Thread: Wow Walmart...

DAMMIT!

how can people be so blind.
Ok, walmart is cheap
Ok, walmart produces lots of vacant jobs
Ok, walmart has a very wide variety of goods and services

BUT walmart is a rampaging beast of predatory imperialism, walmart feasts on the little shops, massacres the little and if this wasnt enough
THE MOTHER FUCKERS WANT TO BUILD A STORE AT TEOTIHUACAN ARCHEOLOGICAL SITE, PATRIMONY OF MANKIND, THE LARGEST CITY OF THE ANCIENT WORLD (EVEN LARGER THAN ROME) KILLING ALL THE POSIBILITY OF SMALL NATIONAL MERCHANTS.

The fact is, walmart is a predator, transnational danger and money making factory. It should be erased of the face of our homeworld and forgotten as the bad dream it is

Stupid neoliberalism
Stupid jungle law
Stupid rich people
stupid world order

Also, once they've all but eliminated alternative outlets for media in a given market (especially in rural areas), they censor their own selection according to neocon moralism.

EDIT: They will also only carry goods with mainstream appeal. If you live in a rural area where Wal Mart has already plucked the eyes and liver from the corpse of local business, then it is dictated that your interests will fall within the mainstream, because that's all you can have.

yeah!

damn their eyes!



walmart co is one of the few United States things i hate (i refuse to call your country America, America is a whole continent dammit! its our continent also!)

second only to Bush father, bush son and bush holy spirit

Yes, I have also found it strange that people from the United States say they are from America...as if it were one in the same. I think I might have done it before, just because America is a hell of alot easier for me to write out than The United States Of America heh. I dunno...I've often thought that it is pretty crappy for people to do that though. Just like people who still say "Indians" because Native Americans takes to long to write out or whatever? heh...people. Ignorance, what can ya do

Originally posted by lucidnina
America is a hell of alot easier for me to write out than The United States Of America heh.

I just write U.S.

Walmart is like Microsoft, but what can you do? When the gov tried to bust down Bill Gates for monopoly the people overwhelmingly protested in Gate's favor. Probably the same will happen with the Walton family if the gov tried.

I don't go to walmart. I go to meijer. It is just like walmart but much much better. It is only in and around michigan though. So if you are not in the midwest you are probably like wtf. Anyways, I was born in the city it started from.

- Wal*Mart was once a "small shop" and only had one location; just like every other company, you have to start off small.
- Wal*Mart got to where it was because of good business, no merciless predatorial shit
- If you are so loyal to your high priced small shops, then go to them. Wal*Mart does not force anyone to go to their stores, there is no mind manipulating crew within Wal*Mart, trust me.
- Adolescents who have watched "Fight Club", "1984", and other stories revolving around anarachy and conspiracy theories tend to develop complexes in which they believe they hold the truth about all that exists within culture and are the only individuals free of media-manipulation, regardless of the fact that their beliefs were influenced from these initial movies... this is known as psuedophilosophy, or just plain being childlike.

Grow up

Originally posted by O'nus

- Adolescents who have watched \"Fight Club\", \"1984\", and other stories revolving around anarachy and conspiracy theories tend to develop complexes in which they believe they hold the truth about all that exists within culture and are the only individuals free of media-manipulation, regardless of the fact that their beliefs were influenced from these initial movies... this is known as psuedophilosophy, or just plain being childlike.

Grow up

truthbearer, take notes.

Originally posted by O'nus
- Wal*Mart was once a \"small shop\" and only had one location; just like every other company, you have to start off small.
- Wal*Mart got to where it was because of good business, no merciless predatorial shit
- If you are so loyal to your high priced small shops, then go to them. Wal*Mart does not force anyone to go to their stores, there is no mind manipulating crew within Wal*Mart, trust me.
- Adolescents who have watched \"Fight Club\", \"1984\", and other stories revolving around anarachy and conspiracy theories tend to develop complexes in which they believe they hold the truth about all that exists within culture and are the only individuals free of media-manipulation, regardless of the fact that their beliefs were influenced from these initial movies... this is known as psuedophilosophy, or just plain being childlike.

