Walmart Flailing, Plans to buy smaller retailers

On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 22:25:29 -0600, Sqwertz
wrote:

We are seeing some of that philosophy now. The local "Superstore" is
usually out of 25% or so of the weekly items we go to get.
Thank goodness for Publix as they are not necessarily cheaper but at
least they have stock most of the time.
--
Mr.E
 
On 3/10/2011 11:25 PM, Sqwertz wrote:

We just helped them build a smaller store (prepare site, bring in
utilities, build intersection and access road and place traffic signals
and 9 year tax forgiveness), about a mile from here. There are at least
two more in progress within a few miles of here. We just helped them
relocate 3 of the "superstores" too so their tax forgiveness could be
renewed. At one location we paid for over a year of site work because we
basically removed the top of a mountain. I feel good that I can help out
someone in need when I write out the tax check..
 
On 3/11/2011 6:34 AM, Mr.E wrote:

There are super Walmarts here, too. Their meat is the worst. Full of
added sodium and their "fresh" produce must be gassed because the minute
you get it home, it starts to spoil. I don't believe they can compete
with the distribution systems the supermarket chains have.

It's one thing to have a central distribution center for hardware and
soft goods, but fresh goods requires better logistics.

JMHO

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
 
On 3/11/2011 1:10 PM, Nunya Bidnits wrote:
Working for slave-wages is still working. I'm not advocating Walmart's
employee practices, but those people with "jobs" at Walmart are paying
taxes not just absorbing taxes. JMTCW (hope I'm not starting a war)

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
 
Re: [email protected]

George wrote:


WTF does Wallyworld need with tax forgiveness? I'm guessing some important
benefits were cut to people in need, or salaries were cut for public
employees, or something, so the community could afford to have this
megacorporation pandered to by their idiotic elected officials. When
governments fail to collect properly due taxes, someone suffers and the only
reason is so the mega corporation can continue sucking up billions of
dollars while supporting jobs overseas and not in the US. Why do local
governments suck up to this garbage? And working at Wallyworld is a truly
shitty job, so the argument that they are creating jobs, when they are going
to come in and exploit some local citizens for subpar wages without benefits
is a crock of BS. If communities would stand up up to these parasites
demanding ever more plunder off the backs of good working people while they
ship jobs overseas, these vermin would still have to build a store
somewhere, tax break or not. And or not is fine with me, then there might
be room for an actual patriotic American business that makes American goods
by employing American workers. If anyone should get incentives, it's those
who create *real* jobs for Americans, rather than selling substandard crap
made by workers overseas so they can employ people here at peon wages to
shove the shit over a scanner.

Fuck Walmart and everything they stand for. .

There

I hope they fail miserably.
 
On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 14:18:36 -0600, Janet Wilder
wrote:


I think Walmart carries fresh meat and produce as a courtesy, I don't
buy it nor do I see too many carts containing any... the most I'll buy
are their bananas and limes 'cause they're cheaper than anywhere else
and they aren't spoiled. I don't buy any of thier fresh meats but
they have very good buys on cured meats, in fact I'll be there
tomorrow to get a butt half spiral cut ham, a 3lb pack of Hillshire
kielbasa and a couple of Hillshire hard salamis... I also buy their
deli sliced cold cuts, same brands as anywhere else but at about 35%
less. But mostly I buy cat supplies from Walmart; food, litter, and
Rx... I save at least half, that's about $200/month savings, nothing
to sneeze at. I buy lots of other groceries there too, even more
major savings. I don't believe those who say they don't buy at
Walmart because they'd rather pay more elsewhere. duh And for the
same job classifications no stupidmarket pays more or gives better
bennies... wtf do yoose expect to get paid for stocking shelves and
checkout cashier, enough to own a beemer and a megamansion... stop it
already.
 
On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 14:41:58 -0600, "Nunya Bidnits"
wrote:


Jerks like you could never run a lemonade stand. You're the kind of
imbecile who has zero comprehension of why communities give long term
tax breaks to ALL major employers, you're far too low IQ to ever
understand. And when Walmart's profits fall that's an indicator that
other lesser retailers who aren't nearly as competant at business
management are going out of business altogether... Walmart is an
excellent business barometer.
 
Re: [email protected]

Janet Wilder wrote:


Well, not a war, but I profouindly disagree with the premise and I think
you're missing the point about the tax relief, per posts upstream in the
thread. Jobs are good, but the context here is almost criminal. How much you
wanna bet that the tax breaks given by the locality to China-Mart are
greater than the taxes collected locally from those employed there? How is
it possibly a valid tax incentive when it's not beneficial to the locality
that awarded it. Who makes up the difference for the poor little
megacorporation so they don't have to pay their fair share of taxes?
Everyday working folks, that's who.

