The Rich are Getting Richer Vol. II

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

So success in the U.S. is now defined by the wealthiest family marketing foreign manufactured goods mostly to the working class who they also happen to largely employ.

Wal Mart - America's Company Store.

Boy did you guys miss the point on this one.

I am missing it not to mention I was doing my own thing anyway.

What stores ARE NOT marketing foreign manufactured goods mostly to the working class who they also happen to largely employ?

[kalm]

So success in the U.S. is now defined by the wealthiest family marketing foreign manufactured goods mostly to the working class who they also happen to largely employ.

Wal Mart - America's Company Store.

Boy did you guys miss the point on this one.

I am missing it not to mention I was doing my own thing anyway.

What stores ARE NOT marketing foreign manufactured goods mostly to the working class who they also happen to largely employ?

Probably very few.

It's not so much the Walton's I'm indicting, it's the system. It would be really nice if our most successful families were rewarded for paying solid wages and selling or manufacturing domestically produced goods.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

I am missing it not to mention I was doing my own thing anyway.

What stores ARE NOT marketing foreign manufactured goods mostly to the working class who they also happen to largely employ?

Probably very few.

It's not so much the Walton's I'm indicting, it's the system.

Well now you're missing my point then my man. If it is the system then why is it always Walmart that is the lightning rod for any of this shit? Is it laziness on the part of the reporters? If it is then isn't also laziness on our own part just to feed into this stuff?

People want to find a successful group that plays by the same rules as everyone else and make them the villian in the story everytime when it is what ALL of them are doing. Just because Walmart is highly successful in one of the most cut throat and dynamic portions of our economy we have to line up against them?

What would be wrong with judging these entities by what they do (all of them) instead of just flinging shit at the one that is most successful. We were all told as youngins that this kind of prosperity was possible for anyone. Sam Walton proved it to be so and now his company is hated because of the achievement. The US just seems like one big fucking high school sometimes. By the way we're having a food fight at lunch so find some rotten fruit if you can.

[kalm]

Probably very few.

It's not so much the Walton's I'm indicting, it's the system.

Well now you're missing my point then my man. If it is the system then why is it always Walmart that is the lightning rod for any of this ****? Is it laziness on the part of the reporters? If it is then isn't also laziness on our own part just to feed into this stuff?

People want to find a successful group that plays by the same rules as everyone else and make them the villian in the story everytime when it is what ALL of them are doing. Just because Walmart is highly successful in one of the most cut throat and dynamic portions of our economy we have to line up against them?

What would be wrong with judging these entities by what they do (all of them) instead of just flinging **** at the one that is most successful. We were all told as youngins that this kind of prosperity was possible for anyone. Sam Walton proved it to be so and now his company is hated because of the achievement. The US just seems like one big **** high school sometimes. By the way we're having a food fight at lunch so find some rotten fruit if you can.

Walmart happens to be the example given. I know they play by the rules. But do you honestly believe that the 4 Walmart heirs and their brood are that much more productive than the lower 140 million?

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Well now you're missing my point then my man. If it is the system then why is it always Walmart that is the lightning rod for any of this ****? Is it laziness on the part of the reporters? If it is then isn't also laziness on our own part just to feed into this stuff?

People want to find a successful group that plays by the same rules as everyone else and make them the villian in the story everytime when it is what ALL of them are doing. Just because Walmart is highly successful in one of the most cut throat and dynamic portions of our economy we have to line up against them?

What would be wrong with judging these entities by what they do (all of them) instead of just flinging **** at the one that is most successful. We were all told as youngins that this kind of prosperity was possible for anyone. Sam Walton proved it to be so and now his company is hated because of the achievement. The US just seems like one big **** high school sometimes. By the way we're having a food fight at lunch so find some rotten fruit if you can.

Walmart happens to be the example given. I know they play by the rules. But do you honestly believe that the 4 Walmart heirs and their brood are that much more productive than the lower 140 million?

No, I absolutely don't believe that. What I believe is that they have the benefit of being the heirs of Sammie boy. That is part of what we all hope to do right? Leave a business or some sort of legacy for those in our family that follow us. So if we were that lucky to set our families up why should that be held against us and them for that matter?

Some people just get lucky. I just have a problem inside I guess about being prosecutorial when I can see no cheating going on. I can see achievement.

[kalm]

Walmart happens to be the example given. I know they play by the rules. But do you honestly believe that the 4 Walmart heirs and their brood are that much more productive than the lower 140 million?

