Wal-Mart mobilizes against Democrats: report

The employees know what they are getting before they agree to take the job, and full-time employees do have insurance. But a union would only make things worse, not better. A union doesn't provide any tangible benefits for their employees, but I can guarantee you that prices at Wal-Mart will be a lot higher if a union does go in.

The union will demand higher wages, and Wal-Mart will pass those "savings" on to us. I have enough prices going up without "Wally World" doing the same thing because of an anacronism that has outlived its usefulness.

A union doesn't provide any tangible benefits for their employees,

Oh....like higher wages?

I have enough prices going up without "Wally World" doing the same thing because of an anacronism

Perhaps you should buy less crap, but pay a fair price what you do buy and actually need?
Why...that's an idea!!!

The Exxon Mobile of retail huh....I guess the news failed to report that Exxon/Mobile also paid 30+ billion in taxes worldwide as well....but that would offset the profit headline.

OMG they paid taxes? you mean like everyone else?

Walmart uses the crap out of their employees and pays them peanuts. Yet another great example of republican greed.

You need to pull your head out of your ----! Wal-Mart pays very fair the people who may have never had a job or might be handicapped. I have a friend that works there, and she loves it. Says fair wages, good place to work and good benefits. This has nothing to do with the Republicans. You Dems/Liberals just can't handle the fact that many people don't like you or your way of thinking!!!

I also have a few friends that work there, and they love it too. They said the same thing...decent wages, good benefits, etc. I don't know why so many people seem to think it's the worst employer in the world. My first job was in fast food and I know I worked a lot harder than that greeter at my Wal Mart, and I'm sure my minimum wage salary was much smaller! And there are many small businesses out there that don't offer any sort of medical benefits.

I recently went to a job fair at Safeway and, lo and behold, they are now starting employees at $9 an hour and NO BENEFITS for the first three years. They can't break the unions, so they're doing what they can to get around them. It won't be long before other chains follow suit (if they haven't already) because they can't afford to pay the high wages and escalating health insurance costs for their workers.

And by the way, YES, Wal Mart DOES pay taxes, federal and local. So they are contributing to your town's economy. So I will keep buying the things my family needs at prices I can afford, and thank the checker for doing a good job.

Oh....like higher wages?

Yeah, higher wages that are eaten up by union dues. Not a real benefit in my book.

Perhaps you should buy less crap, but pay a fair price what you do buy and actually need? Why...that's an idea!!!

How do you have any idea what I buy and at what price? And how can I pay a fair price if all the companies do what you would apparently like them to do and go union?

I recently went to a job fair at Safeway and, lo and behold, they are now starting employees at $9 an hour and NO BENEFITS for the first three years. They can't break the unions, so they're doing what they can to get around them.

There used to be Safeways all over Texas, now there are very few, if any. They asked their employees to take a small pay cut so that they could compete with the other grocery stores. The unionized employees said "No, we don't have to, we are union." So against the will of the employees, Safeway gave them all a pay cut anyway. Only it was 100%, and not the much smaller amount that was proposed.

None of them could get a job at another store because they made too much more than any other store was offering. How did the union help the THOUSANDS of people without jobs that had paid dues to them for years? They didn't. YEA UNIONS!!!

I too have a friend that worked for Walmart.
He cleaned the floors every night for 5 years with 3% pay raises per year. They promoted him to a supervisory position in charge of two stores with one soon to be hired employee..but no pay raise ...just a new title and more work until help arrived. Then Walmart proceeded to search for a "floor technician" over the next year and a half.

At his employee review he was told he'd get a 3% raise again. He pointed out that he had been working two stores without any more compensation for over a year and no one had been hired. They told him that since he was doing a great job they had decided against bringing anyone else on and that he was "lucky to have a job in the current economic environment."

dandemacy says: "There used to be Safeways all over Texas, now there are very few, if any. They asked their employees to take a small pay cut so that they could compete with the other grocery stores. The unionized employees said "No, we don't have to, we are union." So against the will of the employees, Safeway gave them all a pay cut anyway. Only it was 100%, and not the much smaller amount that was proposed."

