Walmart

Walmart Workers Revolt! (Workers Decline to Participate)

The anti-Walmart movement battles to protect Americans from cheap groceries.

|

As American consumers officially kicked off their holiday shopping today, anti-Walmart activists staged what was originally billed as a day of mass employee revolt at the world's largest retailer, a time for store associates to walk off the job "in protest of Walmart's continuous acts of retaliation against those of us who speak out for better pay, affordable healthcare, improved working conditions, fair schedules, more hours, and most of all, respect."

OUR Walmart, which organized the protest, claims today's action was a wild success. Based on the swarm of media attention, they're right.

But there was one thing largely missing that, one might argue, every employee walkout kind of needs: employees.

According to the Bentonville-based company, roughly 50 people who are actually on Walmart's payroll joined today's "walkout" nationwide. The protest organizers say "hundreds" participated. Even if 1,000 took part, that's still less than 1/10 of 1% of Walmart's 1.4 million associates.

Seems strange then that, according to organizer OUR Walmart's website, the group speaks for actual Walmart employees. In the "About Us" section of its website, this not-for-profit describes its mission as follows: "We envision a future in which our company treats us, the Associates of Walmart, with respect and dignity. We envision a world where we succeed in our careers, our company succeeds in business, our customers…" (Italics mine.)

OUR Walmart was listed as a subsidiary of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCWU) in a 2011 Department of Labor filing. While the union disputes that the two organizations are one and the same, one thing is certain: The organizers of today's protest represent not Walmart employees, but employees of grocery stores that compete with Walmart.

Back in April of 2011, when I attended a handful of anti-Walmart protests in DC and NYC, almost every person in attendance seemed to be directly affiliated with the UFCWU. Many protestors were UFCWU members employed by unionized grocery stores. Some candidly admitted they were motivated by the fear that Walmart, which has become the world's largest grocery seller because its food prices are about 20% cheaper than the competition, will cost them their jobs.

As Nick Gillespie and I argued in our April 2011 Reason TV story, while the anti-Walmart movement claims to be about helping Walmart employees get better health care, improved working conditions, higher pay–not to mention preventing our children from the temptation of petty thievery–it's really primarily about stopping the threat of cheap groceries–the same ones that go a long way towards helping cash-strapped Americans put food on the table.

To watch Reason TV's "War on Walmart," click here.

And if you're aching to hear an encore of the grocery workers union's rendition of Otis Redding's "Respect," here you go:


NEXT: New Taxes Await Online Holiday Shoppers

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Looks like Walmart’s employees are smarter than Hostess’.

    1. If memory serves, Walmart is non union. Ergo, much smarter.

  2. While the union disputes that the two organizations are one in the same

    Wait, is that the correct version or the incorrect version? I can’t even tell anymore!

    1. Anyway, next time I’m at WM I’ll check if my favorite cereal is really “20% cheaper” there.

  3. I will NEVER shop at a Walmart again. I REFUSE to do business with a company that abuses its employees by putting profit before family!

    http://www.Max-Privacy.tk

    1. Good for you, AnonBot!

      If you want, I’ll help you in your Shopping for Social Justice crusade by giving you a list of brands to avoid because they’re connected to the Koch Brothers!

      1. Hmmm, there’s … ummm …

        Nope, no companies organized around the principle of not making profits.

        1. But, Chick-Fil-A, they put family before profits.

          That’s why they’re closed on Sundays!

          1. No, they are religious fanatics who put getting into heaven before profits, just like some BWMs (Brain Washed Mormons).

            1. RELIGIOUS FANATICS! They close on Sundays! They must be some sort of crazy brainwashed fundamentalists! HOW CAN THIS BE THAT THERE ARE BUSINESSMAN WHO HAVE PRINCIPLES BEYOND MAKING AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE

              1. Damn them AND Hobby Lobby!!!!!

                1. Hobby Lobby sucks balls for a host of reasons, none of which have to do with it being run by Xians.

              2. Being delusional does not equate to being principled.

                1. Actually, yes it does. Both ways. Believing in principles is delusional.

                  Of course, considering our options in life are delusion, rank hedonism, or suicide, there’s nothing wrong with being deluded.

                  1. “Of course, considering our options in life are delusion, rank hedonism, or suicide, there’s nothing wrong with being deluded.”

                    Everybody’s hedonistic, and every action is self-interested. You have no choice. The only question is whether or not you’re deluded, and delusion is the root of all evil.

                    1. Jumping on a grenade is self-interested?

                      And yes, I’ve heard people try to redefine “self-interested” to include such acts, but that’s seriously begging the question.

                      Leaving aside, of course, the distinction between self-interest and hedonism, which implies complete subserviency to one’s physical desires.

                    2. “Jumping on a grenade is self-interested?”

                      Usually, the opportunity to jump on a grenade is the better option. Standing close enough to a grenade to jump on it means you’ve likely had it anyway, so why not be a hero while you get blown up.

      2. Are the leftists still boycotting Whole Foods because Mackey came out against Obamacare?

        1. Humason| 11.24.12 @ 11:11AM |#
          “Are the leftists still boycotting Whole Foods because Mackey came out against Obamacare?”

          If they ever did, it never showed in WF’s revenue.

    2. I’m sure all the Walmart shareholders are crying all the way to the bank over not having one whiny leftard spammer bitch in their stores.

      -jcr

    3. It appears that you may have to buy a farm to raise your food stuffs since all companies put profit first. For without profit a company can not exist.

    4. Go ahead and spend more than you need to get your goods. That will leave you poorer and with less money to promote your causes. Come to think of it, your family will suffer too.

      So you put your cause and your family after your support for unions.

      Perhaps you should put your family before your union.

      But, in your defense, if you’re in a union shop, you might have been forced by government (if you wanted to keep your job) to join (which seems unlikely due to your position). More likely, you’re about to lose your job with your grocer who’s going under thanks to competition from Walmart. And having been a union employee, will find you can’t get a job. I wouldn’t hire a former union worker myself.

  4. Really hate WalMart’s “ambiance”. Really love WalMart’s “prices” for some things. Just bought our Christmas tree and bunch of other shit there – best prices, everything we need.

    Our local one doesn’t have very good produce, so we still shop at the local grocery for most of our food. But for other “commodity” type things (motor oil, filters, artificial Christmas trees, lights, Stouffer’s for the Man Cave, etc.) it just can’t be beat. Fuck it – I’m shopping there.

    Knowing it pisses off unions just makes it more worthwhile.

    1. I think it depends on which Wal-Marts you go in. I live in Alabama, and the Wally Worlds down in Hoover are like a poor man’s Target or Publix, while the ones in Florence and Muscle Shoals are like a rich man’s K-Mart.

      (The one in Iuka, Mississippi is like a rich man’s Piggly Wiggly [shudder].)

      1. No doubt. While working in Cleveland (and living alone in the Man Cave during the week) the last three years, the WalMart right up the street was the only thing that made sense for pretty much all my food and most of my furnishings and stuff. Nicer than the one here, for sure.

        They didn’t have produce, but literally everything else I bought at WalMart unless they didn’t have it.
        It only made sense economically.

        My “special” forays the the expensive local Heinen’s grocery for their epic $14/lb porterhouse a couple times a month made the otherwise-constant diet of Stouffers, Banquet and Messican food tolerable ๐Ÿ™‚ Heinen’s was the SHIT, and one of the things I miss about getting transferred back to MI.

        1. I never thought I’d say this, but I do feel a little homesick for Tarzhay, hell even a Wal-Mart Superstore with all of its mostly cashier-less checkout lines would be nice.

          The main supermarkets where I am are SPAR, Metro, and Fozzi Grupp stores.

          At least stuff here has real sugar and very little, if any, HFCS products.

          1. You know what Ukrainian supermarkets are? Sitting ducks. Road apples. Walmart is going to put the hurt on Ukrainian supermarkets.

        2. I refuse to believe there is anything edible in Cleveland that can remotely be called mexican food.

    2. Knowing it pisses off unions just makes it more worthwhile.

      It’s icing on your 20% cheaper cake.

      1. I’m sure we’ve all seen this around, but it seem pertinent at the moment:

        http://www.seriouseats.com/200…..lmart.html

        1. A brief visit to the Cake Wrecks blog will confirm that there are incompetent cake decorators everywhere.

          But for some reason it’s supposed to be more fun to make fun of the ones at Walmart.

          I really get the impression that most if not all of the Walmart hate is class signalling: it’s shopping for the Snooki Class. Walmart hate is much like the hate directed at Four Loko a few years back.

          1. A brief visit to the Cake Wrecks blog will confirm that there are incompetent cake decorators everywhere. But for some reason it’s supposed to be more fun to make fun of the ones at Walmart.

            Right, but this cake was (supposedly) made at Wal-mart, making it topical to this thread. And it’s one of the funnier examples out there.

            My disdain for Wal-Mart has mostly to do with the people they staff their stores with, at least where I live. And while we don’t have any Snooki types where I live, the people that shop at our Wal-Marts are people who I wouldn’t choose to associate with once I walk out of the store. I live in the south, so I’m sure you can imagine the types I’m talking about.

            Where I live, we’ve got a Super Walmart right across the street from a Super Target. Nine times out of ten, I’ll go to the Target. And I’ll gladly admit, that has a lot to do with the people I’m surrounded by while I’m inside.

            1. Thanks Karl, now I really feel homesick. -(((

              1. Thanks Karl, now I really feel homesick. -(((

                Are you somewhere where there are no Walmarts, or no rednecks?

                1. Are you somewhere where there are no Walmarts, or no rednecks?

                  UKR, and there is no Val’Mert here, but Donets’k oblast has its own version of stereotypical yokels; Odessa not quite so much.

                  Metro, which is a German owned chain of Wal-Mart/Target type supermarket/dept. store (though a little bit more upscale), is quite popular here nationwide. Which is not surprising, since the Krauts are one of UKR’s main trading partners, along with China and Russia.

                  Interesting that Wally World did try to crack the Russian and UKR markets awhile back circa 2007ish and did not meet with much success, probably because Wal-Mart Epic FAIL’ed when they cracked the Kraut market and found Der Krautsters liked neither the business model nor the corporate culture of Wal-Mart. Shoppers there also did not like the store presentations, even with their low prices and emphasis on volume sales and found it unappealing.

                  Even with a strong presence in both CAN and BRA, I guess Wal-Mart is not compatible with Euro-landia style Socialism for some reason.

                  1. UKR, and there is no Val’Mert here

                    That’s quite the move! I’ve never been to Ukraine, but I know a lot of people from there. Are you learning (or already fluent in) Ukranian, or is Russian mostly spoken where you are?

                    Even with a strong presence in both CAN and BRA, I guess Wal-Mart is not compatible with Euro-landia style Socialism for some reason.

