Acorn

[Vonderbach]

I guess if you would of read what was posted you'd realize that it was in purist form that these things would work, but of course you fly right over it and reply to it as though Im in full support of socialismt, communisim, capitalism ect. Basically it said in a perfect world socialism could work, but since we have people like me, and yourself, it would never work. Keep spinning though, you might end up on the floor one day.

I truly don't think that anyone knows what you support, since your replies range from "nuh uh" to "google.com, search, cut, paste, post." How are we to know how you feel when you plagiarize the words of others in lieu of your own?

Socialism could work? Well, I suppose if you prefer massive public debt, sub-standard services, lacking morale, permanently depressed economies and a ruling class, yes, socialism works. But if you prefer an environment where rewards are earned, hard work pays dividends and the dilligent can write their own tickets, then you should choose a free market system. No sir, the meek shall inherit nothing in this world. Perhaps some higher authority may reward you for sharing the wealth, but I suspect that such an authority would reward teaching by example, self-reliance and earnest hard work ethics far greater than being meek, lazy and dependant.

It boggles my mind when I see people that feel those with great minds should pay the ultimate price for their sin of knowledge. And no, I do not speak of the educators, these people have brilliant minds, but they choose to seek humble profession of educating others. No, I am speaking of those who have great minds and use that talent to reap great rewards in this life, building empires and employing hundreds and thousands of others on the backs of their success. These people are demonized for being too propsperous and too successful. It's either that they don't deserve their money or that they don't need it, that's the social justice cause du jour these days.

So we tear down our successful and restrain them with the bonds of socialism and communism to enact the "greater good." We nationalize banks, and that leads to nationalizing auto companies, which leads to a massive overhaul of Wall Street, enabliing the government to sieze firms at will. And when the government finally pulls the trigger and the hammer of pure socialism/fascism/communism/anyism falls, those brilliant minds will withdraw from society, becoming stale and rusty ghosts of their former selves. With no incentives to build and prosper, these great minds will turn inwards and rely on what they have already amassed. And this world will no longer provide innovation or progress, just a continual stream of mediocirty. Joy to the world, we have attained nothing. And we shall crumble from the inside out. Ask yourself if this hasn't already happened once already in the last 30 years, not on our soil, but somewhere a bit...colder.

 

[Justyntym]

I truly don't think that anyone knows what you support, since your replies range from "nuh uh" to "google.com, search, cut, paste, post." How are we to know how you feel when you plagiarize the words of others in lieu of your own?

Socialism could work? Well, I suppose if you prefer massive public debt, sub-standard services, lacking morale, permanently depressed economies and a ruling class, yes, socialism works. But if you prefer an environment where rewards are earned, hard work pays dividends and the dilligent can write their own tickets, then you should choose a free market system. No sir, the meek shall inherit nothing in this world. Perhaps some higher authority may reward you for sharing the wealth, but I suspect that such an authority would reward teaching by example, self-reliance and earnest hard work ethics far greater than being meek, lazy and dependant.

It boggles my mind when I see people that feel those with great minds should pay the ultimate price for their sin of knowledge. And no, I do not speak of the educators, these people have brilliant minds, but they choose to seek humble profession of educating others. No, I am speaking of those who have great minds and use that talent to reap great rewards in this life, building empires and employing hundreds and thousands of others on the backs of their success. These people are demonized for being too propsperous and too successful. It's either that they don't deserve their money or that they don't need it, that's the social justice cause du jour these days.

So we tear down our successful and restrain them with the bonds of socialism and communism to enact the "greater good." We nationalize banks, and that leads to nationalizing auto companies, which leads to a massive overhaul of Wall Street, enabliing the government to sieze firms at will. And when the government finally pulls the trigger and the hammer of pure socialism/fascism/communism/anyism falls, those brilliant minds will withdraw from society, becoming stale and rusty ghosts of their former selves. With no incentives to build and prosper, these great minds will turn inwards and rely on what they have already amassed. And this world will no longer provide innovation ro progress, just a continual stream of mediocirty. Joy to the world, we have attained nothing.