Hmmm... I wonder why the top earners of the company want the bottom earners of the company to take a pay cut? How about if they take the pay cut to stay competitive?

Sounds like a management problem anyway , since they decided to cut pay anyway and still they are going out of business.

Chuck1968,

The scope of responsibility in a corporation is apparently beyond your reach. As for your last comment, they are right, at least he has a job and if that isn't good enough then tell him to put an application in elsewhere and see if they will pay him what he THINKS he deserves. Most companies don't give more than 3% anyway so think a little.

My DH worked at Intel for almost 8 years before getting laid off this spring. He went 3 years with NO RAISE, and a few of the years received only around 2-3%. He also received a promotion, but no raise for almost a year. Other friends in the high-tech business went through the same thing. So it's not just a Wal Mart thing. It's an economic downturn thing.

I am actually surprised by this move. I would have expected the opposite from Wal-Mart, but I feel their reasons are sound.

I am actually surprised by this move. I would have expected the opposite from Wal-Mart

What the heck are you basing that opinion on? Walmart has been anti-worker, anti-America for years. (i.e. pro Wall $treet)

let's see...how many jobs have unions created? ZERO how many have they caused to leave the country? in your analysis, include support of bacon-davis act (racist as they come), support of extremist environmental and litigation rights, support of extremist "rights" for strikers who commit murder and vandalism...the number is the unions are responsible for the loss of several million jobs. all by their lonesome selves.

My husband is in the pipefitters union UA and they definatly create jobs they have new members to the program every year. They make employers pay employees what they deserve to make. They set what they think that they are worth. My husband has gone to school full time for 5 years and makes a great living and has amazing benefits. His employer has a lot of work and still makes a lot of money with paying his employees great. My husband is not an extremist and does not commit murder or vandalism. He has never been on strike and his union has not been on strike since he got in. I believe most people know little about Unions.

Who do you want doing the electrical components in your child's school someone who has gone to school for 5 years and is extremely trained and makes more or a person who barely knows the trade and went to school for a year and makes 10-15$ per hour while their employer charges just about the same rate and makes a killing. Who's elevator would you want to be on? How about the train system and the building you are in.

I love Wal-Mart. I live equally distant from 2 of them. There is also a Target, and several grocery stores within reasonable distance, so I have choices, and I choose to shop at Wal-Mart most of the time.

I wouldn't boycott them even if they supported Obama, but I also don't think that corporations should be endorsing political candidates.

Support local unions, I would think.

I choose to shop at Wal-Mart most of the time

Communist China thanks you for your support. Why do you hate your fellow American's so much?

Again keys, with the rising costs of goods and labor, people don't want to pay more for something when they can get it cheaper elsewhere. It is simple economics, if you need a class in it I can point you to a local unversity or community college for a class.

"I also don't think that corporations should be endorsing political candidates."

do you also extend that thought process to unions? i bet not. therefore your logic is flawed.

unions commit hundreds of millions of dollars to elections, but corporations are severely limited in financial contribution. so if they have a managerial meeting and outline the dangers to their jobs a particular candidate poses, where's the harm? (employee free choice act - loss of the private ballot in union elections; license for unions to use assault and battery to coerce workers to vote yes)

sneilarreal

If you are serious then don't shop there...this is a society built on capitalism.

let your money do the talking."

Why do people continue to believe this nonsense? Most of these businesses would not be where they are today without socialism in the works.
They use liberal programs all the time and then only detest them when someone else wants to use them to get ahead , just like they did.

Chuck if you could explain what you mean about the businesses using socialism and liberal programs, I would appreciate. It might make me look at things differently if you can make me believe it. Thank you.

Ok, the definition of corporate welfare is defined as "any federal spending program that provides payments or unique benefits and advantages to specific companies or industries."

The federal government spent $92 billion in direct and indirect subsidies to businesses and private- sector corporate entities in 2006.

Boeing, Xerox, IBM, Motorola, Dow Chemical, General Electric have all received millions in taxpayer-funded benefits through programs like the Advanced Technology Program and the Export-Import Bank.

The oil industry received 3.5 billion dollars in subsidies that oil companies received even though they have record profits.