                    Walmart has always struck me as a uniquely American institution, so I guess it’s understandable that they might have difficulty getting a foothold in Europe. And from what I’ve read, German workers are well-paid, so that right there might make Walmart and Germany completely incompatible with one another.

                    1. Are you learning (or already fluent in) Ukranian, or is Russian mostly spoken where you are?

                      Demonstrable fluency in Russian, which is spoken mostly in eastern UKR and Russified western cities. Ukrainian was a pain to learn and I barely passed my fluency exam; my main concern was being able to read and write it. Fortunately, laws were recently passed so Russian is officially acceptable for medical records, official documents, government business, court proceedings, etc. Last year, the UKR government re-issued passports to its citizens with their imja, ochestvo, and familija with UKR equivalents and the Russian, Bulgarian, Belarussian and other groups had a collective conniption fit over it. It would be like immigrants coming here and their names being changed to American or Anglicized equivalents.

                      German workers are well-paid, so that right there might make Walmart and Germany completely incompatible with one another.

                      Pretty much, and Germany by law grants a lot of paid holiday, with working hours shorter than stores in the USA. I believe they were also pressured to allow unionization, but not sure on that one.

                  2. I guess Wal-Mart is not compatible with Euro-landia style Socialism for some reason.

                    Wonder why? (sarc)

                  3. Shoppers there also did not like the store presentations, even with their low prices and emphasis on volume sales and found it unappealing.

                    Even with a strong presence in both CAN and BRA, I guess Wal-Mart is not compatible with Euro-landia style Socialism for some reason.

                    I think the first statement answered your second one. If a corporation wants to branch out overseas, a little market research might have allowed them to tailor the stores to the tastes of the consumer base.

                    1. Shoppers there also did not like the store presentations, even with their low prices and emphasis on volume sales and found it unappealing.

                      Really? I don’t understand how Wal-Mart is fundamentally different that the Tescos and Carrefours that dot the landscape of Eurolandia.

            2. yes, god forbid we don’t get the gratuitous cheap at southerners, because the WMs everywhere else only attract the finest in shoppers.

              1. yes, god forbid we don’t get the gratuitous cheap at southerners, because the WMs everywhere else only attract the finest in shoppers.

                I am a southerner, so it would make little sense for me to denigrate southerners as a whole. I just don’t relate very well to the whole confederate flag, pickup truck, Hank Williams Jr, types that pack my local Walmart at all hours of the day. If that’s some sort of cheapp shot, or if it makes me some sort of snob, then so be it.

                1. It comes across as snobbish – but I don’t think you are a snob, at least from what I have read here.

                  1. but I don’t think you are a snob, at least from what I have read here.

                    Karl is good people, LTC John…even if he has photographic evidence of both sporting a mullet and overly tight shorts and polo shirt. -)))

                    1. Karl is good people, LTC John…even if he has photographic evidence of both sporting a mullet and overly tight shorts and polo shirt. -)))

                      Hey, that was on college, and it was only once!!

                  2. It comes across as snobbish

                    I can see why i comes across that way. And i would be snobbish if I were from, say, California or New England. But I live deep in the south, and I’ve been immersed in all things redneck for most of my life.

                    My right to disdain that culture has been well-earned ๐Ÿ˜‰

                    1. Pickup truck, confederate flag, Hank Williams Jr. etc. There are loads of people in California who fit that description. CA is chock full of rednecks.

                2. I just don’t relate very well to the whole confederate flag, pickup truck, Hank Williams Jr, types…

                  You’ve insulted my peeps.

              2. Redneck is a state of mind, not a place of residence.

                1. Redneck is a state of mind, not a place of residence.

                  Agreed. I am in the geographic ground zero of all things redneck, but I have yet to be assimilated into the culture ๐Ÿ™‚

                  1. I actually meant it the other way round, that you can find rednecks anywhere; I moved from East Tennessee to Minnesota, and I was surprised at how many rednecks there are up here. But it works your way too. ๐Ÿ™‚

                    1. I moved from East Tennessee to Minnesota

                      Culture shock much? ๐Ÿ™‚

                      I bet it’s beautiful up there though, at least spring through fall . . .

                    2. you may be conflating rednecks with white trash. They are not the same. People with pickups tend to have jobs, are typically not societal leeches, have all manner of motorized toys, and are generally good people who would help you if you needed it.

                      White trash, well, tend to be the opposite of rednecks in all the wrong ways. Typical clues are an unfamiliarity with shampoo, the dangling cigarette, bad tattoos, way more skin than anyone wants to see, and vehicles held together by duct tape. Up North, they’re known as Snooki, as you pointed out. Down South, the names are less noticeable but the uniform is unmistakable.

                    3. Up North, they’re known as Snooki, as you pointed out. Down South, the names are less noticeable but the uniform is unmistakable.

                      I think you nailed it right there – regional dialectical differences. Where I live, “redneck” is a pejorative and is most often used in reference to what you’ve described as “white trash.” I have lots of friends who drive pickups and have all manner of motorized toys – but they’ve also got the good jobs that let them afford these toys.

                      If you haven’t seen it before, Google “Walmart Bingo” – it’s hilarious.

                    4. “Down South, the names are less noticeable but the uniform is unmistakable.”

                      That may be true for male white trash names, but the female ones are pretty standard down here in Florida:
                      Misty, Charity, Crystal, Brandi, Dawn, Destiny, Amber. Basically, anything that sounds like a stripper’s stage name.

            3. And while we don’t have any Snooki types where I live, the people that shop at our Wal-Marts are people who I wouldn’t choose to associate with once I walk out of the store. I live in the south, so I’m sure you can imagine the types I’m talking about.

              I didn’t know you hate black people. :-p

              Seriously, though, even though I’m not a southerner, something has long bothered me about how it’s socially acceptable to denigrate southern culture in a way would cause the supposedly tolerant metropolitans to have an apoplectic fit if it were done to a lot of other cultural groups.

              1. I think some of it has to do with the persistent “States Rights” myth. If the antebellum South had cared a rat’s rear-end about States’ Rights they would have recognized the rights of the Northern States to confiscate contraband that crossed their borders. Instead they pursued the Dred Scott case and others that ‘returned’ slaves to their owners.

                Even people who haven’t thought this through are at least vaguely aware that talk of States’ Rights being involved in the Civil War is hogwash, and that an awful lot of Southern culture involves pretending that owning slaves and tolerating slaveowners were not wrong. Furthermore the passel of Intellectual Lefties that imagine that they run things are deeply racist, always have been, and desperately need to distract people from this, so they attack racism elsewhere.

                Now, Northern Culture also has its share of humbug. And Southern culture has its merits. But you asked why Southern culture gets it in the neck, and I think this is the answer.

            4. the people that shop at our Wal-Marts are people who I wouldn’t choose to associate with once I walk out of the store

              Maybe I missed something. Aren’t you one of the people that shop at “our Wal-Marts”?

    3. There are all sorts of legit reasons to argue against MNC’s taking over neighborhoods; first among them the impact on local small-businesses.

      That being said, the irony is that as a small-business owner, Wal-Mart offers decent and sometimes excellent prices for my daycare for certain items.

      If I was stuck going to “daycare specialty” places, it would cost me substantially more. Jesus, Target sometimes has Crayola at .49 cents.

      Gold.

      That being said, I’m not sure I’d tolerate a bunch of hipster doofuses entering my store ponding on tam-tams bothering patrons. I’m all for protest but they should have been forced outside. That Wal-Mart tolerated this is quite impressive. If it would be me, I’d be tempted to go all Sonny in that scene in A Bronx Tale when the mobsters beat the shit out of the bikers.

      Now youz can’t leave.

    4. I LOVE the company. Wrote a lot of papers while getting my bullshit MBA, and my favorite topics were McDonald’s, Southwest Airlines and Wally World. The strategy they used to gain market share over K-Mart was ingenious as was there logistics system.

      My wife doesn’t like using the store here in Great Falls, however. The length of the checkout lines drive her nuts. She’s complained to management who’ve told her they’ve been trying to hire for months and can’t find people willing to work. I guess the 99 months of unemployment is more appealing. I notice there are people in the parking lot begging for cash at every exit though. I’ve been tempted to pick them up an application.

      1. Interesting Francisco.

        I made a similar point down the threads. People don’t grasp successful formulas.

      2. have you ever noticed how the signs of those begging for cash tend to be both grammatically correct and exhibiting good penmanship?

        1. have you ever noticed how the signs of those begging for cash tend to be both grammatically correct and exhibiting good penmanship?

          Ummm….no?

      3. their

        fuck

  5. Yeah, I had a fairly heavy presence in this thread earlier today:

    http://community.seattletimes……ction=DESC

    There were a few people with me there, but the derp is strong. Be warned.

    1. Since you’re not SugarFree, I looked.

      “Wages are, in part, a moral issue.”
      Um, no. Kthxbai

      You did warn me…

      1. Um, no. Kthxbai

        Yes, they are, you idiot. If you have the ability to pay your workers a living wage but pay him less in order to maximize profit, you are doing something grossly immoral.

        1. since you managed to work in the “ability” part, I am disappoint that there was no follow up with “means.”

          1. He had nothing but his commnet chains to lose?

        2. Nope. If you pay your workers more than their market value, you’re doing something grossly immoral, since you’re discouraging people from using their talents in the most socially beneficial way possible.

          1. If you pay your workers more than their market value, you’re doing something grossly immoral, since you’re discouraging people from using their talents in the most socially beneficial way possible.

            If you feed the hungry, you’re doing something grossly immoral, since you’re discouraging genetic fitness in the human race.

            (YOU HAVE AUTISM)

            1. (YOU HAVE AUTISM)

              You’re an idiot.

          2. Don’t respond to Red T o n y, KPres, he’s just a troll.

        3. Doesnt trolling get boring after a while RS?
          Dont you ever get the urge to say something that isnt completely stupid?

        4. Okay, Mary. Derp.

        5. Yes, they are, you idiot. If you have the ability to pay your workers a living wage but pay him less in order to maximize profit, you are doing something grossly immoral.

          You are a mouth-breathing, Mongoloid cretin.

          Here’s something you can understand, since it’s in the form of a cartoon: Edgar the Exploiter.

        6. What’s a “living wage”?

          Americans really are pathetically spoiled. You (Rick Santorum) live in the most prosperous nation on Earth, and what you consider a “living wage” is no doubt an amount that can purchase what in the past would have been considered excessive and ludicrous amounts of objects for one’s own self-gratification. Yet you not only demand that unrelated parties satisfy this capricious and completely arbitrary level of accumulation — regardless of whether you’ve provided value commensurate with that level of compensation — you also claim it to be the moral position! For a neat hat trick, you also support policies (protectionism, closed borders/immigration) that prevent people living in *actual* poverty from improving their lot by benefiting others in this country.

          You are a moral midget without the intelligence to realize it. Don’t ever forget that.

          1. Amen brother!

          2. What’s a “living wage”?

            The capacity to afford basic necessities (including health care) without relying on government assistance.