No, I absolutely don't believe that. What I believe is that have the benefit of being the heirs of Sammie boy. That is part of what we all hope to do right? Leave a business or some sort of legacy for those in our family that follow us. So if we were that lucky to set our families up why should that be held against us and them for that matter?

Some people just get lucky. I just have a problem inside I guess about being prosecutorial when I can see no cheating going on. I can see achievement.

I get what you are saying, but when does dynastic wealth quit being acheivement and become a bad sign for the country?

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

No, I absolutely don't believe that. What I believe is that have the benefit of being the heirs of Sammie boy. That is part of what we all hope to do right? Leave a business or some sort of legacy for those in our family that follow us. So if we were that lucky to set our families up why should that be held against us and them for that matter?

Some people just get lucky. I just have a problem inside I guess about being prosecutorial when I can see no cheating going on. I can see achievement.

I get what you are saying, but when does dynastic wealth quit being acheivement and become a bad sign for the country?

I don't know. Do you think we're there? I mean we've had it pretty much since the inception right? To this day you can call someone "Rockefeller" and we all know what it means. Why is the effort of achievement not seen as a good thing?

Here's what I'm thinking in analogy...I used to love to watch Magic and Bird, but no one made me wish more that I could play basketball than Michael Jordan. I'm not even a fucking basketball fan really but the guy's playing and his achievement DID inspire me...

I didn't think he should be beaten up because of his talent. I also didn't think that we should cut his toes off so that the lesser players in the league or in this analogy the ballers off the street could feel better about their game.

[Chizzang]

Get updated...

* A 2004 estimate by the U.S. House Committee on Education and Workforce found that Wal-Mart's low wages cost taxpayers up to $2.5 billion a year in the form of federal public assistance programs. ["Everyday Low Wages: The Hidden Price We All Pay for Wal-Mart," A Report by the Democratic Staff of the Committee on Education and the Workforce]

* 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 2007]

Your local Wal-Mart costs your community up to $420,000 per year

* These costs come in the form of many public assistance programs. A 2004 study found that one Wal-Mart store cost taxpayers $108,000/year for children's health care and $42,000 per year for low-income housing assistance. ["How Wal-Mart Has Used Public Money in Your State," Good Jobs First 2007]

Your tax dollars subsidize Wal-Mart's growth

* Wal-Mart has received over $1.2 billion in subsidies from state and local governments. ["How Wal-Mart Has Used Public Money in Your State," Good Jobs First , 2007]

* A Wal-Mart official stated that "it is common" for the company to request subsidies in "about 1/3 of all [retail] projects." This suggests that over a thousand Wal-Mart stores have received taxpayer subsidies, despite their $12 billion in profits in 2007. ["New Research Shows Wal-Mart Rigs the System to Skip Out on $2.3 Billion in State Taxes," Citizens for Tax Justice, 4/16/07]

* Through a loophole in many state tax codes, Wal-Mart avoided paying $2.3 billion in state income taxes between 1999 and 2005 alone. ["New Research Shows Wal-Mart Rigs the System to Skip Out on $2.3 Billion in State Taxes," Citizens for Tax Justice, 4/16/07]

[kalm]

I get what you are saying, but when does dynastic wealth quit being acheivement and become a bad sign for the country?

I don't know. Do you think we're there? I mean we've had it pretty much since the inception right? To this day you can call someone "Rockefeller" and we all know what it means. Why is the effort of achievement not seen as a good thing?

Here's what I'm thinking in analogy...I used to love to watch Magic and Bird, but no one made me wish more that I could play basketball than Michael Jordan. I'm not even a **** basketball fan really but the guy's playing and his achievement DID inspire me...

I didn't think he should be beaten up because of his talent. I also didn't think that we should cut his toes off so that the lesser players in the league or in this analogy the ballers off the street could feel better about their game.

In some respects I think we're there. Especially in regards to monopolies where companies and individuals wield so much power they remove most of the competition. And I'm also not sure we had that much dynasitc wealth until the gilded age. Many of the founders died without much.

[JohnStOnge]

Chizz, that stuff two posts above is ridiculous. So, it'd be better if all the employees of Wal Mart had no jobs at all? I guess they would be working at other stores that charge a lot more so they could pay more? I suggest that anyone who is really interested ask any local community that has "accepted" a Wal Mart if Wal Mart represents a net finanicial loss ot that community. That "anyone" will be laughed out of town.