The sub prime mortgage crisis, bailing out Bear Stearns, Countrywide, Indymac, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and others with "loans",(who gets a loan as they are becoming insolvent?)

do you also extend that thought process to unions? i bet not. therefore your logic is flawed.

Of course I do, why wouldn't I? They are a corporation, therefore they shouldn't be endorsing political candidates. Therefore your ability to read comprehensively is flawed, as is your ability to read my mind. Especially when if you had read other things I have already posted, you would realize that I don't think the unions should exist anymore.

Chuck. I didn't see Wal-mart on your subsidies list. Is there a program Wal-mart uses?

Ain't that the truth!

Sam was a big believer of selling American made goods, and treating his employees fairly.

His heirs are now akin to the robber-barons of the 19th century.

I sure have to agree with you two. Sam's empire is now run by people who inherited their money and are silly enough to think they earned it.

What a misconception, Sam spinning in his grave, what a hoot. Walmart is doing nothing different today then it was when it first opened. This miasconception is spread by people who never did their home work on the subject.

Interesting, MIKE. That's exactly what my brother-in-law said. He knew Sam Walton when he opemed his first store. My brother-in-law was a carpet factory rep and called on retailers. He said Sam was a "good ol' boy" and if he were alive today those power mad, greedy thugs that drive Wal-Mart now would be looking for work at K-Mart.

"She was paid $300.00 per week and could take six weeks maternity leave. "

Those bastards! How dare they treat a lowly worker like a human being!

And I bet the reason they went out of business has nothing to do with inept managment, right?

Maybe.. but when there is always a constant in the equation.. you have to begin to see that maybe it's you (unions) to blame for the failure. Not who you perciev as the culpret when they are not in both equations. Geez 300 a week in 1966.. what would 300 a week be in 1966 money vs 2008 money? I think the point he was trying to make, was that she was being paid higher than the work warranted for the time. Come on.. minimum wage in 1991 was 4.25 an hour...by your logic, minumum wage should have been raised to 12 dollars an hour for an entry cashier level position at that time.

I have old commercials taped from that time.. new mustangs cost 8 grand then.. minimum wage was hardly a substandard pay back then for goods at that time... I would hardly cvall it sub-human.

Once again, a lib who thinks people should be paid higher for doing less work or less important demanding work...what would you pay for people to cut your front lawn? 20 bucks for doing it.. or would you pay them 300 dollars because anything less would not be treating people like human beings.

I would have to agree that Wal-Mart going into an area isn't always the best thing for the area. My mother-in-law grew up in Calvert, TX, where there were a lot of small businesses run by local families. Wal-Mart came in, undercut their prices, and they all closed down. Some of the lower class local people were stealing from Wal-Mart, and they couldn't deal with the losses, especially since many of their employees were aiding in the thefts. They closed their doors, and Calvert hasn't recovered.

This all had to have happened over 10 years ago because I have been with my wife for 10 years, and it hasn't been there in that amount of time.

Obama's health care plan--which we desperately need in this country would not cost you more in prescriptions

Maybe not, but it would cost you a TON more in taxes. What a GREAT trade off!

If a shop closes because another business moves in ...that's called capitalism.

It's out of control American style capitalism. *uck everyone but the top 2%.

It gives us freedom of choice..like it or not that is the way it is.

Where did you get these talking points? By Walmart closing everyone else down, that TOOK AWAY CHOICES.

If a business moves into my neighborhood and they cam sale me my favorite widget for less...I am going to buy it. If my favorite store wants to match that price I will continue to shop there as I believe the majority of people would.

Thank you Comrade Sneilarreal!

Walmart has buying power which helps to reduce their price and they pass it on to the consumer.
The consumer can then compare and make a choice...either shop at the mom and pop or the new store with lower prices.

The choice is up to the consumer and the consumer alone drives the market.

Why do I have a feeling that you have no real world experince on the subject?

It might seem cold but it is the way capitalism works.

And thank God that this non-sense is soon coming to an end.

If a shop closes because another business moves in ...that's called capitalism.

It gives us freedom of choice..like it or not that is the way it is.

What? You are just lost. Read up on why the anti trust law were created. Had they not been created Walmart probably wouldn't exist today.

