries being just invaded (occupied).

I do not support the system or justify using it. Although certain elements from the system were positive and could easily be applied in capitalism as many countries in Europe, who have significantly more experience with USSR than US, are applying and using efficiently. Universal healthcare, social safety nets, taxing the rich is not communism... Corporations are product of unregulated capitalism. Currently its just the opposite end. People starve because of corporate exploitation not country one. USSR was raping the environment, now corporates do. Neither extremes are positive. Hybrid works the best. Corporates just the same as country itself should not have too much power.

Cabin
reply to post by undo

 

Stalin was evil, I agree. When the soviets came they sent over 30k people from this country to Siberia in animal trains, everybody who were considered a threat to system - smarter people/business owners etc.

Although I was not talking about Stalin period, WWII period. My relatives are not that old... Stalin died in 1953, if I remember correctly.Afterwards it was significantly softer - krustsov, breznev etc were not animals like him. There was strong propaganda and the system was corrupt and rigged, but the starving and gulags remain in the Stalin era during WWII after countries being just invaded (occupied).

I do not support the system or justify using it. Although certain elements from the system were positive and could easily be applied in capitalism as many countries in Europe, who have significantly more experience with USSR than US, are applying and using efficiently. Universal healthcare, social safety nets, taxing the rich is not communism... Corporations are product of unregulated capitalism.

you'd have to read the whole history of how it got to that point to appreciate what it all means. unregulated capitalism is a socialist policy because it only applies and benefits globalists. they deliberately kept their own investors out of the loop so they could steal all their investments. literally. this happened at the same time as the housing bubble burst, that was artificially created to break the backs of independent capitalism. what the socialists did was invite billions of people to take advantage of the housing bubble, knowing full welll they were going to pop it later, thus robbing moms and pops, grandmas and grandpas, of their entire life savings as bank after bank vaporized with all their money. this is the end game of socialism to break the back of the independent capitalist, not the globalist capitalists, who are their partners in crime.

some more numbers.

walmart executive compensation 2013

ceo- 20,693,545
vp- 6,638,670
vp- 14,457,122
vp- 11,221,797
vp- 9,563,093

total- 62,574,227 or the yearly wage of 2,844 employees.

they average 12 million a person.

now lets drop their wage to 750,000 average.

that frees up 58,824,227 or 2,673 additional employees.

so you see, taking from the top can benefit the bottom, and the top still makes out like bandits.

this is why walmart is the only gig in town



Ep2.


Ep3.


Ep4.

does anyone besides me think it a bit odd that hank paulson suddenly was concerned about going to congress for more bail out money when lehman brothers was crashing? he didn't want to ask congress for money to make sure billions of people all over the usa and the world, did not lose their life savings, businesses and retirement funds.. then, later, he went back to congress to ask for more funds to bail out the auto industry

now don't tell me that he suddenly grew a conscience and then lost again a few months later. that lehman bros guy is probably on a nice island in the caribbean living high on the hog on all the money they stole from the workers of the planet, including old people, retirees, single moms, single dads, etc. the sheer audacity and lack of human compassion socialism deploys in order to get its hands on the power of a country is unfreakin-believeable