Domain: ufcw.org
Stories and comments across the archive that link to ufcw.org.
Comments · 12
-
Re:socialized medicine
I'm not a Wal-Mart shill, I have not been paid for this posting, and TBH I would rather see my wife earning more in her hand each paycheque, but it does have to be said that the medical coverage and benefits she receives are second-to-none.
Maybe Walmart is different in Canada. According to this article, Wal-Martization of Health Care "More than 60 percent of Wal-Mart employees--600,000 people--are forced to get health insurance coverage from the government or through spouses' plans--or live without any health insurance".
Falcon -
Re:What did they expect?
well, that's Walmart's perogative.
And it's the people's prerogative to criticize them for it.
As far as the health care issue goes, here's some statistics that will at least give you an idea of where I'm coming from.
-
Re:The corrupted capitalist lifestyleI love how you people characterize other people as "you people" without stopping to think. Let's look at my post again: I'm against wasting tax dollars. I'm against outsourcing our manufacturing capability to a communist country. I'm opposed to the the state being forced to subsidize a company, or its workers.
Granted, when it comes to social programs, I am against hospitals turning away people without the proven ability to pay, which does make me a little bit of a bleeding heart, I guess, but there's really nothing else in my post which could identify me, based on my opinion about this issue, as anything but a small "c" conservative.
Of course, I don't particualry identify as one, because that would make many people group me in with retards like you. According to this site , Wal-Mart only has about 47% health care coverage among its workers, vs. 67% as the national average, and 80% of those who are in retail unions.
You may want to read this pdf on outsourcing to a communist country.
I didn't, in my original post, get into the harmfulness of Wal-Mart sucking money from local economies and reinvesting it in China, but you can (I'd hope) be able to figure out that our for yourself.
And nothing in your personal attack addresses the base point of my post: You cannot judge Wal-Mart soley by the prices on the goods. You have to look at the actual societal cost to shopping there.
-
or tell them about their wonderful benefits
Or google may help everyone find out about the employee benefits at Wal-Mart, such as their excellent Health Care among others.
-
Re:about timeActually, most ERs are in privately owned hospitals. Which cover the costs of non-paying patients by adding to the bill of paying patients. So they're not sucking up your tax dollars, they're sucking up your insurance dollars. Let's get this straight!
Also, most of the non-paying patients in ERs are people with no insurance who go there because they know they can't be refused service. (Though they may have to wait 12 hours or so to be seen.) If that pisses you off, go complain to Sam Walton.
-
Re:Gotta love Walmart...
That's revenue, not profit. Gross revenue, at that. Basically, it's a useless figure that only shows how much money flows through WalMart on it's way to suppliers, employees, and shareholders.
Don't forget that WalMart is also the largest employer in the US, with more than 1 million employees. And, though I have no evidence to back this up, I've heard they operate on profit margins of 10-20%. -
Re:My eyes are filling with tears for the labels..not that I read the independent statistics you didn't cite
I would have thought in the age of Google that people would have the energy to do their own research if they doubt what is being said
But if it pleases you
:There should be ample supporting arguments on the first three pages of results from the first two links.
-
Re:Allow Me to Rant About ThisThat is simply, bottom-line, no-kidding untrue. You're spreading falsehoods.
Did you read the link that I sent you to? I know, I know, it would take a little while to read it, and you've been posting to Slashdot a lot, but take a little time and poke around in the White House released documents, and follow his analysis. It's pretty convincing, if you have any interest in being open-minded.
I said: The secretary that would have typed these memos said there were memos that were substantially the same as these that she did type.
You said: No, she certainly did not. Read the fucking transcript of the interview.
Sorry, I can't find a transcript link on CBS's site. Care to provide one? At any rate, they quote her as saying: "I know that I didn't type them," says Knox. "However, the information in those is correct." And, more explicitly:
"These memos were not memos that you typed, and you don't think they came directly out of his files," Rather asked Knox.
"The information, yes," says Knox. "It seems that somebody did see those memos, and then tried to reproduce and maybe changed them enough so that he wouldn't get in trouble over it."
What would "those memos" be, but ones that held substantially the same information (and that she would have typed)? So, not true? Is she lying? Where's your evidence?
Ah, yes. See? That's the great thing about the rabid, frothing Bush-haters. They can't compose more than about two paragraphs without spinning off into irrational hatred.
It's hilarious that you're going to call me a "frothing Bush-hater" because I said that he lies about everything. Let's see a few of the things he's lied about:
- Saddam has WMD and is ready to use them against the US.
- His tax cuts are working.
- We're winning in Iraq
I don't know, what else do you want? Since there's little-to-no-chance that you'll read those links & think about them, I'll post more only if you want me to respond to particular claims that Bush has made.
Yet another crazy person.
You were, of course, talking about yourself, right? Because, if someone credible came forward and said that "Bush did serve, I was there and here are some pictures", I'd have to say (as soon as the evidence was substantiated) that I was wrong to say that he's lying. Hell, I'll even email him an apology.