Hereticheart, your comment should be carved on the walls of ALL Wal-Mart stores. Here is another impact people have forgotten. Privately owned local newspapers, not beholden to high mucky-mucky politicians, who observed and reported on small town, small county America, were dependent upon advertising from local family businesses. When Wal-Mart ran roughshod over those people and closed them down the newspapers lost their advertising revenue. Then they died. A vital part of Americana gone forever. Wiped out by what Teddy Roosevelt warned American against long ago, unfettered capitalism. Or less politely, greed rum amok. Wal-Mart left a lot of empty shells where parts of America used to be. And not by accident. Think about that the next time you save $1.98 by going to the bullies that wiped out mom and pop.

I don't think the Walmart in that town in Texas closed because people were stealing. They probably was about to reap the benefits of property taxes which led to Walmart closing it's doors. It happened in another town. When the town was about to gain on property taxes, Walmart moved to the next town.

Where else in America can you go to work and the employer has such fliers and information encouraging its employees to get on government assistance.

This is why I thought they would have supported Obama.

Sneilarreal...

I only pay $3 for my prescriptions...name brands...and I don't have to get them at WalMart. That's because my employer offers great medical benefits.

The point is, WalMart makes Billions a year. They can afford to pay their employees more and offer them better benfits. They can do this without raising prices, but they choose not to.

Very true dumasri - granted not everyone has the opportunity to land a job with great benefits but as you said, Walmart makes billions of dollars and is stingy with it. They could very well offer health benefits to their employees especially as many elderly people they have working there.

Not that I'm a big Walmart fan. There are many things about them I don't like, and in fact I make it a point to shop anywhere but there but I felt it was important to mention that they are not rolling in the cash as much as you think. Walmarts does generate about 365 billion dollars a year in sales but they only run on about 2% margin. So at the end of the year the biggest company in the world only puts about 8 to 9 billion in the bank. (disclaimer: these number are educated gueses based on my understanding of their business model I have not done a ton of research).

Statistically speaking, this is not a huge amount of money given the size of their company. It has been mentioned previously that for many people, Walmart is the only place they can get a job. Rather than look at that as a negative, think of it this way. Walmart is providing jobs to 1.7 million people world wide that, depending on the country, would either be on wellfare, or would just starve to death. In that regard Walmart should be applauded.

As to unions; There used to be a terrific need for unions but over the last few decades unions have gone from protecting the worker to screwing the consumer so Walmart is right to fight them.

Sneilarreal...

Have you thought of the long term repercussions...perhaps the impact later on down the road Wal-Mart will have upon society if they continue with their current practices. Disintegration of jobs, low pay, little or no benefits. They are the largest employer in the world. You would think they could do better for their employee's. You must love the thought of a two-tier society.

What you seem to be overlooking, SNEILARREAL, is the drug companies could have been selling you those drugs for $4.00 years ago. They were in a much better position to do it than Wal-Mart. But they kept on price gouging and YOUR government stood on the sidelines and cheered. We never needed a Wal-Mart. Just a government with enough sense of responsibility to rein in rampant greed.

Have you thought of the long term repercussions...perhaps the impact later on down the road Wal-Mart will have upon society if they continue with their current practices.

Like a standard of living for low income people that was only a dream before Walmart? Or jobs that offer an opportunity for advancement? When the minimum wage was 5.25 Walmart paid 8 for an entry level job. Now they start at 9. Plus benefits. Many people in management positions began as cart jockies. They hire handicapped people who nobody else will hire. How many other retail stores do you see with people in wheelchairs working?

Walmart sells regional items from local suppliers. They provide scholarships and are involved in local community activities. They are a large contributor to the Children's Miracle Network as well as other charities.

Before Walmart I bought my family's clothing and a lot of other things at rummage sales and thrift stores. After Walmart I was able to buy them new things. I was not shopping at the mom and pop store before because I couldn't afford their prices. Walmart did not run them out, they priced themselves out.