            1. Basic necessities are dirt cheap in America in 2012, though your friend Bernanke and the farm subsidy/ethanol machine are doing what they can to change that.

              I have a feeling that by “basic necessities” you mean what’s needed to support a typical middle-class lifestyle in 2012 America, not just what’s needed for survival. In which case you can go pond sand.

              1. Basic necessities are dirt cheap in America in 2012

                Thanks to government zoning, not always true. Housing is artificially scarce.

                Even in a place like Detroit, I can get a property for pennies, but not a govt. issue C.O.

                I would not be suprised if the city required me to pay union scale for the repairs.

            2. How about ya get two jobs if you need it, ya lazy fucking pussy.

        7. Would the opposite be true? If you had the ability to work more than 40 hours a week and the ability to live on less than 40 hours a week wages, is it immoral to get overtime?

          If you ask for a raise, but you have the ability to live on your present salary, is it immoral?

          And if you can get higher wages elsewhere, is it immoral to quit?

          1. I doubt RS is going to respond to this sort of question.
            RS is an emoter, not a thinker.

    2. It puzzles me how the Seattletonianshireanstanis believe they are on the side of the “common man”, but express sentiments that they would NEVER work at Wally-world or that they would only work there as a last resort. They seem to look down their noses at people who stock and price merchandise, unload trucks, clean floors and bathrooms, and cashier as if these hard-working people were out on the street shaking a cup, turning tricks for pocket change, or living on the dole.

      Who are the real elitists here?

      1. Well said. And they also seem to have no problem with dictating the wages that businesses have to pay their employees. As if they should have any say in that.

        1. I agree. I’ve known honorable people who lost their jobs and gladly took jobs as janitors. They did what they had to do. One guy told me it was simply to lead his son by example.

          These guys are special. I’m not sure I’d be able to. I did take a courrier job before I started my business.

          Youz gotta do whats you gotta do and these protestors don’t want to. Instead, they want the “right” conditions to grace us all with their superior visions.

    3. “What needs to happen is that Crime needs to become a respected profession. That way their could be a code of honor among the professional criminals. One good rule for the code would be “only harm the wealthy”. Another rule would be “know your target so as to protect the innocent”. A few years of crime as a respected profession and all of the sudden wages would increase, and there would be a job for everyone.

      Full employment in decent jobs, at decent pay defeats crime every time.”

      Wow. Yes, you did warn me Sage. That little gem has me wanting to start drinking at 10 am.

  6. I’m generally a fan of WalMart, but from what I’ve heard from employees there are some systemic problems in how employees are treated by management. For example, an employee might ask for a specific date off months in advance, but will not receive any word on whether they will actually GET that day off until a week prior. This makes it difficult to make any plans.

    Supposedly these decisions are made by individual managers, but one would think the company could make it a policy to make such decisions (and make them firm) within a certain number of days, so that employees can make plans without fearing for their jobs.

    1. That’s shitty management, and it happens everywhere, not just WalMart.

      If that’s the worst they’ve got, they don’t need to worry about becoming organized any time soon.

      1. Yeah…in a company that large, it’s going to be difficult at best to maintain standards across several thousands of stores and millions of employees. You can’t stay on top of every single one of them, and people being people there’s going to be a distinct number of managers that are incompetent and/or jerks.

    2. If Wal-Mart really treated their employees worse than everybody else as you claim, you would expect Wal-Mart wages to be higher than similar retailers, since they would need to pay more to attract workers into their poor working environment.

      Since that’s not the case, and Wal-Mart actually pays the same as everybody else, it means either one of two things…(A) Their working conditions are the same as everybody else or (B) They hire the people that other places don’t want, people that would otherwise be unemployed or in an even lower-paying field.

      1. No, you idiot, it just means that people are desperate for jobs and are willing to work for shit.

        1. So if Walmart didn’t exist, those people would be even worse off?

          If you’re as altruistic as you claim, you should be happy that Walmart is around.

          1. We’ve pointed out wrt auto bailouts that if a company no longer exists, others expand and/or form to fill the unmet demand. If Walmart did not exist, these people along with customer demand would end up at Target, Sears, Kmart, etc.

            They would not be better off. They would not be worse off. They would just have a different logo on the paycheck.

            Free markets, how do they work?

            1. So you’re saying those people go to Walmart over other businesses for no reason? That’s willfully ignorant.

              If their employees could easily get a better job somewhere else, they likely would already have done so. If they’re continuing to work at Walmart, those other stores probably don’t offer a better deal for them.

              As for customers, they go to Walmart because it’s cheaper than other places. They would also be worse off if Walmart went out of business.

              Logic, how does it work?

              1. So you’re saying those people go to Walmart over other businesses for no reason?

                I’ve re-read my comment carefully. I have not said that at all. Thank you to the other commenters for not putting words in other’s mouths.

                If their employees could easily get a better job somewhere else, they likely would already have done so. If they’re continuing to work at Walmart, those other stores probably don’t offer a better deal for them.

                Agree with you on all points there. In turn, you must agree that in Walmart’s absence they would seek employment from the store with next best terms. They may very well be worse off. The compensation of others is not my concern

                As for customers, they go to Walmart because it’s cheaper than other places. They would also be worse off if Walmart went out of business.

                I agree with the first sentence. Not the second. If Walmart goes out of business, it means they have been out-competed by stores offering even better value. In which case I will be better off. That’s how logic works in a free market.

                1. I’ve re-read my comment carefully. I have not said that at all. Thank you to the other commenters for not putting words in other’s mouths.

                  You explicitly say:

                  They would not be better off. They would not be worse off.

                  Don’t claim you didn’t say that, because that’s exactly saying there isn’t anything better or worse about Walmart, therefore they are going there for no reason. Now you say:

                  They may very well be worse off.

                  Don’t imply I’m putting words in your mouth, when you can’t even get your own opinion straight.

                  If Walmart goes out of business, it means they have been out-competed by stores offering even better value.

                  OR it means that Walmart did worse for themselves. If they’re going out of business because of that, and not because their employees and customers choosing other stores, then those employees and customers will be worse off.

                  The compensation of others is not my concern

                  Then don’t offer contradictory claims about who will be better or worse off.

                  1. Hi Darius!

                    The 900 character limit forces a brevity(I miss Hercule Savinien Triathlon) on all of us that can cause misunderstanding in both directions. The words in mouths statement was solely in reference to “So you’re saying those people go to Walmart over other businesses for no reason?” Didn’t say that.

                    For the record, I believe customers go to Walmart to save money and live better. Sincerely.

                    I understood “those people” to mean Walmart customers not employees. Did you mean employees also? I’m asking.

                    I’m concerned about WM customers because I am one. I’m not concerned about WM employees because I’m not one.

                    My lack of clarity, apologies.

                    1. OR it means that Walmart did worse for themselves. If they’re going out of business because of that, and not because their employees and customers choosing other stores, then those employees and customers will be worse off.

                      Again, the 900 character limit prevents my comments from speaking to all scenarios. But this is a good point you raise.

                      If WM does “worse”(Are you speaking of management here? I’m asking.) it would seem to me that they are being out-competed by other store managements by default. But not because the other stores were getting better. They simply would have become better by standing still.

                      But I don’t believe there is anything magic about WM that cannot be replicated.(uh, is there?) Sam started with one store.

                      In a free market, and granted we don’t really have one, what is to stop someone else from applying the same formula for success?

                    2. They simply would have become better by standing still.

                      “They” references other stores, not Walmart.

                    3. It’s okay. It seemed to me to be a logical inference from the points you made. If that’s not what you meant, then that’s that I guess.

                    4. Sorry about the misunderstanding.

            2. Well, in most places, I agree some other entity would fill the role formerly occupied by WM, but there’s no guarantee the replacement would be as good at that role as WM is. None of the places mentioned offer the value ratio that WM does now, and I’m not sure how they could suddenly do so with WM gone.

              1. I agree with everything Humason says here. No other store is offering the sort of value that Walmart does.

                And I do not see Walmart going out of business any time soon. But if they do, it will only happen when a new competitor offers even better value to the consumer.

        2. “No, you idiot, it just means that people are desperate for jobs and are willing to work for shit.”

          Except for the guy with the tin cup in the parking lot of WalMarts.

        3. The Walmart in the places I’ve lived does hire people who are unfit to get a job anywhere and then they teach them manners, how to work, and how to be positive.

          In my view that is a very good thing. However that also means that new hires are often rude, nasty, and lie to the customers so they don’t have to do their job properly. It takes a while for them to behave like productive adults.

        4. Rick Santorum| 11.24.12 @ 3:45PM |#
          “No, you idiot, it just means that people are desperate for jobs and are willing to work for shit.”

          IOWs, idiot, they’re are worth what the market pays for those skills.

  7. OT Watching practice for Grand Prix do Brasil. Is there anything (mechanical – not Lobster Girl) nicer looking than a Ferrari F1 car? Fuck me those things are cool. I really loved the ones from the 70’s when Niki Lauda and Carlos Reutimann were driving, but even the moderns ones are just swanky.

    I hate the parade that F1’s become in the last couple days, and never watch the races and more, but the cars are still cool as hell.

    Bet not a lotta WalMart empls attend F1 races. RAISE THEIR WAGES, GODDAMNIT!

    Carry on.

    1. This is the best season in years.
      It’s a parade if Maldonado doesn’t take out half the field into turn 1

    2. OT Watching practice for Grand Prix do Brasil. Is there anything (mechanical – not Lobster Girl) nicer looking than a Ferrari F1 car?

      The very first time I ever sat down and watched the Monaco Grand Prix, I instantly lost whatever shred of respect I had for NASCAR as a sport.

    3. To answer your question: yes! The most beautiful man-made things on earth or wooden sailboats……

      1. “are”

    4. Ferrari is the greatest sports car entity in history.

      My friend worked at Marinello and for the F1 team. The Ferrari culture is something to behold. When you walk into a Ferrari show room it’s like “cue Angelic music.”

      1. More like Handel’s Messiah. -D

        1. Maybe the Ode to Joy portion of Beethoven’s 9th.

    5. Is there anything (mechanical – not Lobster Girl) nicer looking than a Ferrari F1 car?

      Yes, there is: any F1 car built before 2012. I’ve never been a fan of McLaren, but they currently have the prettiest cars because they didn’t opt for the ridiculous platypus nose this year. The current Ferrari is the ugliest car Ferrari has ever made.

    6. Hell yes, just off the top of my head…

      F-22
      F-15 E with conformal fuel tanks
      F-18
      F-14
      Mig 29
      SU 35
      Typhoon
      Grippen

      ..etc

      Say what you want about their usefulness for anything but killing people but there ain’t much prettier than modern Jet Fighters.

  8. Have a girlfriend who works at a Kroger. You know what those “living wage” unions do? They take a huge chunk out of her check. What does she get in return you ask? A minimum wage paycheck and no benefits.