[kalm]

Chizz, that stuff two posts above is ridiculous. So, it'd be better if all the employees of Wal Mart had no jobs at all? I guess they would be working at other stores that charge a lot more so they could pay more? I suggest that anyone who is really interested ask any local community that has "accepted" a Wal Mart if Wal Mart represents a net finanicial loss ot that community. That "anyone" will be laughed out of town.

If the Walmart employees were instead employed by locally owned merchants and domestic manufacturers they would make more money and would be able to afford the higher prices, not to mention the shitload of savings and environmental advantages of not having to ship the goods from China. Plus, the locally owned small department store's toy aisle would bore my children to the point where they might go fishing more with me.

[YoUDeeMan]

If the Walmart employees were instead employed by locally owned merchants and domestic manufacturers they would make more money and would be able to afford the higher prices, not to mention the shitload of savings and environmental advantages of not having to ship the goods from China. Plus, the locally owned small department store's toy aisle would bore my children to the point where they might go fishing more with me.

If it were true that employing locally (and paying more wages) would allow people to afford higher prices, then every town, city, state, and country would just make everything by themselves and have their own isolated economies.

Money rules.

[Chizzang]

Chizz, that stuff two posts above is ridiculous. So, it'd be better if all the employees of Wal Mart had no jobs at all? I guess they would be working at other stores that charge a lot more so they could pay more? I suggest that anyone who is really interested ask any local community that has "accepted" a Wal Mart if Wal Mart represents a net finanicial loss ot that community. That "anyone" will be laughed out of town.

John,
None of it really matters to me, I don't shop at Wal-mart (never have and never will) nor do I live anywhere near one... but there several books by people who've done a sh!t load of research that would tell you that Wal-mart represents a whole bunch of changes in small communities when they arrive... most of the books claims are that the changes aren't really "for the better" of the community but I wouldn't know

America has embraced Wal-mart so none of this clever banter actually really matters

[Thumper 76]

The reason personally that I think that there is such an outcry against ole' wally-world is partially due to how people were raised IMO. I was brought up by my parents to think that losing wasn't "OK" and if you did something incorrectly or wrong you damn well better fix it, or find your way to get better to overcome the challenge in front of you. Poor grades were unacceptable. You can always study harder, or find a way for yourself to do better. I was always pushed. This instilled in me a feeling of responsibility for the position I am in, and everyone else is responsible for the position they are in. Yes you may be born in a worse off situation, but there are tons of people who have overcome this and succeeded in a big way. I think that many of my peers have been raised to think that its ok to float through life, and that gave them some sort of sense of entitlement. It drives me nuts to drive past a trailer park and see people with really nice vehicles, and yet they are collecting food stamps, all while surfing the internet on their Motorola Droid or Iphone or whatever. You reap what you sow dammit, why should the people that work hard to further themselves along the food chain so to speak, have to pay these people to have all these fancy gadgets. I would bet that if those wal-mart employees didn't have their cable tv with the HBO package and sweet cell phones and such they would be able to have a better overall quality of life, such as better housing. They earned where they are and what their job is. I'm a poor sonofabitch but I'm not pissing and moaning about it asking for people to give handouts to me because of it. The people that work hard and get to where they get deserve it, and I plan on ending up with them. I don't see how people that own big companies or are higher ups in them should be punished with higher taxes and such to try to bring them down closer to the low end of the spectrum because they worked their asses off to get there. And you know what, if they were born into privilege, and don't work hard, they probrably will end up fucking up the spot they are in and ending up at the bottom. Just my .02 I guess. Sorry if that wasn't very coherent, just felt possessed to post on this no matter how late it was.

Boy guess I just dove the fuck into the pool for my first poli post eh?

[houndawg]

The reason personally that I think that there is such an outcry against ole' wally-world is partially due to how people were raised IMO. I was brought up by my parents to think that losing wasn't "OK" and if you did something incorrectly or wrong you damn well better fix it, or find your way to get better to overcome the challenge in front of you. Poor grades were unacceptable. You can always study harder, or find a way for yourself to do better. I was always pushed. This instilled in me a feeling of responsibility for the position I am in, and everyone else is responsible for the position they are in. Yes you may be born in a worse off situation, but there are tons of people who have overcome this and succeeded in a big way. I think that many of my peers have been raised to think that its ok to float through life, and that gave them some sort of sense of entitlement. It drives me nuts to drive past a trailer park and see people with really nice vehicles, and yet they are collecting food stamps, all while surfing the internet on their Motorola Droid or Iphone or whatever. You reap what you sow dammit, why should the people that work hard to further themselves along the food chain so to speak, have to pay these people to have all these fancy gadgets. I would bet that if those wal-mart employees didn't have their cable tv with the HBO package and sweet cell phones and such they would be able to have a better overall quality of life, such as better housing. They earned where they are and what their job is. I'm a poor sonofabitch but I'm not pissing and moaning about it asking for people to give handouts to me because of it. The people that work hard and get to where they get deserve it, and I plan on ending up with them. I don't see how people that own big companies or are higher ups in them should be punished with higher taxes and such to try to bring them down closer to the low end of the spectrum because they worked their asses off to get there. And you know what, if they were born into privilege, and don't work hard, they probrably will end up **** up the spot they are in and ending up at the bottom. Just my .02 I guess. Sorry if that wasn't very coherent, just felt possessed to post on this no matter how late it was.