Walmart has done more for low income people than any other retail store and it is my experience that those who complain about them the loudest are those who are envious of their success. They complain about a successful business instead of getting off their duff and doing something so they too can be successful. I applaud anyone who goes out and starts a business and becomes successful. The more money they make the better. If they offer products that I need at a price I can and will pay I will shop their. If not I will shop elsewhere. It is called freedom to choose where my money is spent.

sneilarreal,

I cannot argue with you on your finances. I do agree that walmart fits into most americans budgets. They purposly created this delimma. It was by no accident that walmart is the only store around for a lot of small towns. There was a time when there were Mom & Pop stores that could regulate pricing through competition, but walmart put an end to all of that.

The problem with capitalism is it puts profits before people.

Chuck,
All business is there to make money.
It is not a social program.
People need to be responsible for their own lives.

That doesn't mean I support the deficit with china because they feature items made by practically slave labor.
We would have more employer abuse without unions.
Unions should be reasonable however.
They hurt the steel and auto industry in my opinion.

happy:Chuck,

All business is there to make money."

Yes I'll agree with you there. The real question is then, what is the purpose in making money? Why even bother if it's just about profits?

It's about people. It's about creating a society_— people that work together for the common good as well as for our individual families.
We can be the United States or take what we can for ourselves and live in Pottersville's all over the country.

What I find most interesting is how these businesses love to be protected by regulation but they can't stand it when those regulations help out the consumer or possible other competitor. So they keep pushing the "this country was built on capitalism" BS.

If they wanted a truly "free market" then they wouldn't mind getting rid of such regulation as copyrights, patents, trademarks, mineral rights etc etc. They keep @!$%#ing about the black market for their goods...why should we care? that's real capitalism and real competition.

What they really want is the laws to benefit them until they've reached their "success" and then make the very regulations that helped them achieve this success obsolete for anyone else.

Social democracy = socialism

I don't want government telling businesses what to do or how to do it. The government has enough difficulty running itself without trying to run everything else as well. Also, when you start all these social programs, you have to have people watching over them. You start passing laws about how businesses should operate, and you need people to monitor the businesses. This just leads to higher taxes, and less efficient businesses.

Businesses should be allowed to be governed by the laws of capitalism, and nothing else. With all the laws that are currently in place, as well as the will of the American people being what it is, I think the markets would do well in regulating themselves (AKA: regulated by the consumers).

Businesses should be allowed to be governed by the laws of capitalism, and nothing else. With all the laws that are currently in place, as well as the will of the American people being what it is, I think the markets would do well in regulating themselves (AKA: regulated by the consumers)

If you really believe this you need your head examined. Read a history book.

I have read history books, and the fact is that NEVER has a truly capitalistic system of business ever been attempted. Government ALWAYS sticks its nose where it doesn't belong. If all the rules and laws and everything were removed, there would be a period of upheaval, and in 5 years, 10 at worst, things would calm down, and EVERYONE would benefit.

No there never has been a purely capitalistic economy--and thank God for that! I'm glad that there were enough people who could read the writing on the wall -- otherwise you wouldn't be guaranteed the same wages you make now, that could change daily. Oh and you can forget about that forty hour work week or over time pay.

"If all the rules and laws and everything were removed, there would be a period of upheaval, and in 5 years, 10 at worst, things would calm down, and EVERYONE would benefit."

All the rules, huh?
So Coca Cola can stick their trade secret up the ol wazoo..and I can practice medicine and lie about having any credentials. Use my money to keep you from opening up a business, make my employees do dangerous things with no safety precautions ...'cause dammit safety costs MONEY!.and so on and so on.

Yeah that sounds like a great idea!

Actually, lowering the taxes for the richest 1% has increased revenue time and time again. Look at Reagan, look at G. W. Bush. But I believe that a nice flat tax would be the best thing for this country. You earn $1, you pay $0.10 in taxes. No deductions (except for operating expenses for businesses) no exceptions (except for the possibility for people who make less than $10K or $20K a year, but even then, they should have to do their fair share as well).

Honestly, would any of you allow your employer to try force you to vote their way?

Where in the article did it say that anyone was trying to force anyone to vote a certain way?

A republican vote is a vote for more taxes on you and less for them.

You can't truly believe this when Obama has specifically stated that he was going to raise taxes on all the rich ($30K/year) people?

vote Obama to keep your freedom.