    She gets to subsidize the benefits of those who decide to work 5 years and make a career out of it though. Lucky her.

  9. Is it worth watching the flash mob video?

    1. Depends. Are you into slam dance head butting?

    2. A couple of the chicks with spaghetti straps forgot to shave. As in, they look like they’ve got Buckwheat in a headlock.

      1. There are Germans in DC?

    3. Is it worth watching the flash mob video?

      Take a sense of entitlement and victimhood and set it to music. If that’s your thing, then you’ll love this video. But I’m guessing that’s not your thing, so you probably won’t get much from it.

  10. Employee or no, we all pay for Walmart’s low prices, with Medicaid and food stamps and periodic unemployment compensation for Walmart workers. By some accounts this adds up to over $400k per store, per year.

    Walmart is a not a champion of free enterprise, they are a beneficiary of corporate socialism.

    1. I’m sure those mom and pop shops are just hiring by the dozens and giving real living wages…

      A low paying job is better than no job.

    2. Over ten percent of the country is on food stamps. Don’t try to pin that shit on one company.

      Walmart is a not a champion of free enterprise

      Who claimed that we are in anything approaching a “free enterprise” system? You could make a fortune being an expert in the laws walmart has to operate under.

      1. Sage, I see one of the freak shows with whom you were arguing in your local rag has shown up.

      2. The state is much more efficient at creating a dependent underclass.

        At least Wal-Mart pays you.

    3. “Employee or no, we all pay for Walmart’s low prices, with Medicaid and food stamps and periodic unemployment compensation for Walmart workers. By some accounts this adds up to over $400k per store, per year.”

      What would we do without all that Chinese labor? We have to do something to keep all those union scumbags in check.

      The unions have already chased all the manufacturing out of the country and into China–now they want to destroy the retailers who sell those products, too?

      The unions won’t be satisfied until they turn the whole country into a shithole like Detroit.

      1. Over ten percent of the country is on food stamps. Don’t try to pin that shit on one company.

        Walmart receives 25% to 40% of all food stamp spending.

        The unions have already chased all the manufacturing out of the country and into China–now they want to destroy the retailers who sell those products, too?

        If only Americans were willing to work for $.50 an hour, then we wouldn’t have to outsource!

        1. “Walmart receives 25% to 40% of all food stamp spending.”

          Derp, derp – direct subsideeee?! So now you want to tell the EBT crowd where to buy food? “OK, since you are having trouble affording food (by our rigorous government standards) here, have a card – now go to the place that charges 20% more than Wally World, so that you can buy less!”

          Please be a parody and I just missed it.

          1. Its name is “Rick Santorum”, of course its a parody.

            1. Its name is “Rick SantorumMary Stack”, of course its a parody.

              FIFY

        2. “Walmart receives 25% to 40% of all food stamp spending.”

          1) Am I supposed to believe that statistic just because you say it’s so?

          I don’t.

          2) If bigger unions at Wal*Mart were artificially inflating the cost of the food stamp program for taxpayers, why would that be a good thing?

    4. Exactly, which is why it’s hilarious the left hates it so much, because it’s a prime example of why government’s shouldn’t have so much power, it simply uses the power to give taxpayer money to favored corporations.

      Laws meant to regulate commerce always end up helping those companies with political connections

      With that said, their prices aren’t always so great. On some things they are really cheap, but others, not so much.

      And the quality of their own lines of products – clothing, shoes, furniture, is terrible. Shopping there for food and name brand items is okay, but I wouldn’t buy much else there.

      1. ^^
        Yes.

      2. I’ve checked a number of product prices at the local Wal-Mart versus neighboring stores. They often aren’t any lower, and most of the ones that are lower are only a few cents less. Some are actually higher. Also, the Wal-Mart didn’t carry as many generic versions of OTC drugs, so some customers who regularly use those drugs could save a lot of money by buying the generic at another store.

        They also do stuff like make it look like things are on sale when they never charged the “full” price, and no one else charges that much, either.

        A lot of the genuinely good deals (which never seem to last very long) are probably loss leaders to get people into the store so they’ll buy other stuff, too.

        1. So don’t shop there. I don’t give a hoot.

        2. But the Austrian question you should ask isn’t what those prices are in relation to the neighboring Wal-Mart, but what they would be in the absence of Wal-Mart.

          I won’t pretend to have read anything to substantiate that point. And the loss-leader point is a valid one.

    5. Logic’s not your long suit, sparky. You assume with no evidence that if the handouts were removed, that Walmart would have to raise their wages by an equivalent amount.

      -jcr

      1. They would have to, or else their workers would die, you idiot.

        1. Yeah, because people were dying in the streets left-and-right back when Kennedy was president.

          1. Comparing the economic situation of Americans now to the economic situation of Americans in the ’60s leads me to believe you’re retarded.

            1. You’re right: Food and other essentials are more easily produced and are overall cheaper now than they were during the 60’s. So again, if people weren’t dying of starvation in the ’60s, when food was more expensive, and there were no food stamps at the time, then how in the hell can you argue people would starve without them today?

              People can live on less than Walmart provides. No one would starve to death, no matter how much your argument relies on the idea that they would.

            2. When has there ever been mass starvation in US history?

              1. Besides the 30s, before the New Deal fed the masses by landfilling millions of pigs and chicken?

                oh. Right.

        2. Do you actually believe that?

          -jcr

    6. “Employee or no, we all pay for Walmart’s low prices, with Medicaid and food stamps and periodic unemployment compensation for Walmart workers…

      Walmart is a not a champion of free enterprise, they are a beneficiary of corporate socialism.”

      You moron, that’s not corporate socialism, that’s just socialism. Wal-Mart doesn’t benefit from that, since all of their competitors get the same thing.

      1. All their competitors DON’T get the same thing, they lobby for, and often get, tax breaks for opening up a store in a neighborhood where the local politicians go for it.

        THAT I object to. No tax break for mom and pop store, no tax break for WalMart.

        1. Tax breaks are always good. For some, for all, for one, for any. Anything, ANYTHING that keeps money/resources out of the hands of Leviathan is a Good Thing.

    7. Walmart lobbied for a raise in the minimum wage a few years ago precisely because of this – they are tired of dealing with food stamps and gov’t forms of payment.

      Of course, I favor a raise in the minimum wage anyway, coupled with a large cut in corporate tax rates. It’s the only “stimulus” that might actually work.

      1. Walmart lobbied for a raise in the minimum wage a few years ago precisely because of this – they are tired of dealing with food stamps and gov’t forms of payment.

        They probably lobbied for it because they were already paying people the new minimum wage, and wanted their competitors to be forced to follow suit.

        Of course, I favor a raise in the minimum wage anyway, coupled with a large cut in corporate tax rates. It’s the only “stimulus” that might actually work.

        Right, because creating unemployment, which is all the minimum wage does, is the greatest form of “stimulus”.

        1. If wealth can be created by decree, via the minimum wage statutes, why not make the minimum wage $200/hour? Seriously, why not?

    8. Spokanite| 11.24.12 @ 12:56AM |#
      “Employee or no, we all pay for Walmart’s low prices, with Medicaid and food stamps and periodic unemployment compensation for Walmart workers. By some accounts this adds up to over $400k per store, per year.”

      I’ll bet the one doing the ‘accounting’ here is the one who finds the defense dept budget higher than medicare, am I right?
      ———————————
      “Walmart is a not a champion of free enterprise, they are a beneficiary of corporate socialism.”

      So get rid of the government programs, idjit.

      1. My thoughts exactly. Yet the Left will wail to the heavens if you suggest that. They’re the ones perpetuating the corporate welfare.

  11. Employee or no, we all pay for Walmart’s low prices, with Medicaid and food stamps and periodic unemployment compensation for Walmart workers.

    And that’s Wal-Mart’s fault how? End the Fed, fractional reserve lending, and the gargantuan regulatory state and watch poverty drop like a rock. Anything else is just pissing into the wind.

  12. Costco and Target treat workers much better and remain profitable, and cost the public less money in the sort of indirect support that Walmart receives. There are other models, even under our labor laws.

    Spending your money is a kind of voting, you are choosing the kind of society you will live in. I prefer one with some dignity for workers. You may feel otherwise, and you have a right to do so. But this Walmart boycott is what a moral awakening looks like.

    1. “Costco and Target treat workers much better and remain profitable, and cost the public less money in the sort of indirect support that Walmart receives.”

      How much public support does the UAW receive?

    2. “Costco and Target treat workers much better and remain profitable, and cost the public less money in the sort of indirect support that Walmart receives.”

      How much do government employee unions cost the taxpayers in direct support?

    3. Costco and Target treat workers much better and remain profitable, and cost the public less money in the sort of indirect support that Walmart receives.

      Hey look, a completely unsupported, nonspecific statement!

      1. He wants to jack up the cost of shopping for poor ass Wal*Mart shoppers–in order to save the taxpayers a few bucks?

        He must be part of the 12%!

        http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01…..union.html

        1. You really hate poor people, don’t you? There will come a day when you go hungry, and I can’t wait.

          1. As God is my witness, I’ll never go hungry again!

          2. Do you imagine unions make life easier for poor people?

            How does artificially inflating the cost of labor make things less expensive for poor people?

            How does pricing unskilled labor completely out of the job market make life easier for poor people?

            Poor people are the primary VICTIMS of unions. Do you imagine poor people can call up the UAW if they want a job?

            The real unemployment rate hovers around 45% in Detroit–becasue no one can afford to hire those people at union wages. That’s because of the union monopolizing access to the industry. The unions should be ashamed of what they do to poor people!

            I hate poor people? I hate unions for what they do to poor people! You’re hilarious.

            1. Rick Santorum hates poor people that don’t belong to a union. That’s why he wants to drive down their wages and drive up the cost of living for them.

              1. And do you know how hard it is to get into a union like the UAW?

                Poor people should organize and picket every UAW office around the country!

                Unions are helping poor people–how?!

                By excluding them from industries that need low skilled labor–so the unions own members will be paid more?

                By artificially inflating the cost of shopping at Wal*Mart?

                How do unions help poor people?

            2. To add to Ken’s reply…

              Poor people shop at Walmart. Inflating labor costs means the increase is passed on to the customer.

              Why do you hate poor people, Frothy?

            3. Do you imagine unions make life easier for poor people?

              Nah, unions like the UAW are corrupt.

              How does artificially inflating the cost of labor make things less expensive for poor people?

              It doesn’t, but it ensures that poor people make more money. Since we still see grossly inflated prices on goods from companies that have offshored their goods, we know that cheap labor doesn’t equate to cheap commodities.

              How does pricing unskilled labor completely out of the job market make life easier for poor people?

              Poor people are the primary VICTIMS of unions. Do you imagine poor people can call up the UAW if they want a job?