Grow up

You're one of THEM!

hah
teh bushist has spoken

NYAAAAH! </childish>

O'nus I don't think the main anti-WalMart argument was mind-manipulation. I think the main argument is that because some companies get so big and powerful they monopolize whole industries. And that's bad because it hurts the freedom of opportunity that this country stands for. If you want to start a business but can't even get off the ground because all the potential customers are flocking to WalMart, there is no land of opportunity. It's kinda like a suppression of the people.

Of course I'm not saying that the Walton family doesn't deserve their cash. They earned it. Or rather, Sam Walton earned it for them, so they have a right to their entitlements. But the idea is that the federal government should take more monopoly regulation into serious consideration. In the 1800s that didn't happen, and America was pretty much owned by Morgan's bank and the railroad tycoons. That led to a lot of problems and current economical policy should try to avoid that kind of stuff, or at least take preventive measures from it happening again.

That said, I'm not against WalMart, I don't think they reached the extremeness that would justify a forced downsizing of any sort. I'm just clarifying the anti-WalMart argument.

Originally posted by Regalecus

hah
teh bushist has spoken

NYAAAAH! </childish>

If you are referring to me, I am not even american, and I do not like Bush whatsoever. In fact, I utterly dispise him and wish he suffers nightmares for the rest of his life, and all the pain that he has dealt out back onto him. The pain that he has suffered is nothing compared to what he is dishing out. Bush himself proclaims being a \"War-president\" which only proves how much of a war-monger he is.

Originally posted by Squall
O'nus I don't think the main anti-WalMart argument was mind-manipulation. I think the main argument is that because some companies get so big and powerful they monopolize whole industries. And that's bad because it hurts the freedom of opportunity that this country stands for. If you want to start a business but can't even get off the ground because all the potential customers are flocking to WalMart, there is no land of opportunity. It's kinda like a suppression of the people.

Of course I'm not saying that the Walton family doesn't deserve their cash. They earned it. Or rather, Sam Walton earned it for them, so they have a right to their entitlements. But the idea is that the federal government should take more monopoly regulation into serious consideration. In the 1800s that didn't happen, and America was pretty much owned by Morgan's bank and the railroad tycoons. That led to a lot of problems and current economical policy should try to avoid that kind of stuff, or at least take preventive measures from it happening again.

That said, I'm not against WalMart, I don't think they reached the extremeness that would justify a forced downsizing of any sort. I'm just clarifying the anti-WalMart argument.

Yes, the civil side of this argument is logical. I don't like it when I meet individuals who insinuate that Wal*Mart is a tyranical company that has some mind-manipulating ability over society through their lowsy TV commercials and low prices.

However, I would think that any company that has the potential to monopolise an industry must be doing a damn good job with their business if they have earned that potential. Considering every town I have moved to that has fought the Wal*Mart's being built always argued about how they will "rob the little stores and family owned businesses" etc. never considered the fact that they are these people (and their friends) who are the Wal*Mart customers. I have gone to little towns with populations no bigger than 4000 and still believe that Wal*Mart is responsible for their friends being brain-washed by their "pascal-super-store-colors and apparently-low-prices" or whatever.

Why circumvent industry business? Where do you draw the line? Cutting back their hours? Is McDonalds restricted in their business? Because McDonalds is certainly in lead with succesful fast-food business. Also, if all these stores want "borders for opprotunity" then, alright.. what will you do when (if) you become the largest supplier of goods in your town? Where do you draw the line?

There is going to be a leader in every form of business, someone who is more successful than others. Or, at least, a handful of companies that are in competition ruling out every other brand name possible (example: shoes).