I don't even know where to begin to show how wrong this is.

Yes its a negotiation. I worked hard in school, kept my nose clean so I could get a decent job. Now the dum terd who smoked pot everyday behind the library instead of going to class gets the union to tell me I have to go on strike pay and tell my family we dont get a vacation this year, the kids get to recycle last years school clothes and we can tighten our belts to put the screws to the company so dum terd can make as much money as I do. Thats the negotiation.

And when THE MAN get tired of fighting the unions and the gov while trying to compete with crappy goods coming in from overseas sweatshops he can close up his shop in USA and move his company overseas. Thats the negotiation.

How about letting me do a good job so I can go to the boss and present my case for a merit raise FOR ME! How about letting me compete for the promotion on equal footing, not having to worry I wont get the promo because Im white and there aren't enough minorities getting promoted. Instead I get to wonder when I'll hear "Meet dum terd, your new supervisor".

THERES YOUR RACE TO THE BOTTOM!

I despise Walmart. But if my union can "recommend" voting for Obama and the socialist gang, why can't Walmart state to its employees the repubs provide the best option for them?

Ma,

You need a lesson in economics as well....granted, in the 50's Unions might have been benificial, at this point they demand quite a bit. I will give you an example, a friend worked at a plant in Detroit and was hurt in the process, not only did he get paid while he was out (regular pay) but when he returned his job had been given to someone else. Rather than take another job that was offered in the company he stayed home and due to the unions, HE HAD TO GET PAID his reular pay for the rest of his life....while not working. All this was negotiated through the union he was a part of. That is why the jobs are going to Mexico, that with NAFTA make it extremely cheap to produce vehicles and still make a profit. When an employer has a bad year it is wise not to give a raise but explain that he can't due to the economy. Having a job with the same pay is better than no job at all because the business fails.
Unions are the stinky crotch of the businesses today, always asking for more because they can. Wal-mart was correct in getting rid of all their butchers, they wanted to unionize and Walmart said, fine if we can't offer our customers a price for meat that is cheap with the butchers than we will have meat without them and just get them prepackaged. Unions get strong enough to a point that they start to dictate what the business should do when the business is making the decisions that are the best. That would most likely be.......................... A PROFIT, good God, what the heck are they thinking.

Greatballs,

Unions don't tell workers to do anything! It's the workers who negotiate a contract, not the Unions. I worked at a furniture hardware manufacturing company for 25 years. We tried numerous times to vote the UAW in but to no avail :( In 1983 I made $14.00 an hour on piece work busting my a** every day. By 2002 my wages had been reduced by $5.00 an hour, my benefits were crap, the company took away half my vacation and stopped contributing to my 401K. The company knew the workers were too scared to vote a Union in and they had us over a barrel. In 2005 my job was shipped off to China where they pay workers $0.50 an hour. I guess if I worked for $0.50 an hour I could keep my job and crappy benefits? ummmm NO!

Getting back to Wally-World...I've known for years how they treat their employees and I for one won't shop there I'll pay my local Meijer store and their Union workers a few pennies more just to make my point and feel good in doing so!

BTW...Thanks to the taxpayers of the USA, the government paid for me to go to college after I lost my factory job. I graduated with a 4.0 GPA and work at a plasma donation center. People will do just about anything for a few extra bucks these days.

VOTE REPUBLICAN...keep the economy in the sh*ter and save my job LOL

"Unions get into place because the employees are not treated right." If this is true, then the Democrats who control government throughout this country have a lot of explaining to do to the heavily unionized government work force. There is a place for unions but they are not for the general welfare of labor. By definition, unions protect their members against competition from ohter labor whether domestic or foreign. Unions frequently go too far as they did with steel in the 1970s and may have done with GM, Ford, and Chrysler more recently. One statement in the article really needs to be addressed. The article states "proposed legislation called the Employee Free Choice Act, which would make it easier for workers to unionize by signing a card rather than holding a vote." This is a highly slanted view of the Employee Free Choice Act. The Act really makes it easier for union organizers to pressure workers to sign cards supporting the union instead of allowing workers to vote their private conscience anonymously in the voting booth. Unions do a lot of good but they are not pure and businesses are not always the bad guy. The Employee Free Choice Act is a bad idea.