Boy guess I just dove the **** into the pool for my first poli post eh?

Somebody has to be unemployed, Thump, it's the cost of keeping wages down.

[Thumper 76]

The reason personally that I think that there is such an outcry against ole' wally-world is partially due to how people were raised IMO. I was brought up by my parents to think that losing wasn't "OK" and if you did something incorrectly or wrong you damn well better fix it, or find your way to get better to overcome the challenge in front of you. Poor grades were unacceptable. You can always study harder, or find a way for yourself to do better. I was always pushed. This instilled in me a feeling of responsibility for the position I am in, and everyone else is responsible for the position they are in. Yes you may be born in a worse off situation, but there are tons of people who have overcome this and succeeded in a big way. I think that many of my peers have been raised to think that its ok to float through life, and that gave them some sort of sense of entitlement. It drives me nuts to drive past a trailer park and see people with really nice vehicles, and yet they are collecting food stamps, all while surfing the internet on their Motorola Droid or Iphone or whatever. You reap what you sow dammit, why should the people that work hard to further themselves along the food chain so to speak, have to pay these people to have all these fancy gadgets. I would bet that if those wal-mart employees didn't have their cable tv with the HBO package and sweet cell phones and such they would be able to have a better overall quality of life, such as better housing. They earned where they are and what their job is. I'm a poor sonofabitch but I'm not pissing and moaning about it asking for people to give handouts to me because of it. The people that work hard and get to where they get deserve it, and I plan on ending up with them. I don't see how people that own big companies or are higher ups in them should be punished with higher taxes and such to try to bring them down closer to the low end of the spectrum because they worked their asses off to get there. And you know what, if they were born into privilege, and don't work hard, they probrably will end up **** up the spot they are in and ending up at the bottom. Just my .02 I guess. Sorry if that wasn't very coherent, just felt possessed to post on this no matter how late it was.

Boy guess I just dove the **** into the pool for my first poli post eh?

Somebody has to be unemployed, Thump, it's the cost of keeping wages down.

True, but most likely it will be people who are content with it or have manuevered themselves into those positions through thier actions and decisions.

[JohnStOnge]

Here is the bottom line when it comes to Wal Mart:

On the way home from work today I stopped at Wal Mart and got a few items I buy regularly. I got a pound of Community Coffee, a container of Coffee Mate creamer, a couple of boxes of spoon sized Shredded Wheat, and a gallon of Kleinpeter skim milk. The total cost with taxes was $17.70. Since we've been having this discussion I stopped by a store that's part of a local/regional supermarket chain, LeBlanc's Pay Less, to compare prices. The same items, with taxes, would have cost me $23.56 there. That is a 33% higher cost.

That is a huge difference. It is going to take an awful lot to convince me, books or no books, that having a Wal Mart located along the way on my drive home increases my cost of living.

Anybody who shops at Wal Mart and also buys things in other players can see it. It's obvious. Your cost of routinely buying day in day out supplies and necessities is WAY lower at Wal Mart. And I do NOT believe my taxes would be any lower if Wal Mart didn't exist.

As far as Government services to low pay and benefit workers goes: If there is cost there I do not blame Wal Mart. I blame a culture that has established the principle that Government is responsible for doing such things.

[youngterrier]

Their family has 90 billion dollars and they treat their employees like shit.

How can one family have so much and still treat their employees the way they do?

Apparently because of the FED and inflation...