The bottom line is that the tax breaks given to an undeserving massive
corporation result in an income deficit to the locality which granted the
tax abatement, and that deficit then has to be made up by everday working
people, who are then thanked by being employed for shit wages. The
corporation doesn't need a break, the people do need a break, so who gets
the break? The corporation, of course, and their political "beneficiaries"
who probably sold out there constituents for some campaign funding.

This business of shifting tax burdens from wealthy corporations who don't
need it to low and middle income people whose backs are already breaking
just has to stop. I never cease to be aghast that everyday people don't
catch on to this game and flood their representative's offices with
protesters. But when it comes time for the public hearing for this sort of
thing, the populace dumbly stays home while their pocketbooks are committed
to supporting corporations by the people they elected to protect them.
 
On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 14:21:21 -0600, Janet Wilder wrote:


My biggest problem with Walmart is that they provide lots of
half-working people, people who don't even want to work, with low
value wages and a shitty outlook on careers and workplace value in
general.

I've worked for companies I'm proud to work for and I know the
difference. I used to look forward to going to work in the morning.

Not many people in the workforce can say that about their jobs today.

ObFood: Dulce de Leche Ice Cream from HEB ($2.50/quart)

-sw
 
On 3/11/2011 10:04 PM, Sqwertz wrote:

It is more than that. Walmart has continuously lowered the bar on what
is acceptable. There are courses taught and books written on how to be
like walmart.
 
On 3/11/2011 3:21 PM, Janet Wilder wrote:
Last stats I read are that more than half of the folks on welfare in my
state are walmart employees. That would mean aside from the drain on
resources they would need to be in a poverty situation so the "negative
income tax" would also apply.

A friend works at a public assistance office and she verified that as
part of the employment package walmart workers were given information on
where to go for their "medical benefits".
 
"George" wrote

Interesting, but where would those people be if WalMart did not hire them?
Would they be working at Sears? NASA? Would they be making a living wage
at those places.
 
On 3/11/2011 5:34 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:

You tend to be little out of touch with the times. Are you proud
that this is the first time in the history of the US that children will
not do better than their parents?

Wouldn't you be the first one to scream about someone being a welfare
queen but yet it is OK for the government to pull money out of our
pockets to "help out" walmart? If walmart is run by such "competent
management" why can't they pay their own way? Its not like they are are
the edge of discovering the cure for cancer and some public funding
might help them do it.
 
On 3/12/2011 9:21 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
Unfortunately that is the problem. That is why the walmart CEO can go on
TV and say "see, we are a great employer because we just announced store
# 6999 will be opening and 5,000 are in line for jobs..."

Clearly lots of people didn't read the bulletin board about this being a
service economy. Manufacturing jobs that once allowed the middle class
to feed themselves and raise a family are gone. So I don't think it is
unreasonable for service economy employers to be responsible.
 
"George" wrote

OK, first, we are mentioning Walmart, but in fact, we are talking about
"most" retail stores. They most all pay similar wages for similar duties.

Next, let's define "responsible". Is there a minimum wage and benefit
package that should be offered? Paid sick days?

You are correct that we are becoming a service economy. Do we pay the same
wage for stocking shelves as a machinist making precision parts on a milling
machine? Do we pay the same to the guys unloading merchandise at the
WalMart warehouse as we pay the guy unloading steel at the GM plant?

Are we willing to pay for this? We are a nation of bargain hunters that
will travel great distances to save a few pennies on a big appliance or
electronic gadget. It is king of funny that many people here go on about
the high prices at Whole Foods and how the CEO is a capitalist whack job,
but from what I've been told, he pay one of the highest wages in the
industry.

Our economy is, as you point out, changing. Used to be, retail stores
employed school kids and women that wanted some part time work while the
husband made a real living at the manufacturing plant. That will work again
if 1950 ever comes back. In 2011, good paying jobs exist, but not everyone
qualifies. Medical, high technology, and construction, can still be a good
living, but there is a big gap to the traditionally low paying service jobs.

You also have a high school dropout rate and that seems to be a growing
problem. Do those kids deserve a high paying job just because WalMart (or
others) should be responsible? That should get their lazy ass back to
school and take responsibility for themselves. More skills=more money.
What is the minimum?

Above I mentioned paid sick days. The lawmakers in CT want to pass a bill
making it mandatory to give 1 hour of sick pay for every 40 hours worked up
to a maximum of 5 days. You can take them if you are sick or if a family
member you care for is ill. Sounds good on paper, but it opens the
opportunity for abuse. My neighbor was letting me last night how he went to
work sick last week because he doesn't want to use up his sick days while.
He needs them for a trip to Paris this summer.

A better way is to offer a package of "you get xx days off every year; use
them how you want to". Vacation, holiday, sick day. They are just paid
days off.
 
Back
Top