Get a grip Dark, anyone that has a business wants to do anything that would make their business a success. Just because most Americans are not saavy enough to make it happen breeds jealousy. (WHINE) They have more then me and I can't get to the top because I keep getting kicked down.

If speacial interests are the case then explain to me why the Democrats are in the enviornmental gorups back pocket. They can't fart without all the Dems going into an uproar over it. I would love to see more American made products, but most Americans will not work for less then 15.00 an hour as a laborer, so, if I can pay 5 dollars an hour instead of 15 dollars and hour, I would take the 5 dollars myself. It doesn't take a brain scientist that the economics and most Americans need to have everything they want has put us in the situation we are in and a large amount of unions are the bridge that led us there.

Sarge, the profit motive is well understood by all and need not be explained to us. It is not in itself a glorious and honorable thing. It is the driving force behind the actions of the petty thief as well as organized crime. If one is on a quest for profits it does not excuse one from being ethical. It is one thing to make laws to preserve the environment and quite another to make laws to shift the playing field in your favor to eliminate your competition and to make more and more money. If you think that a corporation deserves the same consideration as the environment you should spend your next vacation at Wal-Mart.

Well said!

We as American's cannot control the rest of the world's workforce unless you are so ARROGANT like Obama to believe that the world has been waiting for someone like hiom to come along. Take a look at your own backyard and it's demand for high labor wages, thats the problem with the economy today. Unions are an unnecessary evil.

Have you looked at labels at your local Target, KMart, etc. lately? How many of THEIR items were made in the Good Ole USA? By the way, they pay substantially higher than minimum wage to start, unlike many ENTRY LEVEL JOBS. Safeway is now only offering $8-$9 to start, with no benefits for the first three years. Uh Oh...I'd better stop shopping at Safeway! Oh, and McDonalds? Minimum wage and no benefits...I'll have to tell my 3-yr. old he can't have any more Happy Meals.

Where does it stop? Who decides what's fair? Wal Mart is the success it is because Sam Walton understood business and built a successful empire by meeting the needs of customers that other big retailers ignored.

By the way, many "main streets" in our country are being revitalized. Home Depot opened up, and the mom & pop hardware store became a restaurant. Target opened up and the dime store became a high-end boutique. I realize this isn't the case everywhere, but it's how capitalism works.

Well genious here is an idea, get a business model together and open a fabric store, since there isn't any compitition in the area you should be able to make a very good profit. Then your employee's can get a union and demand higher wages for you so that way you as well have to close your doors because your operating expenses have exceeded your gross margin.

You are right. If Hillary were the Democartic candidate, they never would have done this. She served on their board for years.

Do any of you own a senator, a congressman, a president? Wal-Mart owns several.

And it's so easy to buy and matching BMW's and vacation homes while your employees are denied cost of living raises. You're the typical greedy out for yourself non-American who would be happy to sell the stars and strips as long as it put more money in your pocket.

Amy, so the answer is no. You shouldn't talk about the things you don't know anything about. First you run a company, for years...then lets talk.

JoJo,
Regarding your response to my comment below. Yes I have a clue. I'm the Finance Director for a sole proprietorship with only 35 employees. Our owner offers competitive salaries, full health and disability coverage, and a 401k with employer match. Everyone has been working here a VERY long time because we are treated with respect and compensated fairly. Yes these types of companies still do exist in America when owners aren't greedy and take care of business!

Darkwood, who are these senators et al owned by Walmart? I really would like to know. Because if cant name names and why you claimed they are owned, it says alot about you. And not good stuff. Help yourself out here.

Well Greatballs do you ever watch your Senators? Senator Lugar made a passionate plea for bringing Wal-Mart to India. I imagine Americans need to subsidize this some how.

Mike, how many of the jobs in your company are entry level, unskilled jobs? And does your company pick up the entire tab for employees' healthcare? And how does the owner pay for all those perks? Does he increase what he charges to clients/customers? What's his profit margin like?

It's not quite apples-to-apples.