              You seem to be under the impression that I think that unions are all roses. All I’m saying is that you’re full of it when you say that unions cause outsourcing.

              1. “It ensures that poor people make more money.”

                No it doesn’t. It insures that more poor people are unemployed.

                Hostess was a great example of that attitude. The unions don’t care about how many unemployed people they price out of the market–so long as the wages of the people who remain in the union are artificially inflated.

                “All I’m saying is that you’re full of it when you say that unions cause outsourcing.”

                If you don’t think a once heavily unionized high wage manufacturing base was among the primary reasons why manufacturing fled the United States for low wage countries like China, then I don’t know what to say.

                It wasn’t enough for manufacturers to pay a fair wage–the wages had to be artificially inflated by way of a union. …and now those jobs are gone.

                1. +1 econ101

                  1. There’s also the stupendous strawman belief that we need to directly compete with Chinese wages and to do so we’d need to lower wages to 50 cents without unions.

                    We don’t actually have to compete with Chinese wages since a lot of companies would prefer having their factories closer to their consumer base by having them in America.

                    Wages don’t have to be on par with China to compete, they just have to be less artificially inflated so that business owners will stay here to take advantage of all the other benefits of producing in America.

                    1. Exactly correct iggy. Our wages don’t need to be the same as the Chinese. Just low enough so American labor is less than Chinese labor + the logistical costs associated with doing business overseas.

                    2. It’s actually more complicated than that, since the productivity of an American worker is, on average, currently higher than a Chinese worker.

                    3. “Wages don’t have to be on par with China to compete, they just have to be less artificially inflated so that business owners will stay here to take advantage of all the other benefits of producing in America.”

                      What is happening is the same thing that happened in Germany and Japan, post WW11 and other Asian nations there after.
                      Our wages didn’t drop; *their* wages rose.

          3. You really hate poor people, don’t you?

            Yup

            There will come a day when you go hungry, and I can’t wait.

            Nope.

            1. Honestly, I’ve been working since I was 14 years old.

              The thought that a union was the solution to my problems when I was poor never once crossed my mind.

          4. What percentage of poor people belong to a union? What percentage of poor people buy groceries?

            Who’s the one who really hates poor people?

    4. I prefer one with some dignity for workers.

      Dignity is a personal matter. Either you have it or you don’t.

    5. Costco and Target treat workers much better and remain profitable, and cost the public less money in the sort of indirect support that Walmart receives.

      [[citation needed]]

      If you really want to get down to brass tacks, Walmart has done more good for this country than any other business simply by keeping inflation down. Their drive to keep prices low means others have to keep theirs low as well to compete, and it keeps the overall price of goods from growing larger than it would otherwise. This allows for a much more comfortable lifestyle for everyone, from minimum wage employees on up.

      I’ve also never seen any convincing evidence that Walmart pays a lower salary than industry average. Maybe their employees get a bit less than their union goon brethren, but since they don’t have to pay ridiculous union dues they probably come out at parity or perhaps a little bit ahead.

    6. Great, and people in the retail field are free to work at such places instead.

      Having worked in the field in the past I can tell you that ultimately, most places that Wal-Mart competes with are going be rough to work at. Low pay, with less than desirable hours and benefits. These aren’t difficult jobs that require high-end labor to perform, and the compensation is always going to reflect that.

    7. Costco and Target treat workers much better and remain profitable…

      Target pays lower wages on average than WalMart.

    8. Then don’t shop at Walmart. Nobody is forcing you from shopping there, or preventing you from shopping somewhere else. Just do me a favor and be a nice lad and return the favor, would you?

      I’ve been around a while, and I’ve had my share of shitty, suck-ass jobs. You know what I do (did)? I look for another fucking job. If you don’t like stocking shelves, learn a skill that is in demand.

      1. I’ve been around a while, and I’ve had my share of shitty, suck-ass jobs. You know what I do (did)? I look for another fucking job. If you don’t like stocking shelves, learn a skill that is in demand.

        FTW. It’s my life, and I just can’t comprehend the mindset that says “I’ll wait for the government to improve my lot in life”. To borrow a phrase from Captain Mal, that’s a long wait for a train that don’t come.

        Besides, if I don’t care enough about my life to take care of it, how can I loudly insist that somebody else is obliged to?

        1. On Obama’s plantation all jobs are for life and no one ever advances.

        2. Besides, if I don’t care enough about my life to take care of it, how can I loudly insist that somebody else is obliged to?

          YES!

      2. “If you don’t like stocking shelves, learn a skill that is in demand.”

        But…if they learned a skill that was in demand, that would lower salaries of rich people in a socially beneficial way! They prefer fighting inequality in a socially damaging way.

    9. “Costco and Target treat workers much better and remain profitable”

      Uh, Costco and Target only exist because of Wal-Mart. They fill the high(er) end niche, and pay people more so they can attract better employees and provide better services.

      1. Uh, Costco and Target only exist because of Wal-Mart. They fill the high(er) end niche, and pay people more so they can attract better employees and provide better services.

        The first part isn’t actually true. If somehow all WalMarts magically vanished tomorrow, Costco and Target would scoop up some of those customers, along with every other retailer with lower-priced goods, in a market share feeding frenzy.

        Everyone in retail who wants to stay in business now knows how WalMart got such a huge market share. If WalMart somehow vanished overnight, a bunch of entrepreneurs would try to recreate that formula for getting insanely wealthy via exploiting a market niche.

        Usually I shop at Costco, sometimes at Target or Ross or WalMart. Depends on what I’m looking to buy and which store selling the goods I want offers the lowest costs of driving to it plus the time spent getting in and out of the store. None of those companies owns my patronage.

  13. “50 people who are actually on Walmart’s payroll joined today’s “walkout” nationwide. The protest organizers say “hundreds” participated. Even if 1,000 took part, that’s still less than 1/10 of 1% of Walmart’s 1.4 million associates.”

    You left an important statistic out, Epstein.

    Tens of millions of Wal*Mart shoppers all over the country dwarfed the walkout protestors today. Because they care more about saving a few bucks for Christmas than they do about stupid union theatrics.

    1. “Wal*Mart shoppers all over the country dwarfed the walkout protestors today”

      Possibly, the overwhelming bulk of the Wal-Mart employees came to the stark realization that being assaulted, shot, stabbed, maced, pummeled, or trampled for standing between fanatical shoppers and their discounted Xboxes just to piss and moan about unionizing to them (on behalf of their competition) was not as healthy nor as easy as simply ringing them up, and getting paid to do it. Wally world employees (and their partners) just want to make it home at the end of the night.

      1. That might hold water if today were somehow special.

        Fact is that tens of millions of Wal*Mart shoppers have been ignoring calls for unionization at Wal*Mart for years and years–because they care more about taking advantage of everyday low prices than they do about union theatrics.

        That’s the great thing about markets–they’re much better than representative democracy in that people get to represent themselves in the market. They vote with their dollars–and they don’t have to wait to do it once very four years. They do it every day!

        You don’t need pundits or exit surveys to figure out what Wal*Mart shoppers care about or don’t care about. You just look at Wal*Mart’s sales. Wal*Mart’s sales numbers–that’s what really represents the will of the people. Not Congress. Not Barack Obama. Not the United Food and Commercial Workers Union. In markets, people get to represent themselves–individually.

        That’s why unions hate free markets so much.

        1. First, we don’t have a free market, we have a sort of corporatism (or state-corporate capitalism), with government interference in the market on behalf of the rich, such as the owners of Wal-Mart. (The corporation receives ridiculous amounts of corporate welfare.)

          Second, there’s a problem with the old metaphor of voting with your dollars: inequality. You can’t pretend that market decisions somehow democratically add up to the “will of the people”, when some individuals have billions more votes than others.

          Third, so far as people representing themselves individually, if that’s what you want, you can start by abolishing corporations. Wal-Mart isn’t an individual, after all, but a legal fiction, a “collectivist legal entity”.

          1. Second, there’s a problem with the old metaphor of voting with your dollars: inequality. You can’t pretend that market decisions somehow democratically add up to the “will of the people”, when some individuals have billions more votes than others.

            Voting in government elections is about as unequal as possible. If I vote, it doesn’t matter at all — what other people want is what happens.

            Voting in a marketplace is as fair as possible — I vote for what I want, and then I get exactly what I want as shown by my revealed preference. The whole fucking point of markets is that they don’t “democratically add up” — individuals get what they want, not what 50.1%+ of other shoppers want.

            1. To protefeed, I like that response. I’ll buy it!

          2. Yes, they call it “rent seeking” here and the prime example are the Koch Brothers who lavish pols with palm grease to obtain favors.

            1. The libertarians of the world don’t care about such things. They are interested in defending corporate power and greed at any cost. Walmart could hire slave drivers to whip their employees the libertarian response would be, “Psh, Walmart offers me low prices, and part of that is encouraging their employees to work hard. If they don’t like it, they can get another job.”

              1. “The libertarians of the world don’t care about such things. They are interested in defending corporate power and greed at any cost.”

                I suspect you need to go look up ‘libertarian’. We will wait.

              2. Walmart could hire slave drivers to whip their employees the libertarian response would be, “Psh, Walmart offers me low prices, and part of that is encouraging their employees to work hard.

                Which libertarians defended battery?

              3. Walmart could hire slave drivers

                So WalMart employees are slaves now?

                1. Funny, I thought the greeters at the door were there to say hi to customers and catch shoplifters, not prevent employees from quitting their jobs and leaving the premises.

              4. “Walmart could hire slave drivers to whip their employees the libertarian response would be, “Psh, Walmart offers me low prices, and part of that is encouraging their employees to work hard. If they don’t like it, they can get another job.”

                Unlike, say, the US Military, which kills their employees.

                Of course, Wal-Mart could never whip their employees, nor would they, since if they did, nobody would work for them and they’d go out of business.

              5. Why do you hate poor people Rick Santorum?

              6. They CAN get another job!

            2. Porca putana. Encora questo culo-plug con gli fratello Koch.

              Ma va!

            3. Is there a left-wing shibboleth that Shreek will not recycle?

            4. “Yes, they call it “rent seeking” here and the prime example are the Koch Brothers who lavish pols with palm grease to obtain favors.”

              LOL Kochtopus ™, that never gets old…
              Oh, and…Booooosssshh!

              1. You think Kochtopus is old?

                It’s still capping on Sarah Palin.

            5. Citation for this Koch brothers slander, please?

          3. Second, there’s a problem with the old metaphor of voting with your dollars: inequality.

            The socialist obsession with inequality is infantile. Inequality is great. It’s what makes life worth living.

            We’re all equal in the grave. Until then strive for excellence not equality.

          4. ” such as the owners of Wal-Mart. (The corporation receives ridiculous amounts of corporate welfare.)”

            Cite?

            1. A 2004 study tallied up over $1,000,000,000.00 in government subsides to Wal-Mart of various kinds. Unfortunately, the link is now broken, and Wayback doesn’t have it.