I came up with an idea for Dream Interpretation and a diet program idea before they came out and wanted to see if I could make it fly anywhere. But I was shunned immediately and labelled a cheater, plagarist, liar, etc. However, I didn't piss and moan over those companies getting it out, they just simply won the race, and I accepted that fact. The only thing that pissed me off was the insults from these patents.

What pisses me off the most about anti-Wal*Mart groups is when I was looking for work and my resume's were rejected solely for the fact that I was associated with Wal*Mart. I didn't work their, but my mother was the store manager, and because of this, I was rejected several jobs. I suppose I should be glad I'm not working for an envious, lazy, close-minded, incompetent, but it still feels like a form of discrimination.

I think you present your opinion in a very civil point of view, Squall, and I respect you for that and hold no hard feelings (as much as my post may seem.. I hope it doesn't). I am angry at individuals who exaggerate the ordeal and begin oppressing me for it or throwing insults around.

~

I am not sure about this but I think it may be illegal to not hire you just because your mother works at walmart. If thats the case you could sue them.

Originally posted by Alric
I am not sure about this but I think it may be illegal to not hire you just because your mother works at walmart. If thats the case you could sue them.

Yes, but why waste my time? I wanted a job, not easy money. Plus, it would only be another factor to add onto their list for how Wal*Mart steals everyones money. (Considering I cannot work for Wal*Mart because of my mothers position within management)

I'm not proposing the government do anything about Wal*Mart. I'm saying that if people think long term and value their quality of life, they will shop elsewhere. Also, I've heard bad things about their business practices, such as they have a history of sexual discrimination (anecdotal evidence in this thread notwithstanding, and perhaps they've corrected the problem in response to lawsuits) and they hire lots of part-time employees to avoid giving benefits.

Employees feel their jobs are threatened if they even breathe the word "union" in a store. I read an editorial recently from someone who was visiting relatives in Wal*Mart's HQ town, and they went there for groceries because there was no where else. They talked to the cashier, who told them he was hoping to move over to the warehouse, where money was better. "Do you have a union in the warehouse?" the customer asked, and the cashier just got very quiet and looked down at the items he was scanning. "You can't even say it out loud, can you?" The cashier shook his head.

Again, I don't think the government should do anything about it; if we take a long view, we just won't shop at places whose reason for existing is not to provide any good or service, but simply to translate more of the world's resources into credit for their shareholders. Yes, businesses need to generate income, but when that becomes the sole focus, as in corporations that spend more money on officeworkers to move the money around than on people who actually make or deliver the goods, the business becomes a drag on our culture.

Originally posted by Taosaur
Employees feel their jobs are threatened if they even breathe the word \"union\" in a store. I read an editorial recently from someone who was visiting relatives in Wal*Mart's HQ town, and they went there for groceries because there was no where else. They talked to the cashier, who told them he was hoping to move over to the warehouse, where money was better. \"Do you have a union in the warehouse?\" the customer asked, and the cashier just got very quiet and looked down at the items he was scanning. \"You can't even say it out loud, can you?\" The cashier shook his head.

Are you sure about that? Sounds a bit...drastic.

I don't know where that culture comes from, but it's definitely there. Walk into a Wal*Mart wearing a union t-shirt, and you WILL be approached by a manager (and no one else). I doubt anyone ever tells an employee, "Talk about unions, and you're fired!" but the idea gets across somehow.

Ah yeah, I see what you mean. If somebody suited them over it, then they'd probably get off - because they haven't said it explicity, but it's communicated without words (e.g: evil looks).

Originally posted by Taosaur
I don't know where that culture comes from, but it's definitely there. Walk into a Wal*Mart wearing a union t-shirt, and you WILL be approached by a manager (and no one else). I doubt anyone ever tells an employee, \"Talk about unions, and you're fired!\" but the idea gets across somehow.

I have several friends in many different Wal*Mart management positions, including my own mother, and none of them treat any employee's any differently if they are considering a union. Also, there are a lot more full-time positions within Wal*Mart than part-time, maybe equal as many. I could get SWAS reports to prove that to. (Excluding names of course...)