<<<<Now, I hope no one enters into the conversation saying that poor people who are ignorant high school drop outs or do other seemingly irresponsible things a lot of poor folk seem to do, are just lazy or stupid and deserve to make eight dollars an hour without affordable benefits. Because then we'll have to come to fisticuffs. >>>>>
Liz, I agree. I will help you throw an amputee at them too! You know, one of those guys that got hit by a car when he wasn't looking and lost a leg. On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:15 AM, Liz Purkrabek <[email protected]>wrote: > There are a lot of people who depend on their Walmart job to live. There > are a lot of high school drop outs (like myself once upon a time. Although > I never worked at Walmart.) and others who, for whatever reason (and often > that reason has something to do with the lack of opportunity and other > problems associated with poverty) are unable to get better jobs. > > > > Walmart uses these people who are already slaves to their poverty through > ignorance or a combination of other factors that serve to keep the poor > nearly locked into their station in society, and then makes it difficult for > them to earn much more than minimum wage. Slave wages really. > > > > The people you are mentioning have advantages that the folk I'm talking > about do not. The people you mention are educated and have the luxury of > investing an entire paycheck. This arrangement may work out for a few, but > what I'm saying is, once you're down (poor) Walmart is not interested in > helping you out. They are interested in keeping you on public assistance > and working for near minimum wage. > > > > Now, I hope no one enters into the conversation saying that poor people > who are ignorant high school drop outs or do other seemingly irresponsible > things a lot of poor folk seem to do, are just lazy or stupid and deserve to > make eight dollars an hour without affordable benefits. Because then we'll > have to come to fisticuffs. J > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of * > [email protected] > *Sent:* Sunday, December 14, 2008 10:03 PM > > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: WASHINGTON MUST BAILOUT RETAIL SECTOR > > > > *People who choose to make a career of being a WMT greeter or stock person > will go nowhere fast, that's for sure. No argument there. I don't > personally know anyone who has done that. The people that I know are > department managers at WMT and also school teachers who work there summers, > holidays and evenings. One guy is a Toms snack foods guy by day. One earns > his living with a landscape business and invests 100 percent of his WMT > income for retirement. Some invest their entire paycheck as they live on > their spouses income or the income from their full time job. People on the > floor only make I think about seven or eight bucks an hour. If you do that, > and are single and not in school you are screwed. People who choose to be > greeters or stock persons can not reasonably expect a lot from any non union > employer. These are decent positions for retirees and part timers who have > other jobs but suck as a persons chosen career. People stuck in a low > paying full time job have the option of doing what is necessary to advance > with the company or secure career training or schooling for a better job. I > can't imagine why someone would choose to live solely on Walmart greeter or > stock person income but I do see people who have benefited enormously from > WMT. I have a cousin who's husband worked for Milan Army Ammunition plant. > They lived on his income and insurance and such. As a full time "checker" > she invested 100 percent of her WMT income in WMT stock. At retirement she > had four million dollars of WMT stock. * > > > > *J.* > > > > > > Was this a greeter or a stock person? My husband made over a hundred > thousand a year until he lost his job fairly recently, and even investing > the maximum amount and being matched, he made nowhere near that kind of > money. > > > > I love you human, but I think that these examples are not representative of > the general Walmart employee's experience. > > > > liz > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of * > [email protected] > *Sent:* Sunday, December 14, 2008 6:29 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: WASHINGTON MUST BAILOUT RETAIL SECTOR > > > > *Some take full advantage of the match in funds that WMT offers and others > don't. Some ask that additional funds over and beyond the match be taken out > of their pay check and others don't. I have never been an employee of WMT > but I removed my forty grand after 7 years. Had I left it twenty years the > sum would have been a bit different. * > > *I know one WMT employee who quit so that he could get his match funds, > paid cash for a new home and new car, then went back to work for WMT. Every > story is different.* > > > > *J.