              1. So, you can’t find a single link anywhere on the internet to back up your assertion?

                Are you claiming that you’re incompetent at googling, or that your recollection is wrong?

              2. Unfortunately, the link is now broken, and Wayback doesn’t have it.

                Well, isn’t that convenient.

              3. Dan Clore| 11.24.12 @ 11:32PM |#
                “A 2004 study tallied up over $1,000,000,000.00 in government subsides to Wal-Mart of various kinds.”

                I didn’t ask for your opinion, idiot.

              4. How much of this was actual, real subsidy and how much was “we won’t steal as much from you”?

          5. “You can’t pretend that market decisions somehow democratically add up to the “will of the people”, when some individuals have billions more votes than others.

            Non-sequitur.
            If a good costs $3 at one store and $2 at another, the number of dollars I have is irrelevant.
            Unless you believe I would by a billion of that good to game the system. In which case, please drop by and watch me swim in my pool of money.

          6. “First, we don’t have a free market, we have a sort of corporatism (or state-corporate capitalism), with government interference in the market on behalf of the rich, such as the owners of Wal-Mart.”

            Wait. I thought the problem with Wal-Mart was the everybody that works there gets welfare and medicaid? I guess it’s hard to keep your story straight when you’re just making stuff up.

          7. “First, we don’t have a free market, we have a sort of corporatism (or state-corporate capitalism), with government interference in the market on behalf of the rich, such as the owners of Wal-Mart. (The corporation receives ridiculous amounts of corporate welfare.)”

            I didn’t say we did–I said there’s a reason why unions hate free markets.

            There’s a reason why unions love trade protectionism. There’s a reason why unions love market barriers. There’s a reason why unions love heavy regulation. There’s a reason why unions try to monopolize an industry’s access to labor.

            And there’s a reason why shoppers continue to shop at Wal*Mart despite whatever protests unions have directed at Wal*Mart over the years.

            Whatever consumers decide to do with their money every day–within the constraints of an unfree market–reflect what they actually care about. …certainly better than voting once every four years. …certainly better than any union represents them. And if consumers choose to save a few bucks at Christmas–despite some stupid union protest–it’s becasue they care more about saving a few bucks than they do about some stupid union.

            What people actually do with their money is certainly more indicative of what they want than either a) who they voted for or b) what some stupid union says consumers want.

          8. “Second, there’s a problem with the old metaphor of voting with your dollars: inequality. You can’t pretend that market decisions somehow democratically add up to the “will of the people”, when some individuals have billions more votes than others.”

            If you’re suggesting that the cost of unionization to the many consumers will always outweigh the benefits of unionization to the few who are in the union? Then I’m gonna say you’re absolutely right!

            The benefits of the many being able to enjoy a higher standard of living because they don’t have to pay for artificially inflated union salaries will always outweigh the benefits to union members of being artificially overpaid–just because there will always be so many consumers and so few union members…

            …and that’s without taking any other factor into consideration.

          9. Second, there’s a problem with the old metaphor of voting with your dollars: inequality. You can’t pretend that market decisions somehow democratically add up to the “will of the people”, when some individuals have billions more votes than others.

            Yeah…it’s the rich spending their billions of votes in Walmart.

            You’ve defeated your own argument, idiot.

      2. Possibly, the overwhelming bulk of the Wal-Mart employees came to the stark realization

        … that any WalMart store that unionizes will be closed permanently, and all the employees will lose their jobs. And, unlike the workers at Hostess, they made a rational decision about what was in their best interests.

        1. Or maybe that the union will take a significant bite out of their paychecks and offer nothing in return except a hostile work environment.

          Several of my kids friends have done short stints at unionized grocery stores, quitting quickly because of the union stealing their money (their words) and the overly structured work place with rules about which box you can and cannot move etc.

        2. Happened in Quebec. A few years ago Wal-Mart wanted to open in Northern Quebec where unemployment hovers around 20%. Before they could open idiots were angling to have a union.

          Wal-mart left. No jobs for a poor part of the province.

          1. “No jobs for a poor part of the province.”

            And the consumers in that part of the province lost access to every day low prices, too!

            And that’s what an increase in the standard of living is all about:

            1) Being able to buy things you couldn’t afford before.

            2) Having more money left over after buying what you need.

          2. The Left loves poor people. It’s why they make so many.

            1. And keep them poor. Otherwise our resident lefties would have no reason to exist.

  14. “That might hold water if today were somehow special.”

    Certainly…I was being cynical in that last post, in response to the final part of your post. If memory serves me correctly, union membership and new union formation in the PRIVATE sector is way down, and only a shell of what it was back in the union heydays of the late 50’s through the mid 70’s. I recall reading some statistics on that a while back, somewhere, but those statistics included traditional union bastions such as UAW/IBEW/Teamsters as well. I would imagine that corporate migration to R.T.W states, and beyond our national borders have hastened that trend.

    1. Private sector unionization is down to 6.9%, which is at the low point for the last century.

      Dunno if that includes the Hostess layoffs.

  15. I think people come to the false conclusion that, since Walmart is so cheap, they must be paying their employees less. Actually, Walmart has such a large distribution that they are able to negotiate with their vendors for lower wholesale prices. I think it was Sony that refused to do business with Walmart for years because Walmart wanted to sell their products for less. But even Sony realized that what they lose in margins, they make up for in volume.

    1. Another large part of their ability to provide low cost shit is their super efficient distribution system. They get it done with fewer trucks. You pay less.

    2. WalMart is absolutely BRUTAL with their vendors. They have people with decades and decades of experience in manufacturing and can tell within a half a percent what your margin on a product is. And they are not at all shy about asking for a whole freakin lot of it, either.

  16. Latest lefty ‘big idea’ is that if we mandate higher wages to retail workers, they’ll become solid middle class citizens and spend more at retail places and pay more taxes. [ignore all unintended consequences]

    And don’t worry, the big guys can afford it.
    http://www.demos.org/publicati…..overall-ec

    1. What’s a 2.1% tax increase? It’s only $203 a year!

      Is another one of their irrational takes.

    2. Can’t pay any taxes when you don’t have a job, which is exactly what would happen to these people if the gov’t mandated higher wages.

      1. That’s not the ‘latest lefty’ idea. They were saying the same thing during the depression when they assumed that artificially increasing the cost of farm goods would mean farmers have more money, which would lead to them buying more stuff, which would lead to good times for everyone!

        Unintended consequences, yada yada yada.

  17. But this Walmart boycott is what a moral awakening looks like.

    A moral awakening consists of a handful of union organizers failing to get actual workers to walk off the job?

    What does moral napping look like?

    1. I rathe rimagine it is a moral awakening, just not in the direction the union bosses desire(d).

  18. “if you’re aching to hear an encore of the grocery workers union’s rendition of Otis Redding’s “Respect,” here you go”

    Demanding respect is the infallible sign of not deserving it.

  19. I’ve been working for them for a year. I just now got insurance even though I am part time. That they actually thought I was going to work for 12 hours on Thanksgiving, they were out of their fucking minds. But they don’t care. 48% of the profit is split by the 7 remaining surviving waltons. 2011 profits were 15 billion. Not bad for doing nothing but choosing the right parents or hypergamy. That’s what, 600 million, after taxes.

    Workers at my store have an unbelievable work ethic. Wal-mart doesn’t deserve them. Managers ride your ass constantly regarding productivity: their measure of which is flawed and they do try to eeeek every fucking minute of use.

    But the libertarian in me knows that it isn’t their job to be nice to me. Their job is to make as much $$$ for shareholders as legally possible. The lib in me knows if I hate it enough, and I do, it is my responsibility to get off my ass and look for a different job.

    This job has cured me of my consumerism, though.

    1. What’s so insane about asking employees to work a 12 hour shift on the biggest day of their year? Presumably you would have been paid for the extra hours, and apparently it WAS optional because you apparently opted out.

      And, what business is it of yours whether Sam Walton’s heirs “deserve” their inheritance? It’s theirs ONLY because it was Walton’s wish that it be theirs– isn’t that sufficient justification? He could have left it to you, me, or the ASPCA, but he chose his children. Suppress your envy and get over it.

      1. What’s so insane about asking employees to work a 12 hour shift on the biggest day of their year?

        “If you aren’t working twelve hour days instead of spending time with your family, you deserve to be poor.” –Libertarians

        1. “Something stupid”

          -Rick Santorum

        2. My better half works with the Navy, and got home at 0830 AM on T-giving morning after a 12 hour shift, caught some Zzzs, and was up and deep frying a turkey by 2PM. Then it was back to work another 12 hour shift at 9PM. He is racking up the OT at a 7% premium AND he gets the paid day off money on top of it. Maybe we’re soulless, but you can have as much of our T-giving as you like for that kind of cha-ching.

          TBH, the older 2 kids were probably thrilled to be able to get back to Minecraft and FB respectively by 5PM. Teen are so much about the family lovefests. Especially if it involves endless discussions of the old people’s latest ailments and cheek pinching.

          1. 0830 AM

            You sure it wasn’t 0830 PM?

    2. Huh. Weird. When I worked at Target two years ago, I worked long hours during the Christmas season, too. And the managers constantly rode our asses about productivity, too. Same thing at Food City when I worked there eighteen years ago. It’s as if . . . I don’t know . . . LOW WAGE RETAIL JOBS ARE THE SAME NO MATTER WHERE YOU WORK.

      That’s what I really don’t get about the Wal-Mart hate. I worked there briefly about fifteen years ago, and let me tell you something: they paid better and had better benefits than any other retail job I ever had, and they made damn sure you got your breaks on time and got off work on time, which isn’t something a lot of other places do. There were sucky parts of it, too, but overall it was about average for retail, maybe a bit better. It’s like McDonald’s: it’s the Symbol Of Corporate Greed du jour, so progressives hate it.

    3. Stay strong player. And remember your manager is still human, and thus vulnerable to some solid shit talk.

    4. “That they actually thought I was going to work for 12 hours on Thanksgiving, they were out of their fucking minds”

      Uh, I’m going to have to work *REAL* hard to work up sympathy for you.

      1. Uh, I’m going to have to work *REAL* hard to work up sympathy for you.

        “If you aren’t working twelve hour days instead of spending time with your family, you deserve to be poor.” –Libertarians

        1. If you’re unemployed or not in a union, you deserve to not be able to afford groceries.

        2. Rick Santorum| 11.24.12 @ 1:15PM |#
          “”If you aren’t working twelve hour days instead of spending time with your family, you deserve to be poor.” –Libertarians”

          “I’m a stupid shit who can’t post without lying”
          —Rick Santorum

      2. “That they actually thought I was going to work for 12 hours on Thanksgiving, they were out of their fucking minds”

        Perhaps they just had a belated epiphany about the kind of slacker they had mistakenly hired, rather than that being evidence of mental insanity.