That was awesome

 

[BenWoj42]

Really...??? That's interesting, and yet another layer is peeled back.

I think...anyone who has put their life on line in service to their country for me
and mine so that we are free to even have this discussion not only has my
deep appreciation...but my undivided attention.

Never said one doesn't appreciate what they do, but using it as a mean of "im right, your wrong" doesn't float with me.

You can serve as many years as you want for this country, but when your wrong, your wrong.

 

[TruWrecks]

Socialism is flawed in it's design that when the middle-class, whom pays for the majority of the social services no longer exists, it quickly devolves into Communism. The only people left are the super rich and the extremely poor.

The only fair system is an independent Republic. Democracy was instituted to give the people a say on how they are governed within the Republic.

I was raised with a simple view: "If you want something, get off your ass and work for it!" I have done pretty well for myself following that direction. Sure I've made a few mistake, but they were mine to make and they didn't burden others with the costs.

 

[BenWoj42]

If corrporations were to do what they should and allow employees to go to work, make a livable wage to support their family, and also take care of these workers by making sure they were healthy and able to retire comfortably, Capitalism can work. Unfortunately, that isn't the case these days. A corrporations only goal is to maximize profit no matter the cost of the worker. Take for example wal-mart. Wal-mart is raking in millions while the employees are working for minimum wage, and even though they work their butts off, they are still considered to be under the poverty line and have to apply for government assistance to stay afloat. Look at our health insurance. They make billions on us, while our coverage keeps getting reduced. If you guys want to talk about the army, look how many people have had to join the army because their was no other route to go other then starve to death. Our banks were working under the "capitalist ways" and they almost destroyed this country if we didn't bail them out (socialism).


Capitalims as a whole will destroy a country which is why I believe some socialism can help where capitalism fails.

 

[Vonderbach]

If corrporations were to do what they should and allow employees to go to work, make a livable wage to support their family, and also take care of these workers by making sure they were healthy and able to retire comfortably, Capitalism can work. Unfortunately, that isn't the case these days.

When did it become mandatory for a citizen to remain forcibly employed with an employer that pays unfair wages? I must have missed that memo.

A corrporations only goal is to maximize profit no matter the cost of the worker.

That's where you're wrong. A corporations only goal is to satisfy the shareholder, and this is done my increasing perceived value of the company. Perceived value includes profitabiity. Profitability is directly tied to costs of doing business, a factor that weighs heavily in the employee department.

It is in a companies best interest to retain employees as long as possible. If a company fails to retain employees, then these employees have exercised their free will by opting to discontinue their employment with said employer. It has been calculated that the cost to train a new employee averages around $4000. [1] Do you suppose that companies might consider that cost when ascertaining the longevity of current employees? Is it also irrational to suggest that a happy employee is a productive employee? Perhaps a happy employee provides superior customer service, which in turn drives more business? Imagine that.

Take for example wal-mart. Wal-mart is raking in millions while the employees are working for minimum wage, and even though they work their butts off, they are still considered to be under the poverty line and have to apply for government assistance to stay afloat.

I challenge you to find another retailer that offers premium wages for unskilled labor. It's absurd to think that anyone is going to far exceed the minimum wage for an employee that offers very little in return to the bottom line. As I said, find another retailer that bucks this trend and I'll show you a retailer on the verge of bancruptcy. Wal-Mart provides a fair wage, a stock sharing program that offers a 1:1 match, a profit sharing program that contributes 100% with no employee contribution and some of the most inexpensive health insurance on record. It's horrible I tell you, just horrible.

Look at our health insurance.

Yes, let's look at Health Insurance. 86% of Wal-Mart employees have health insurance, 48% through Wal-Mart's own plan. [2]

They make billions on us, while our coverage keeps getting reduced.