I'll assume that comment was directed towards me, I think the standard of living on those of low-income would improve if we did not have such depreciation of our currency. In a true free market with no Federal Reserve the value of the currency and minimum wage would increase by itself with the growth of the market. Never did I mention Walmart and the like, I was alluding to the problem of our economy that is the Monetary system. It is difficult for the poor to make a decent living for themselves on their own because of the rapid inflation that is a result of our country's monetary policy that is the FED.

good night and good luck,
Youngterrier

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

The reason personally that I think that there is such an outcry against ole' wally-world is partially due to how people were raised IMO. I was brought up by my parents to think that losing wasn't "OK" and if you did something incorrectly or wrong you damn well better fix it, or find your way to get better to overcome the challenge in front of you. Poor grades were unacceptable. You can always study harder, or find a way for yourself to do better. I was always pushed. This instilled in me a feeling of responsibility for the position I am in, and everyone else is responsible for the position they are in. Yes you may be born in a worse off situation, but there are tons of people who have overcome this and succeeded in a big way. I think that many of my peers have been raised to think that its ok to float through life, and that gave them some sort of sense of entitlement. It drives me nuts to drive past a trailer park and see people with really nice vehicles, and yet they are collecting food stamps, all while surfing the internet on their Motorola Droid or Iphone or whatever. You reap what you sow dammit, why should the people that work hard to further themselves along the food chain so to speak, have to pay these people to have all these fancy gadgets. I would bet that if those wal-mart employees didn't have their cable tv with the HBO package and sweet cell phones and such they would be able to have a better overall quality of life, such as better housing. They earned where they are and what their job is. I'm a poor sonofabitch but I'm not pissing and moaning about it asking for people to give handouts to me because of it. The people that work hard and get to where they get deserve it, and I plan on ending up with them. I don't see how people that own big companies or are higher ups in them should be punished with higher taxes and such to try to bring them down closer to the low end of the spectrum because they worked their asses off to get there. And you know what, if they were born into privilege, and don't work hard, they probrably will end up fucking up the spot they are in and ending up at the bottom. Just my .02 I guess. Sorry if that wasn't very coherent, just felt possessed to post on this no matter how late it was.

Boy guess I just dove the fuck into the pool for my first poli post eh?

Not bad Thump, so what if it rambled a bit, there ain't a one of us that doesn't. Hell St. Onge posted a grocer list one time on a poli thread.

One addendum to how people put themselves in the positions that make them need public assistance. Walmart does seem to hire a lot of the less work force attractive personnel. They hire the well aged, the mentally handicapped, and a good deal of the physically handicapped as well. Being a Walmart checker is not and was never intended to be a fucking career but some want to argue that because Walmart is successful at retail they should give their employees with very limited skill sets the pay and benefits of a good career?

Another question I would have about the number of those needing public assistance other than the mental, physically, or just plain older members or our society that would have trouble getting work ANYWHERE else is how many of the public assistance that make up the stats that Cleets posted are claiming that Walmart doesn't pay enough for them to support their families? I bet that's a pretty high number because Walmart pays in line with all other entry level jobs for individuals. They are not hiring a fucking family, they are hiring a fucking individual.

It ain't Walmarts god damn fault that you have an entry level job and decided to go out and get a load dumped in ya or dump a load in someone. It don't take a whole lot of mental ability to realize that being a stocker at Walmart probably isn't gonna leave you a well developed, financially sound family.

Next time you want to copy & paste some horseshit you read on "Ihatewalmart.com" or whatever then at least try to run it through the minimal amount of thought Cleets. Better yet, finish up that vector based vibrator you have been testing out.

[AZGrizFan]

Chizz, that stuff two posts above is ridiculous. So, it'd be better if all the employees of Wal Mart had no jobs at all? I guess they would be working at other stores that charge a lot more so they could pay more? I suggest that anyone who is really interested ask any local community that has "accepted" a Wal Mart if Wal Mart represents a net finanicial loss ot that community. That "anyone" will be laughed out of town.

John,
None of it really matters to me, I don't shop at Wal-mart (never have and never will) nor do I live anywhere near one... but there several books by people who've done a sh!t load of research that would tell you that Wal-mart represents a whole bunch of changes in small communities when they arrive... most of the books claims are that the changes aren't really "for the better" of the community but I wouldn't know

America has embraced Wal-mart so none of this clever banter actually really matters

+1. I'll gladly pay 33% more to NOT have to go into white-trash heaven.

[houndawg]

John,
None of it really matters to me, I don't shop at Wal-mart (never have and never will) nor do I live anywhere near one... but there several books by people who've done a sh!t load of research that would tell you that Wal-mart represents a whole bunch of changes in small communities when they arrive... most of the books claims are that the changes aren't really "for the better" of the community but I wouldn't know

America has embraced Wal-mart so none of this clever banter actually really matters

+1. I'll gladly pay 33% more to NOT have to go into white-trash heaven.