    5. The vast majority of people that work at Wal-Mart are unskilled laborers. If you’re 21, that’s reasonable. But what if you’re 40? That means in 40 years of existence on this planet, you never once took the time and effort to develop a skill that could benefit somebody else. Think about that for a second, and tell me again why the Waltons are the evil people.

    6. ‘I’ve been working for them for a year. I just now got insurance even though I am part time. That they actually thought I was going to work for 12 hours on Thanksgiving, they were out of their fucking minds….48% of the profit is split by the 7 remaining surviving waltons. 2011 profits were 15 billion. Not bad for doing nothing…”

      Typical liberal drivel. Talk about over rating yourselves. I love how everyone always looks at the end result and never give one ounce of thought of the work that went into building a business.

      That’s the disease of the entitlment cult.

      Sounds like you’re making excuses big time. Seriosly, dude, you’re thinking about how the Walton’s split their dough? I don’t see how it’s of ANY concern to you.

      What’s horrible about asking you to work 12 hours? More money for you.

      Back in the day I also worked the midnight shift with boyhood buddies at ‘Toys R Us.’ Four best friends roaming the aisles filled with toys. What could go wrong?

      They asked us to work extra hours all the time. No one complained. If you complained you were a lazy fuck. I know my father would slap me silly if I came up refusing to work more.It was worse in construction.

      Today, it’s the opposite and points straight to the problems of work ethic we face. By the way, I don’t give perks to my workers for one-year either. There are many reasons for that.

      1. However, about the perks, I’m working towards offering them in a much shorter time frame.

        1. Another thing about the “peer” influence. I was encircled by guys who worked. We’d egg each other the second we felt one was making excuses. It seemed like we had different values just 20-25 years ago. Guys like the guy above were chastised in my day.

          We all knew working at ‘Toys R Us’ wasn’t a career move. We understood what we were getting into and weren’t about to make noise for nothing.

          Anyway, now they seem to dictate the narrative.

          No wonder things are the way they are.

          1. I don’t really think there’s anything wrong with being lazy, per se, if that’s the lifestyle you choose. It’s only wrong if you think others should be forced to subsidize your laziness.

            1. I agree. I also have little against the lazy so long as they don’t expect me to cover for them – and we know they exist.

              Lucky for Obama we can’t really quantify how many more want to be subsidized.

              In the case I used, we were four guys in a unit. If one chose to leave – while it was his right – for no good reason, it affected the rest of us.

    7. That they actually thought I was going to work for 12 hours on Thanksgiving, they were out of their fucking minds.

      Why? Was working 12 hours that day going to conflict with your second job?

      1. “If you aren’t working twelve hour days instead of spending time with your family, you deserve to be poor.” –Libertarians

        1. I’m a degreed, certified control engineering project manager. If I need to work 12 hours a day, on a holiday, I do. It’s the nature of the work.

        2. “If you aren’t working twelve hour days instead of spending time with your family, you deserve to be poor.” –Libertarians

          A. I think I’ve seen this somewhere before, Mary.
          B. If you don’t want a job that requires working on Thanksgiving…get one.
          C. Fuck off, slaver!

          1. A. I think I’ve seen this somewhere before, Mary.

            Hurrr.

            B. If you don’t want a job that requires working on Thanksgiving…get one.

            It’s so easy to find work in this economy, am I right? And the unskilled workers deserve to be shat on and have their holidays consumed by low-paying jobs because they’re not the next John Galt. They don’t deserve to have time with their families because they’re stupid.

            C. Fuck off, slaver!

            With the way that libertarians and Republicans treat the poor, you’re going to deserve everything you get when the OWS generation take over. All you would have to do is explain how the free market benefits everyone and produces a higher standard of living whereas the collusion between government and corporations creates an environment hostile to innovation, competition, and the working class…yet you choose to sneer and mock and scream about how the poor deserve their lot in life.

            Well, when your attitude is “fuck the proles,” don’t be surprised when the proles fuck back.

            1. B. Hmm. Time with my family? Feed my family?

              C. Not the POOR you disingenuous fuck! EVERYONE deserves their lot in life. If you don’t like yours, make it better you fuckstain.

              And we’ll see what the hostile business environment does to the poor you fucking idiot. Bite the hand, you imbecile.

              1. He’s an idiot. The number of economic fallacies in his defense of unions are legion. It’s the same leftist BS where he assumes people who don’t like his idiotic social policies only disagree because they hate poor people/blacks/women, whatever.

                You want to help poor people? Then stop letting unions force them into unemployment with artificially inflated wages.

                You want to know what the most heavily unionized city in American history is? Detroit. Want to know why so many people in Detroit are unemployed? Over-unionization. Thank God for the unions, otherwise there might be lots of poor people in Detroit!

                1. It’s the same leftist BS where he assumes people who don’t like his idiotic social policies only disagree because they hate poor people/blacks/women, whatever.

                  I find it amusing that you think I’m a liberal.
                  _________________________________

                  I define a living wage as making enough money to afford basic necessities while having enough money left over to put in savings.

                  1. Rick Santorum| 11.25.12 @ 8:22AM |#
                    “I find it amusing that you think I’m a liberal.”
                    Dunno, but you’re certainly an ignoramus
                    —————————
                    “I define a living wage as making enough money to afford basic necessities while having enough money left over to put in savings.”
                    Fine. In that case, fine a job that pays that amount.

              2. EVERYONE deserves their lot in life. If you don’t like yours, make it better you fuckstain.

                _________________________________

                I define a living wage as making enough money to afford basic necessities while having enough money left over to put in savings.

            2. It’s so easy to find work in this economy, am I right?

              Well then why are you advocating policies that will increase unemployment further?

              1. Well then why are you advocating policies that will increase unemployment further?

                What policies are those? I support free markets.

                _________________________________

                I define a living wage as making enough money to afford basic necessities while having enough money left over to put in savings.

                1. “I define a living wage as making enough money to afford basic necessities while having enough money left over to put in savings.”

                  Your definition is very pretty, but what does it have to do with the wage that an employer is prepared to pay for the job they’re looking to fill? And, since “basic necessities” are higher for someone supporting… say, five kids & a wife vs the single person’s… then your so-called “living wage” needs to be calibrated (by the employer) based solely on need? Or, maybe ALL should be paid enough to support a theoretical family of seven? There’s a solution!

                  Sorry to be such a stickler for trivial details; I nonetheless think your definition is VERY pretty, don’t let anyone tell you it’s not.

                  1. And, since “basic necessities” are higher for someone supporting… say, five kids & a wife vs the single person’s… then your so-called “living wage” needs to be calibrated (by the employer) based solely on need?

                    I would say that a “living wage” would be enough money to support a single person. There’s not an exact figure because cost of living varies from place to place. In a sane society–the kind that we used to have–Dad could work full time and have enough money left over for the wife and three kids.

                    _________________________________

                    I define a living wage as making enough money to afford basic necessities while having enough money left over to put in savings.

                    1. Rick Santorum| 11.25.12 @ 3:31PM |#
                      “I would say that a “living wage” would be enough money to support a single person.”

                      My opinion is you are worth, oh, $0.75/hour; mine’s equally valid.

                2. Rick Santorum| 11.25.12 @ 8:18AM |#
                  “What policies are those? I support free markets.”

                  So you’re as stupid as you are dishonest?

            3. b. Victim thinking. Back when the hubby was in the Navy, he missed countless holidays, and one thing I learned quick was that holidays are what you make of them. T-giving is ONE DAY. Have it the next day, or the day before, or just make time to see your loved ones when you can.

              Hell, I’m going to do a happy dance tomorrow when I kick the minions out the door.

              1. If you choose to take a job that requires you to work on Thanksgiving, then be glad you got the job you wanted. If you don’t want such a job, get a different one. It may not pay as much.

                If your family is so damned ungrateful that they don’t appreciate you working on Thanksgiving in order to support them, and aren’t willing to roast a turkey and stuffing the day before or after and give thanks then, perhaps you need to have a talk with said family members about their work ethic and their unwillingness to lift a finger to help other people via the work you do on their behalf.

            4. Rick Santorum| 11.24.12 @ 3:57PM |#
              “A. I think I’ve seen this somewhere before, Mary.
              Hurrr.”

              Fuck off, slaver.

            5. And the unskilled workers deserve to be shat on and have their holidays consumed by low-paying jobs because they’re not the next John Galt. They don’t deserve to have time with their families because they’re stupid.

              What’s this bullshit about “deserve”? Back in college, I worked in a movie theater and had to work on Thanksgiving and Christmas (funny how no union shittards thought to mount a protest of those places). When I was in the military, I missed those holidays in three out of the four years I was enlisted.

              Deserve’s got nothing to do with it, you moron.

            6. With the way that libertarians and Republicans treat the poor, you’re going to deserve everything you get when the OWS generation take over.

              Believe me, those entitled, pampered toads are going to get everything they deserve when they take over, too.

              Well, when your attitude is “fuck the proles,” don’t be surprised when the proles fuck back.

              I’m not too concerned about the revolutionary impact of a generation that chimps out when they can’t get a job that pays them $80K a year to fuck around all day.

              1. Deserve’s got nothing to do with it, you moron.

                Yes, child. Every American willing to put in his 40 hours deserves to spend time with his family. The disintegration of the family unit is related to social dysfunction (ever see any stats on what happens to children raised by single mothers?). You want a healthy, productive society, you reinforce the family unit.

                We’re the wealthiest nation in the world. Every American who is willing to work the 40 hour week deserves a living wage and time with his family. Greed is no virtue.

                Believe me, those entitled, pampered toads are going to get everything they deserve when they take over, too.

                Naw. You and I, the privilege-denying white males–we’re going to be the one to suffer. Mayhaps you best make some effort to reach out to moderates rather than screaming lolbertarian talking points into the wind.

                _________________________________

                I define a living wage as making enough money to afford basic necessities while having enough money left over to put in savings.

                1. “I define a living wage as making enough money to afford basic necessities while having enough money left over to put in savings.”

                  We’re not interested in your idiotic opinion; we want a definition.

                2. Rick Santorum| 11.25.12 @ 3:27PM |#
                  “Yes, child. Every American willing to put in his 40 hours deserves to spend time with his family.”

                  No, idiot. That’s all.

                3. Yes, child.

                  Wrong, child.

                  Every American willing to put in his 40 hours deserves to spend time with his family. The disintegration of the family unit is related to social dysfunction (ever see any stats on what happens to children raised by single mothers?). You want a healthy, productive society, you reinforce the family unit.

                  Reinforcement of the family unit requires a hell of a lot more than just spending time together on Thanksgiving.

                  We’re the wealthiest nation in the world. Every American who is willing to work the 40 hour week deserves a living wage and time with his family. Greed is no virtue.

                  “Deserves” got nothing to do with it.

                  Naw. You and I, the privilege-denying white males–we’re going to be the one to suffer.