There are less expensive insurance plans that have highly reduced premiums for people that aren't in need of daily care for the sniffles. The reason that health care is so expensive is because people abuse the system. Why do you think hospitals are forced to charge a dollar for an aspirin. It's not for Joe Smith that has insurance, it's for the preceeding 5 people that had none.

If you guys want to talk about the army, look how many people have had to join the army because their was no other route to go other then starve to death.

Can you provide evidence of these starving people? The United States has, on average, the wealthiest impoverished class in the world. No sane person starves in the United States.

Fortysix percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a threebedroom house with oneandahalf baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
Seventysix percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than twothirds have more than two rooms per person.
The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
Nearly threequarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars.
Ninetyseven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
Seventyeight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
Seventythree percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

[3]

Our banks were working under the "capitalist ways" and they almost destroyed this country if we didn't bail them out (socialism).

They should have allowed them to fail. The entire reason that we're in trouble is because we, as a country, refuse to allow Capitalism to work. I blame Bush and Obama both for venturing into territories that they had no business being in. We need to fail so that others will learn.

Capitalims as a whole will destroy a country which is why I believe some socialism can help where capitalism fails.

You have provided no evidence to substantiate this claim. Zero.

 

[BenWoj42]

When did it become mandatory for a citizen to remain forcibly employed with an employer that pays unfair wages? I must have missed that memo.
.

Employee 1 pays $5, Employee two pays $6. Employee Two see's employee 1 is paying $5 so he changes his pay to $6. Employee 1 wants more business and a bit more profit for himself so he decides to lower his pay to $4 an hour. Repeat rince.

Edit: This brings recent news. Why are people complaining about illegal immegrants taking the cheaper jobs when they can just leave and find another one that pays more?

That's where you're wrong. A corporations only goal is to satisfy the shareholder, and this is done my increasing perceived value of the company. Perceived value includes profitabiity. Profitability is directly tied to costs of doing business, a factor that weighs heavily in the employee department.

It is in a companies best interest to retain employees as long as possible. If a company fails to retain employees, then these employees have exercised their free will by opting to discontinue their employment with said employer. It has been calculated that the cost to train a new employee averages around $4000. [1] Do you suppose that companies might consider that cost when ascertaining the longevity of current employees? Is it also irrational to suggest that a happy employee is a productive employee? Perhaps a happy employee provides superior customer service, which in turn drives more business? Imagine that.

.

To you and I $4000 is a large sum of money. To large corperations raking in millions of dollars, its nothing but pocket change. Example: When a Wal-mart moves into a city, it devalues the businesses because everyone knows it can't compeate with the prices. Businesses close, so therefore employee's have no other place to go. In theory a businesses interest is to satisfy share holder, but in reality its all about profit. One word. ENRON.

I challenge you to find another retailer that offers premium wages for unskilled labor. It's absurd to think that anyone is going to far exceed the minimum wage for an employee that offers very little in return to the bottom line. As I said, find another retailer that bucks this trend and I'll show you a retailer on the verge of bancruptcy. Wal-Mart provides a fair wage, a stock sharing program that offers a 1:1 match, a profit sharing program that contributes 100% with no employee contribution and some of the most inexpensive health insurance on record. It's horrible I tell you, just horrible.

There are less expensive insurance plans that have highly reduced premiums for people that aren't in need of daily care for the sniffles. The reason that health care is so expensive is because people abuse the system. Why do you think hospitals are forced to charge a dollar for an aspirin. It's not for Joe Smith that has insurance, it's for the preceeding 5 people that had none.

.

I guess you must have a different definition of "Fair wage" I dont consider being UNDER the poverty line "Fair".
Yes, let's look at Health Insurance.