[YoUDeeMan]

+1. I'll gladly pay 33% more to NOT have to go into white-trash heaven.

Glad I am not the only one. I went to WalMart once to see what the buzz was. Holy Shit, it looked as though every dirt bag in the county was shopping (or shoplifting) there. Of course, it wasn't all white trash...in Delaware, we are more refined and have a broader spectrum of dirt bags.

Won't go back.

Pay a fee for Costco...the small price keeps out most of the unwashed masses.

[Chizzang]

It ain't Walmarts god damn fault that you have an entry level job and decided to go out and get a load dumped in ya or dump a load in someone. It don't take a whole lot of mental ability to realize that being a stocker at Walmart probably isn't gonna leave you a well developed, financially sound family.

Next time you want to copy & paste some horseshit you read on "Ihatewalmart.com" or whatever then at least try to run it through the minimal amount of thought Cleets. Better yet, finish up that vector based vibrator you have been testing out.

Now Ursus,
You and I have had this conversation (face to face) and you know how I feel...
I like using wal-mart as an example, it serves well when one wants to point out things about local business and small town competitive capabilities vs. a huge metro-delivery system of Chinese goods etc.

Do I care if wal-mart runs every little mop & pop grocery outlet and Tackle Shop or Nik-Nak store into foreclosure... of course not - if you save $4 dollars every $25 you spend at wal-mart then there you have it... conversation over

As I've said: America has completely embraced the wal-mart mentality = It's cheaper, 97% of it is Chinese, so go fuck yourself..

My holier than thou high-horse attitude isn't getting me very far with this crowd (as is well documented) but I do like a good wal-mart debate even though I know I'm going to lose and be humiliated

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

It ain't Walmarts god damn fault that you have an entry level job and decided to go out and get a load dumped in ya or dump a load in someone. It don't take a whole lot of mental ability to realize that being a stocker at Walmart probably isn't gonna leave you a well developed, financially sound family.

Next time you want to copy & paste some horseshit you read on "Ihatewalmart.com" or whatever then at least try to run it through the minimal amount of thought Cleets. Better yet, finish up that vector based vibrator you have been testing out.

Now Ursus,
You and I have had this conversation (face to face) and you know how I feel...
I like using wal-mart as an example, it serves well when one wants to point out things about local business and small town competitive capabilities vs. a huge metro-delivery system of Chinese goods etc.

Do I care if wal-mart runs every little mop & pop grocery outlet and Tackle Shop or Nik-Nak store into foreclosure... of course not - if you save $4 dollars every $25 you spend at wal-mart then there you have it... conversation over

As I've said: America has completely embraced the wal-mart mentality = It's cheaper, 97% of it is Chinese, so go fuck yourself..

My holier than thou high-horse attitude isn't getting me very far with this crowd (as is well documented) but I do like a good wal-mart debate even though I know I'm going to lose and be humiliated

The debate is the fun part.

I use Walmart and it ain't for Chinese crap. It's for the monthly meds and if it wasn't for Walmart and what they did a few years back to the pharma's and only charging what it is really worth instead of what it means to you then costs for my insulin and various other shit would be even more unbelievable.

I don't have any facts but insurance won't cover the reli-on brand of insulin. Walmart bought out the pharmacuetical years ago as they were going under. Once Walmart bought them out and started producing it themselves the price for a bottle of insuling dropped from about $70 to $26/bottle. Insurance does cover the Lilly brand of the same insulin that is somewhere around $80/bottle now or you can go with a slightly quicker acting Lilly brand at $120/bottle.

I wonder if Blue Cross and the major Pharmaceuticals are in bed together on this thing?

I ain't nearly as worried about Walmart if they are offering employees what the rest of the employers are offering as I am the Ins. Co. and Pharma gouging the public because there is a medicine we can't live without.

[D1B]

I am missing it not to mention I was doing my own thing anyway.

What stores ARE NOT marketing foreign manufactured goods mostly to the working class who they also happen to largely employ?

Probably very few.

It's not so much the Walton's I'm indicting, it's the system. It would be really nice if our most successful families were rewarded for paying solid wages and selling or manufacturing domestically produced goods.

That's capitalism. In China now, and soon the United States, it will have achieved it's perfect form - enslavement of the working class.

Pray for high oil prices if you want to ever see domestic production.