                  Maybe you’ll suffer, goon, but I can take care of me and mine just fine. If anything, the Day of the Rope is exactly what you deserve.

                  Mayhaps you best make some effort to reach out to moderates rather than screaming lolbertarian talking points into the wind.

                  Right, because “GIBSMEDAT!” is a moderate position.

    8. Workers at my store have an unbelievable work ethic.

      That definitely does not match my experience. I worked for Wal-Mart part of the time I was in college, and my co-workers were some of the laziest, most entitled assholes I’ve ever seen.

      1. People are lazy fucks at almost every job.

    9. I’m an engineering project manager. I had degreed PE’s working 12 hours on Thanksgiving, hundreds of miles from home, too.

      Welcome to the real world.

    10. That they actually thought I was going to work for 12 hours on Thanksgiving, they were out of their fucking minds.

      Do yourself a favor. Don’t ever start your own business with that attitude.

      1. Depending on one’s work ethic, it may be precisely the attitude needed to start a new business.

        My father, brother, and brother-in-law have each started and run a successful business. Mostly so they can be their own boss. They do work long hours through the year. But they never work on Thanksgiving. And no one can tell them to.

        1. goneGalt| 11.25.12 @ 12:06AM |#
          “My father, brother, and brother-in-law have each started and run a successful business. Mostly so they can be their own boss. They do work long hours through the year. But they never work on Thanksgiving. And no one can tell them to.”

          I own and run a successful business also, and my customers can tell me to work when they wish me to.

          1. I own and run a successful business also, and my customers can tell me to work when they wish me to.

            Oh I agree. That is our right, and more importantly our choice.

            One of my sidelines is computer repair. I can often charge a nice premium on a holiday. I imagine you do too!

            I have other customers who are in arrears. I suppose they CAN tell me when to work. Whether I AGREE to work is TBD on a case by case basis.

            But so far, no one has put a gun to my head and coerced me to work when I do not wish to.

          2. For the record, if people take a job in retail, they need to accept the Black Thursday/Friday thing as part of the deal. If they do not want to work the holidays, don’t whine. Hit the bricks and get a job that has holidays off.

            It’s not hard. There is plenty of work if people really look.

      2. I used to wash dishes for a 24 hour diner in Bridgeport, CT. I never met anyone who worked harder and longer than a Greek diner owner. But even he would shut down on Thanksgiving and Xmas(But not New Year!) so we could be home with family as his stated reason.

        Maybe these Walmart folks need to look for a job with better hours. 35 years later, my old diner is still in business… And hiring!

  20. roughly 50 people who are actually on Walmart’s payroll joined today’s “walkout” nationwide.

    so did the WM payroll shrink by 50?

    1. I suspect they were off duty ones.

    2. WalMart probably can’t legally fire those 50 employees due to labor laws tying the hands of employers. I suspect those 50 employees will have a hard time getting a raise or promotion from now on, and any screwups on their part will be carefully documented to create a long paper trail should they be fired due to layoffs.

  21. Meanwhile, gaze in wonder at the glory which is DEMOCRACY!

    On Monday, Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn is expected to announce the date for a special election that he promised will be “as economical as possible for taxpayers.” Estimates by the Illinois State Board of Elections suggest it will cost about $5.15 million for both a primary and a general election.

    Instead of announcing months ago he would not or could not run due to the almost certain eventuality of being removed from office, Jackson ran and won. I deem this to be a fraud perpetrated on the voters, and the cost of the special election should be classified as theft.

    1. Considering this was clear to everyone months ago, I blame the voters in his district.

      1. Are you suggesting that people should not have voted for the black Democrat with bipolar II? That makes you a racist, an ableist, and an enemy of the Party. Report to a reeducation center at once!

    2. The state would have been better off offering him a million dollar bribe to not run in 2012. He probably would have taken it.

  22. Several of my kids friends have done short stints at unionized grocery stores, quitting quickly because of the union stealing their money (their words) and the overly structured work place with rules about which box you can and cannot move etc.

    In the past, Walmart was a place with a lot of mobility; motivated people who were willing to learn and work hard could expect to be rewarded with promotions and raises. That fucking imbecile Lee Scott did what he could to fuck that up, but it still exists. I suspect a lot of Walmart employees still realize they will lose a huge amount of flexibility and potential for advancement if the union comes in and imposes their standard straitjacket of work rules.

    1. Unions are pieces of shits.

      For what it’s worth, I’m with the owners in the NHL lock out havimg made their beds notwithstanding. They should also honor the contracts they idiotically gave out.

      Buffoonery on both sides.

      Still. The players are pissing in the wind. Even 50% revenue sharing is way too much if you ask me. I can’t believe the owners gave them 57% with NO RISK or stake in the operation known as the NHL.

      If the players want more, they can be big boys and invest in the league.

      1. Guys who slide around on an ice puddle getting smashed against walls and hit with wooden blades have no risk?

        This is the market at work. If the owners think the players are asking for too much they can find some other guys who people are willing to pay to watch.

        1. And they get compensated mightily well for it.

          I’m talking about the cut they want. No problem with them getting something but if they want more invest in the company is I’m saying.

          Also, all this bs union theater pulled by Fehr is annoying.

          1. Also, all this bs union theater pulled by Fehr is annoying.

            I’d probably be more sympathetic to the players if Fehr wasn’t their rep. That guy is so over the top he makes it way too easy to take the owners’ side.

            I remember he was making noise about another MLB strike in 2002 or 2003, and people in the media were basically daring him to do it and kill off MLB forever. I wouldn’t be surprised if this one has a similar effect for the NHL, because outside of Canada and the Northeast, the other fan bases don’t have nearly the same level of devotion.

    2. From my experience (I worked for them, and members of my family still do), if you are willing to work and learn, there is almost no limit to your ability to rise in the Company. My experience with Unions is exactly the opposite…no matter how hard you work, you will get nowhere fast!

      1. “My experience with Unions is exactly the opposite…no matter how hard you work, you will get nowhere fast!”

        If I were in an environment where it didn’t matter how hard I worked–compared to other people–I’d just get whatever I was supposed to get based on seniority or how long I’d worked there?

        There’s no way I could ever work in that kind of environment. It’s a system that replaces ambition and achievement with a sense of entitlement and active discouragement of initiative.

        I’d rather deliver newspapers.

  23. Speaking of work rules and job classifications: I have been in situations where eight or ten people are forced to stand around accomplishing nothing because they have to wait for the union-designated “Electrician” to be tracked down and induced to come wandering in to push a Reset button.

    Fuck those lazy useless drunken thieving morons.

    1. your description could fit the typical DOT project in damn near any state. How often have you seen one guy in a hole working his ass off while a half-dozen others watch him? My favorite is the one in the white shirt, hard hat, and styrofoam coffee cut; he’s the one sucking down payroll while Paco is sweating in the dirt.

    2. I have been in situations where eight or ten people are forced to stand around accomplishing nothing because they have to wait for the union-designated “Electrician” to be tracked down and induced to come wandering in to push a Reset button.

      Not sure where the “forced” part comes in — why doesn’t some rebellious soul just push the FN reset button and dare the union to do something about it?

      1. “Not sure where the “forced” part comes in — why doesn’t some rebellious soul just push the FN reset button and dare the union to do something about it?”

        If you ever worked a trade-show floor, you certainly wouldn’t push that button.
        Not if you wanted to work again…

  24. I’m shocked that no one here, from what I’ve seen, has taken that babbling imbecil,e Brenda Speaks, to task for saying that, because Walmart is in a community, young men will be forced to shoplift their merchandise and thus get records.

    Those bitches at Walmart are just asking for it, aren’t they?

    1. They sell records at Walmart?

    2. Isn’t the soft bigotry of the left kind of a given?

  25. Why is it OK to bring 3 chartered buses into a private business parking lot, disrupt their day,cause untold safety hazards, create a media circus, and protest private business practices when you have no skin in the game? Maybe some of those people should have worked at Wal*Mart first to learn how bad things are before listening to spin doctors for the Unions?

    1. That’s why several of them were getting arrested for trespassing.

      1. I also like that their reason for protesting is that Walmart hadn’t come and sat down with local politicians to ‘negotiate standards’ for workers.

        How dare they open up stores and give people jobs without asking us permission first! The monsters.

    2. Why is it OK to bring 3 chartered buses into a private business parking lot

      I believe the more accurate term is “private business parking lot roadway

  26. So their aim is to deceive everyone.

    Yet whenever you don’t tell the truth, it diminishes your self respect because the conflict is being untrue to you! Know the truth and the truth will set you free is not an obsolete religious quote, it’s a real admonition for gaining freedom! See http://www.lifestrategies.net/truth

  27. Rick Santorum| 11.25.12 @ 3:27PM |#
    Deserve’s got nothing to do with it, you moron.
    “Yes, child. Every American willing to put in his 40 hours deserves to spend time with his family. The disintegration of the family unit is related to social dysfunction (ever see any stats on what happens to children raised by single mothers?). You want a healthy, productive society, you reinforce the family unit.”

    You see, it’s the government’s responsibility to prevent single mothers. Correcting, of course, the government’s policies which reward single motherhood.
    So, moron, which policy do you support?

  28. I knew this was all a load from the start, just had that itchy libtard plastic-activism feeling the whooooole time.

  29. News flash for the ignorant. If you don’t want to work in mass market retail you have to get an education in a VIABLE field or learn an in-demand trade skill. Having only a HS diploma is a sure ticket to folding clothes at JC Penny.

    1. That’s a good sentiment to have, in theory, but in practice, most humans either lack the intellect, motivation, or the opportunity to better themselves in that fashion. It is better to construct policy based on how humans actually behave rather than how you really, really, really wish they behaved.

  30. Walmart is about 20% cheaper than the competition? Rainbow Dash approves.

  31. I’m sort of surprised to see libertarians jump to such a defense of Walmart as if it’s merely an actor in an actually free market. The company receives all sorts of goodies from local and state governments in the form of cheap land, tax breaks, and the like. Federal expenditures on the interstate highway system directly subsidizes the transport apparatus necessary for such a large scale enterprise. Large swaths of their employees receive government food and medical aid. The company can socialize portions of it’s operating costs through all these means. If your idea of the free market includes these things, then go ahead and defend away. But, it seems to me without the aid of the state Walmart would have never grown to the behemoth that it is, and we wouldn’t even be having this discussion.

    1. Most self-proclaimed “libertarians” do not deserve the title. They’re okay with the concentration of power in the hands of a few as long as its not government. I find their views to be overly simplistic, almost childish in their simplicity.

  32. I especially got a laugh out of the women who says Walmart is responsible for giving kids records for shoplifting, saying that kids will be kids. I’d like to know her grocer so I can take my kids to shoplift for me since it’s ok with unionized shops.

    With her reasoning, maybe we should close government schools since it often results in kids getting records too.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.