-Wal-Mart reports that its health insurance covers only 50.2% of their employees. Wal-Mart has nearly 1.4 million US employees. [UFCW analysis of Wal-Mart health plan, March 2008]

-If an average full-time Wal-Mart employee chooses the least expensive family coverage plan, they would have to spend over 20% of their income before the health insurance provided any reimbursement.[ EBRI Issue Brief October 2007]

-An average full time Wal-Mart Associate faces a serious family health issue. They have to pay the entire out-of-pocket maximum for the least expensive health plan, which adds up to pay 53% of their income. [ EBRI Issue Brief October 2007]

In 21 of 23 states where data is available, Wal-Mart forces more employees to rely on taxpayer-funded health care than any other employer. ["Disclosures of Employers Whose Workers and Their Dependents are Using State Health Insurance Programs, Good Jobs First, June 26, 2007] -

Can you provide evidence of these starving people? The United States has, on average, the wealthiest impoverished class in the world. No sane person starves in the United States.
.

Youths in Rural U.S. Are Drawn To Military - washingtonpost.com

http://www.frac.org/html/hunger_in_the_us/hunger_index.html

You have provided no evidence to substantiate this claim. Zero.

I could use the same claim to you as capitalism isn't proven to work. Since the U.S has both Capitalism, and Socialism.

 

[m_ridgeway]

you also have to look at the quality of employees said jobs bring in. anyone just about can work at wal-mart. 0 skill level required. when i worked there some years ago while trying to attend college they payed above min wage, not much but was above. and worked with my schedule.

the only businesses ive seen go under "because" of wal mart are poorly run ones anyway. my family has owned more than a couple retail businesses and remained profitable, with big chains moving in, until they were voluntarily closed. and this is even a relatively small town.

everyone cuts their own deal, ive personally offered people working at wal-mart to work with me, make over 20 an hour, 100+ a day living, full benefits, and they wont due to lack of motivation.

people get comfortable with state/fed assistance and realise its a status of life they are ok with, it will always be there, so why try for anything more. they have a pretty decent home, free food, kids get school related expense allowances, and utilities are almost paid for.

as far as a company not paying "well enough"..... if it wasnt well enough they wouldnt have any employees, its that simple. you dont like where your at, common sense is to move on.

people are drawn to the military i feel more because they dont really know what to do. ive always told my friends and such, if your not going to college, enlist, it'll give you some time to grow up and figure out what you wanna do.

the day of a common working man are just about gone, construction was one of the few trades you could walk on, labor and move up if you were good. not so much anymore with alot of immigrants taking those jobs.

 

[afterhours]

after catching up.....there is some mis-information tht needs to be addressed.

fair wage= nobody is guaranteed a "fair wage".....this is america, we have the freedom to leave a job and find one that pays better. we all make a decision to take the job, for what pay is offered. you want to make more, get an education, learn a trade, improve your skill-set....if all you can bring to the table is your sweat....that your fault.

middle class pays for everything= the so-called middle class uses the most srvices, yet pays very little of the total tax of this country. the social agenda or the dems. and the wars of the reps. are both financed by the wealthy.


PS: as far as the evils of capitalism, if you think its so bad there are hundreds of other places in the world to live.....put your money where your mouth is and go see how great life is in other countries.

my grandparents busted thier asses to come to this country because it is the greatest....ask someone from europe, china, korea, iran or iraq that was not rich why they left thier homeland...

 

[Vonderbach]

Employee 1 pays $5, Employee two pays $6. Employee Two see's employee 1 is paying $5 so he changes his pay to $6. Employee 1 wants more business and a bit more profit for himself so he decides to lower his pay to $4 an hour. Repeat rince.

My apologies, but when has that ever occurred in real life? To my knowledge, no employer of any note has decreased their minimum pay requirements on an menial hourly level. Unless you can demonstrate this as being the norm, I'm going to assume it to be something you dreamt up.

Edit: This brings recent news. Why are people complaining about illegal immegrants taking the cheaper jobs when they can just leave and find another one that pays more?

Recessions come and go, economic theory does not. If someone can not find a job at this moment, it's not due to the poor wages of any given company. You know better than that.

To you and I $4000 is a large sum of money. To large corperations raking in millions of dollars, its nothing but pocket change.

As a percentage of payroll, $4000 per employee could mean as much as 25% of annual salaries in new hire training. You're thinking of finite dollars instead of percentages. You are also failing to account for the exponential factor that $4000 x 10,000 new hires = $40Million dollars. You don't think this gets any one's attention?