* > > > "... On the other hand, Walmart sucks in obvious ways." - human > > Thanks for the bone human! Yes, I am shocked at your anecdotal story > of the person who 'amassed between one and four million dollars within > 20 years of employment'. The apparent variance of $3,000,000.00 is > puzzling though. > > On Dec 14, 1:48 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > Walmart helps this poor country boy save over one hundred USD per month. > > > Walmart employees who have taken advantage of WMT stock purchase options > and > > matches have perhaps done far better than Nieman Marcus employees. I > > personally know WMT employees who have amassed between one and four > million dollars > > within 20 years of employment. That doesn't include employee discounts > on food > > and such. On the other hand, Walmart sucks in obvious ways. > > > > J. > > > > Nieman Marcus pays it's employees, Wal Mart doesn't. The people at the > > top of Nieman contribute to the poor, the Wall family does not. etc. > > > > On Dec 14, 8:12 am, Clogtowner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - I think we've been down this road before about what the > > > "poor" do with their money. I don't for one moment believe we have a > > > fair system - life is not fair. Nevertheless, a poor person's vote > > > counts just as much as a wealthy one in the polling booth. Of course a > > > wealthy person voting with a wallet has more effect on companies that > > > go bust or surivie and this was the root of the debate. In the present > > > economic environment Nieman Marcus is feeling the pinch. Wal Mart are > > > doing very nicely thank you. > > > > > On Dec 14, 9:54 am, "Liz Purkrabek" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > No. It's not as small as you think, and even if it is small, how is > it a > > > > fair system when those most likely to benefit from enforcing a > change in > > the > > > > system are the least able to effect such a change? The neighborhood > I > > grew > > > > up in is typical of thousands of others across this country, and I > don't > > > > like the idea that it is somehow not significant that because their > > wallets > > > > are empty, they are powerless to "vote" with them. > > > > > > liz > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: [email protected] > > > > > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > > Clogtowner > > > > Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2008 9:40 AM > > > > To: Memphis Freethought Alliance > > > > Subject: Re: WASHINGTON MUST BAILOUT RETAIL SECTOR > > > > > > Hi y'all - I'd like to see an accurate figure for the percentage of > > > > the population who have no money and are therefore unable to vote > with > > > > their wallets. I suspect it would be rather small and entirely > > > > inaccurate. > > > > > > On Dec 12, 8:23 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > "... For me this is true democracy. I vote with my wallet. ..." - > clog > > > > > > > Typical...equating economics with governance! I know the media > keep > > > > > pummeling us with this notion, but, of course, they are two > entirely > > > > > different things. IF one even takes one second to consider the > people > > > > > who have no money, this becomes painfully clear. Of course, it is > all > > > > > too common to ignore or rationalize this truth. > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 10:10 am, Clogtowner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - yes I do like Wall St. and millions of stock holders. > For > > > > > > me this is true democracy. I vote with my wallet. If I don't > like a > > > > > > company (or a CEO) I'll sell the stock and if others do likewise > the > > > > > > value of the company will be diminished (unlike the Govt.) If we > had > > > > > > more stock holders, we'd have more democracy, and no, it doesn't > cost > > > > > > a lot - I can buy or sell any amount of stock for $7. There are > > > > > > brokers who help small investors get started by offering $4 > trades > > and > > > > > > they will deal in fractions of a share. > > > > > > > > On Dec 11, 9:00 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > "…If Govt. becomes involved in a business it necessarily sets > up a > > > > > > > huge bureaucracy in its own image to > > > > > > > run it. I've seen these grow from nothing - layer upon layer. > It > > > > > > > drains the economy slowly and exhaustively. I've never seen > one > > > > > > > function efficiently in the long term…" – clog > > > > > > > > > Yeh, sorta like Wall Street and millions of stock holders. > Talk > > about > > > > > > > a huge bureaucracy! And, the government claims to regulate all > of > > this > > > > > > > too!!! Capitalism bureaucracy built in it's own image for > sure. > > > > > > > Clearly, the 'economy', whatever anyone wants to mean by the > > term, is > > > > > > > drained fully by CEO's with BILLIONS of dollars in stock and > > having to > > > > > > > give additional profits to the stock holders. Anyone who wants > to > > buy > > > > > > > stuff has to pay so much more because of this grossly > inefficient, > > top > > > > > > > heavy and greedy system. > > > > > > > > > On Dec 11, 7:12 am, Clogtowner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - "First, 'the Govt.' (We the people.) can be in > any > > > > business > > > > > > > > 'we' want > > > > > > > > to be in. 