Are you willing to even consider that you're wrong about this? Can you think critically and question your deeply held beliefs? If not, then you're the one who is crazy. - Saddam has WMD and is ready to use them against the US.
-
You are missing the point
While the media's portrayal of Christians may be skewed, ask your Christian friends whether they consider themselves to be Republican or Democratic and whom they will vote for this year. After they tell you they are Republican, ask them what the Republican party would have to do to lose their vote, or what the Democratic party would have to do to gain it. Now weigh their answer against the probability of those reasons ever happening. This is the real point, and the politicians know it.
Of all the Christians I personally know, only one has already decided to cross the party line this year to vote non-Republican. He has decided that opposing Bush's policies on revitalizing US imperialism, ignoring UN entirely before invading Iraq, ignoring the 1997 Kyoto Treaty, reckless governmental spending, doing virtually everything possible to support big business (especially the oil industry), helping to screw the 40 hour work week, and countless others, are more important than supporting his Christian-based issues of anti-abortion, anti-gay/lesbian , anti-non-Christian religions, etc.
Granted, I haven't conducted a Gallup Poll, but I would certainly like to see the demographic breakdown. What do you think: 90% of people who identify themselves as Christian (not just religious, but Christian) vote Republican? More? Less? Anyone have access to this poll or this one? -
oh reallyNo company in the United States would truly want to do that because they wouldn't be able to compete with the pricing. So what they would do is buy from a chinese sweatshop and have them relabel the tags with "Made in America" ones.
Wal-Mart and Sweatshops
It may all look good on paper, but this is nothing short of typical politics: "You pressure us, we pressure you" and with an economy like China which is still immature, someone is going to bend, and I don't think it would be ChinaMany Americans believe the clothing purchased in U.S. Wal-Mart stores is manufactured in America. In fact, the majority of its private label clothing is manufactured in at least 48 countries around the world, but not in the U.S.
In his autobiography, Made in America: My Story founding Wal-Mart President, Sam Walton, proselytized "Buy American." USA Today, August 14, 2001, reported that, "Wal-Mart has more than 1,107 international operations." The newspaper also reports that, "Bangladesh workers earn as little as nine cents an hour making shirts for Wal-Mart.
Hypocritically, Wal-Mart ran a "Buy American" and "Buy Mexican" marketing campaigns simultaneously, all the while reinvesting its all-American dollars overseas.
Wal-Mart is the largest importer of Chinese goods. 10% of all Chinese imports are imported by Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart even established its own global procurement division this year, abandoning the pretense to its traditional "buy American" campaign. This team searches the globe for the cheapest raw materials, manufacturers and shipping routes. They allow Wal-Mart to relocate factories from one country to the next in its endless quest to squeeze countries for lower wages and cheaper goods. (LA Times 12/03) (source)
-
Re:can you back up that claim?donutz (195717) said:
Do you have anything to back up this claim?
Check out Bill Moyer's "Wal-Mart and the World"From Wal-Mart's War on Unions:
When meat cutters at a Jacksonville, Tex., Wal-Mart voted for UFCW Local 540 representation in February 2000, the company refused to recognize the union--and suddenly changed the job functions of the meat cutters with a change to case-ready meat. Wal-Mart believed it had successfully circumvented the UFCW's first victory at one of its stores--until a National Labor Relations Board Administrative Law Judge ordered the company to recognize and bargain with Local 540 over the effects of the change to prepackaged meat. This order comes more than three years after the original union election. Case-ready beef and pork is cut, processed and packaged in the meat slaughterhouses, then transported to the retail outlets already packaged and ready for sale.
Or watch the video and hear directly from workers and former managers at Wal-Mart.There was a story in the NY Times sotry "The Wal-Martization of America."
Dude, Walmart sucks big time for their workers. A picture is worth a thousand words
... -
Re:can you back up that claim?donutz (195717) said:
Do you have anything to back up this claim?
Check out Bill Moyer's "Wal-Mart and the World"From Wal-Mart's War on Unions:
When meat cutters at a Jacksonville, Tex., Wal-Mart voted for UFCW Local 540 representation in February 2000, the company refused to recognize the union--and suddenly changed the job functions of the meat cutters with a change to case-ready meat. Wal-Mart believed it had successfully circumvented the UFCW's first victory at one of its stores--until a National Labor Relations Board Administrative Law Judge ordered the company to recognize and bargain with Local 540 over the effects of the change to prepackaged meat. This order comes more than three years after the original union election. Case-ready beef and pork is cut, processed and packaged in the meat slaughterhouses, then transported to the retail outlets already packaged and ready for sale.
Or watch the video and hear directly from workers and former managers at Wal-Mart.There was a story in the NY Times sotry "The Wal-Martization of America."
Dude, Walmart sucks big time for their workers. A picture is worth a thousand words
...