Example: When a Wal-mart moves into a city, it devalues the businesses because everyone knows it can't compeate with the prices. Businesses close, so therefore employee's have no other place to go.

And you believe that the retailers in these small towns provided higher wages and better benefits? Think again.

In theory a businesses interest is to satisfy share holder, but in reality its all about profit. One word. ENRON.

This is called a hasty generalization in terms of logical fallacies. Essentially you are concluding that because Enron failed to live up toe societal norms that we expect from our corporations, this then means that all corporations have no fiscal responsibility. Is that about right?

No, the exception to the rule is nothing more.

I guess you must have a different definition of "Fair wage" I dont consider being UNDER the poverty line "Fair".
Yes, let's look at Health Insurance.

-Wal-Mart reports that its health insurance covers only 50.2% of their employees. Wal-Mart has nearly 1.4 million US employees. [UFCW analysis of Wal-Mart health plan, March 2008]

-If an average full-time Wal-Mart employee chooses the least expensive family coverage plan, they would have to spend over 20% of their income before the health insurance provided any reimbursement.[ EBRI Issue Brief October 2007]

-An average full time Wal-Mart Associate faces a serious family health issue. They have to pay the entire out-of-pocket maximum for the least expensive health plan, which adds up to pay 53% of their income. [ EBRI Issue Brief October 2007]

In 21 of 23 states where data is available, Wal-Mart forces more employees to rely on taxpayer-funded health care than any other employer. ["Disclosures of Employers Whose Workers and Their Dependents are Using State Health Insurance Programs, Good Jobs First, June 26, 2007] -

I fail to see your point. Are you claiming that these people could find higher wages and better benefits if Wal-Mart had never existed in the first place? Are you positing that small retailers have better insurance plans, better profit sharing, better stock sharing, and higher wages? Please, I beg of you, confirm this to be true. Wal-Mart is the great Satan and all who came before them were angels of prosperity. Is that about right?

Youths in Rural U.S. Are Drawn To Military - washingtonpost.com

FRAC - Hunger in the U.S.

You said starving....starving as in dying from lack of food. Hunger is a temporary condition and one that is obviously solved via charity and social programs. The fact is, nobody starves in the U.S. unless by choice.

I could use the same claim to you as capitalism isn't proven to work. Since the U.S has both Capitalism, and Socialism.

Socialism is an invention of modern times in the U.S. FDR brought about the rise of moder Socialism in America. Everything preceding that was very much laissez fare Capitalism. And even post FDR, the social programs did little to impede industry....until the later half of last century. So 175+ years of Capitalism providing the world with the most advanced technology, the industrial revolution, medical advancements second to none....these have nothing to do with Capitalism? I obviously have no evidence whatsoever.

 

[det45]

Rant Rant Rant Rant, November is coming so let them Rant....

 

[skydivr]

Vonderbach for President!

 

[det45]

I can't wait for November.......I just can't wait for November.......Did I tell you all I can't wait for November?....Oh yeah, I did tell you all.....Just want to make sure the Libs hear me loud and clear.

 

[BenWoj42]

My apologies, but when has that ever occurred in real life? To my knowledge, no employer of any note has decreased their minimum pay requirements on an menial hourly level. Unless you can demonstrate this as being the norm, I'm going to assume it to be something you dreamt up..

Which is why they pass min. wage standards. If we were to let capitalism run with out any regulation, you'd be seeing this everyday.

Recessions come and go, economic theory does not. If someone can not find a job at this moment, it's not due to the poor wages of any given company. You know better than that...

How long has the argument of "illegal immegrants are taking the low page jobs" been going on? It's been going on for years. Like I said, if your able to find another good paying job, then why complain that the illegals are taking the lower payed job? What you said sounds a lot like anyone can find another job if your employer isn't paying enough. Dream world.

And you believe that the retailers in these small towns provided higher wages and better benefits? Think again..