'We' set it up that way. There is no 'should' > about > > it. > > > > > > > > And, 'we' in fact have little to no control over spending. > At > > least > > > > > > > > not directly. Also, there are no real 'strings' when it > comes to > > > > such > > > > > > > > things. If studied long enough, this will become obvious. > And, as > > > > > > > > contradictory as it looks, you now seem to think it is OK > for 'us > > ' > > > > to > > > > > > > > turn a profit! Strange! " > > > > > > > > > > Indeed I have only been in this country for 21 years but I > have > > > > > > > > studied the effect of Govt. ovwnership of business in the > Eastern > > > > > > > > Bloc, and I've seen the results. If Govt. becomes involved > in a > > > > > > > > business it necessarily sets up a huge bureaucracy in its > own > > image > > > > to > > > > > > > > run it. I've seen these grow from nothing - layer upon > layer. It > > > > > > > > drains the economy slowly and exhaustively. I've never seen > one > > > > > > > > function efficiently in the long term. > > > > > > > > We can't say what strings are attached to the Auto deal yet > as > > it > > > > has > > > > > > > > not been completed, but so far it looks more promising, from > a > > > > > > > > taxpayer point of view, than the Bank debacle. > > > > > > > > During the recent collapse of many banks the FDIC (and I > don't > > > > > > > > normally praise the Govt.) has done a fine job of ensuring > > stability > > > > > > > > and guaranteeing accounts. Note the difference in the UK > where no > > > > FDIC > > > > > > > > existed and we were treated to videos of Building Society > > customers > > > > > > > > lined up and screaming for their money. Eventually the UK > Govt. > > were > > > > > > > > forced to step in and offer their version of the FDIC. > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 10, 11:30 pm, ornamentalmind < > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > "Hi y'all - I can't agree with you on this. Neither the > Govt. > > nor > > > > the > > > > > > > > > whole citizenry of this country should be in the car > business. > > As > > > > the > > > > > > > > > Govt. controls the spending I have no objections to loans > in > > the > > > > > > > > > interest of the country with strings to ensure repayment, > and > > > > > > > > > hopefully, a profit. The Govt. does a good job of backing > up > > our > > > > bank > > > > > > > > > accounts FDIC (so far.) > > > > > > > > > I do agree about the banks. They should have been offered > the > > same > > > > > > > > > deal." – clog > > > > > > > > > > > Clog, I know you weren't born here nor are you old enough > to > > know > > > > what > > > > > > > > > all has transpired when it comes to such issues here in > the > > US. > > > > So, I > > > > > > > > > don't blame you much for being what appears to be quite > naïve. > > > > > > > > > > > First, 'the Govt.' (We the people.) can be in any business > ' > > we' > > > > want > > > > > > > > > to be in. 'We' set it up that way. There is no 'should' > > about it. > > > > > > > > > And, 'we' in fact have little to no control over spending. > At > > > > least > > > > > > > > > not directly. Also, there are no real 'strings' when it > comes > > to > > > > such > > > > > > > > > things. If studied long enough, this will become obvious. > > And, as > > > > > > > > > contradictory as it looks, you now seem to think it is OK > for ' > > us' > > > > to > > > > > > > > > turn a profit! Strange! > > > > > > > > > Anyway, no, the Govt. (We the people.) do not do a good > job of > > > > backing > > > > > > > > > up our bank accounts. Think "Savings and Loan Crisis'. The > > thing > > > > that > > > > > > > > > McCain was deeply involved in among others. > > > > > > > > > And, what is 'common knowledge' (about the banks) is in > fact > > not > > > > the > > > > > > > > > reality. IF one reads the 108 pages or so of the first > bank > > > > bailout, > > > > > > > > > what it said was that the banks should just take the money > and > > buy > > > > > > > > > other banks! It said nothing about helping people and > > businesses > > > > who > > > > > > > > > couldn't get loans. Look it up. Most of what is presented > on > > > > corporate > > > > > > > > > TV is half truths at best. At worst, much of it makes the > old > > > > USSR's > > > > > > > > > Pravda look like a comic book! > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 10, 7:25 am, Clogtowner <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - I can't agree with you on this. Neither the > > Govt. nor > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > whole citizenry of this country should be in the car > > business. > > > > As the > > > > > > > > > > Govt. controls the spending I have no objections to > loans in > > the > > > > > > > > > > interest of the country with strings to ensure > repayment, > > and > > > > > > > > > > hopefully, a profit. The Govt. does a good job of > backing up > > our > > > > bank > > > > > > > > > > accounts FDIC (so far.) > > > > > > > > > > I do agree about the banks. They should have been > offered > > the > > > > same > > > > > > > > > > deal. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 9, 10:49 pm, ornamentalmind < > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again, the notion of nationalization isn't being > > mentioned. I > > > > would be > > > > > > > > > > > for that. At least that way, 'we the people' would get > some > > > > ... > > > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -<BR > style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'> > > <BR > style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'> > > > > > -- gnothe se auton --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