Yes I do. Not sure where your getting your info from, but lower prices on goods doesn't add up to higher wages. Thought that was just commen sense.

This is called a hasty generalization in terms of logical fallacies. Essentially you are concluding that because Enron failed to live up toe societal norms that we expect from our corporations, this then means that all corporations have no fiscal responsibility. Is that about right?

No, the exception to the rule is nothing more.
.

I point out an example when a businiess was all about profit and not for the shareholders and you strike it down as if its just "one time". I guess the Banks were all about the share holders and not profit as well? Ouch, Guess thats 2 examples now? Welp, thats just "two times" right? Your living in a dream world buddy.

I fail to see your point. Are you claiming that these people could find higher wages and better benefits if Wal-Mart had never existed in the first place? Are you positing that small retailers have better insurance plans, better profit sharing, better stock sharing, and higher wages? Please, I beg of you, confirm this to be true. Wal-Mart is the great Satan and all who came before them were angels of prosperity. Is that about right?
.

I think you fail to see what these people actually earn. Wal-Mart pays an average hourly wage of $8.23 an hour. After paying 20% of their income to health insurance, then buying food, and paying for their mortgage and bills, you think these people have money to put into stocks? What a shame someone like yourself would think this. I suggest reading up on the thousands, if not millions of articles about walmart and how it's destroyed towns. What a shame.

You said starving....starving as in dying from lack of food. Hunger is a temporary condition and one that is obviously solved via charity and social programs. The fact is, nobody starves in the U.S. unless by choice..

Oh I'm sorry, I guess when one person says "I either pay the bills or go Hungry" I think of it as that person suffering. I guess I feel a little more compassion for those that are "hungry" then others as I see it as something awful like starving.
So to rely on social programs and charity because ones lack of income means that capitalism is doing well? Thats sad.

 

[skydivr]

You use Enron as an example of Capitalism run amok...actually it was greed run amok (plenty of that in a Communist state). But Capitalism worked and found the solution...the company did not survive, because it was not FIT to survive. Good riddance. There are some other companies out there right now that should not be allowed to survive, but they are 'too big to fail'.

I happen to participate in a small business. We don't pay the minimum wage (not even close) because we value and need our employees to make the company successful; both the owners and the employees share in that success. We are in a right-to-work state; if they don't like the job, they can leave (and we don't have much turnover); if we don't think they will work out and do the job that we pay them good money for, then they will be gone. We don't need a Union to tell us how to manage our employees. Nobody's holding my hand or giving me a handout, we are on our own. All we need is for the government to keep it's greedy fingers out of our pockets.

Capitalism may have it's sour points, but it's a heck of a lot better system than anyone else has come up with...ACORN was nothing but a leech on society...never created squat just tried to take stuff from others.

 

[Vonderbach]

Which is why they pass min. wage standards. If we were to let capitalism run with out any regulation, you'd be seeing this everyday.

Economic theory says otherwise. You seem to forget that companies compete for labor as well as prices. Unless you plan on introducing some communist mandate as to who can work where, then there will always be free trade in the employment market. This means that if Wal-Mart is not paying enough, you can go to work for Costco. Of course we both know that the wages won't vary that much, because this is the wage level that has been set by the market, the free market. Minimum wage is rarely touched by any major employers. Even McDonald's pays above minimum wage.

How long has the argument of "illegal immegrants are taking the low page jobs" been going on? It's been going on for years. Like I said, if your able to find another good paying job, then why complain that the illegals are taking the lower payed job? What you said sounds a lot like anyone can find another job if your employer isn't paying enough. Dream world.

I don't know why you're tossing up this straw man argument. I don't really see anything wrong with immigrant labor so long as its done properly. The only distasteful aspect is the fact that they are here illegally. Otherwise you won't find Wal-Mart directly employing illegals...not in a knowing capacity.

Yes I do. Not sure where your getting your info from, but lower prices on goods doesn't add up to higher wages. Thought that was just commen sense.

Who said Wal-Mart had higher wages? I asked you if the retailers that existed prior to Wal-Mart were paying higher wages? You failed to answer the question. You also failed to address the insurance availability, the stock program, the profit sharing, et al. I can only deduce that you really have no defense for the amazing number of incentive programs offered by Wal-Mart that were not offered by existing hometown retailers.

I point out an example when a businiess was all about profit and not for the shareholders and you strike it down as if its just "one time". I guess the Banks were all about the share holders and not profit as well? Ouch, Guess thats 2 examples now? Welp, thats just "two times" right? Your living in a dream world buddy.

So you have 2 examples of companies that failed to live up to your expectations. Hell, you could show me 50 or 100 companies and I would still point to the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of companies that operate legally and ethically under our Capitalist system without fail, employing millions of people across the country. Do you not see the failure in your logic? Imagine for a moment if someone said something as absurd as "a short man robbed me last week, and my cousin was robbed by a short man last year, this must mean that all short people are violent criminals." This makes no sense, hence my determination that you are employing a logical fallacy.

I think you fail to see what these people actually earn. Wal-Mart pays an average hourly wage of $8.23 an hour. After paying 20% of their income to health insurance, then buying food, and paying for their mortgage and bills, you think these people have money to put into stocks? What a shame someone like yourself would think this. I suggest reading up on the thousands, if not millions of articles about walmart and how it's destroyed towns. What a shame.

Emotional attachment to small retailers is understandable. Nobody wants to see Mom and Pop's hardware store close down. But face facts, Wal-Mart did nothing but improve the lives of the people of these towns. The cost of goods, down. The cost of living, down. The cost of insurance.....down. These are all benefits that Wal-Mart has brought to local towns across the country. I appreciate your desire to be Norman Rockwell and harken back to the good ole days where little Timmy would run down to the corner five and dime and pick up a pack of baseball cards for a nickel. but that's not realistic, and I would hope that you wouldn't buy into the hype that is being regurgitated on the internet time and time again.

Oh I'm sorry, I guess when one person says "I either pay the bills or go Hungry" I think of it as that person suffering. I guess I feel a little more compassion for those that are "hungry" then others as I see it as something awful like starving.

You said they were starving. You provided evidence of being hungry. They are not the same, not even remotely. If you doubt my word, research Ethiopia, or for a more modern take, Haiti. These people are starving. If you want to claim that people are hungry in the United States, then yes, they are. In fact, I'm hungry right now, my stomach hurts and I feel as if I require food. Am I one of those statistics?

So to rely on social programs and charity because ones lack of income means that capitalism is doing well? Thats sad.

One must put forth an effort to thrive in a capitalist society. This is not to say that all people are able to work. But when you're 30 years old, with 3 children and 3 fathers, I think it's time to look in the mirror and consider for a moment that perhaps it's not the system that is to blame. A bit of self-reflection is necessary in any great society.

 

[Blanca BusaLess]

One word titled thread
5 days later
75 responses and still going...

priceless...

 

[Tufbusa]

Am I the odd man out or has anyone else noticed that Dino, who couldn't wait to get in on these political threads, convienently became quiet when "BenWoj42" showed up?

Since BenWoj42's rhetoric is a mirror image of Dino, I happen to believe BenWoj42 is actually Dino doing what he does best.

 

[Dino]

Am I the odd man out or has anyone else noticed that Dino, who couldn't wait to get in on these political threads, convienently became quiet when "BenWoj42" showed up?

Since BenWoj42's rhetoric is a mirror image of Dino, I happen to believe BenWoj42 is actually Dino doing what he does best.

No tuf I have just cut back on trying to argue with stupid.

Mods you are free to let TufBusa know that Ben and I are 2 completely different people. I realize how easily old people get confused.

 

[Vonderbach]

No tuf I have just cut back on trying to argue with stupid.

Yeah, that mirror can be a challenging opponent.







Dino, I love ya, and I'm sorry.....that was completely uncalled for.