Jump to content

OT: Walmart, K-Mart, Target, and Nazi junk here


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Originally posted by mr.rob

Walmart is more or less a retail apparatchik. They control the manufacturers who supply them, push for unrealistic pricing, and what happens is that the manufacturer can either opt to go out of business or they can move their operations to the People's Republic of China. Then where the deceased manufacturing plant with its long gone middle class jobs once were located Wal Mart throws up a store and pay the people $8.00 an hour. Meanwhile China floods the U.S. market with goods so cheap U.S. firms struggle to compete.

End result: People are so happy to save $1.00 on some P.O.S that they put themselves in a position where the jobs that allow you to buy a house and raise a family etc. go away. In other words, who gives a {censored} if a TV costs $50 more! At least that way people can make enough to put their kids through college etc.

 

Once again mr.rob sums things up perfectly. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

 

Originally posted by wishfulsinful909

Do you know Walmart almost put Rubbermaid, a giant company in of itself, out of business because they wanted Rubbermaid to cut their prices on their goods? When they didnt', Walmart took ALL their products of their shelves and the company suffered GREATLY.

 

 

That's odd, because I bought a couple new MADE IN USA Rubbermaid containers there last week.

 

There is nothing wrong with a monopoly if you have an uncorrupt government at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Originally posted by urbanscallywag

Communism or capitalism. Choose 1. A mix doesn't work. It disappoints me too, but...

 

 

I'd argue that a world where technology runs our lives you can't have anything BUT a mix. You can't have breaktrhough lifesaving medicines or procedures without someone bitching about not having access to them. You can't have private schooling when the average worker could never afford it because companies know that the government will cover the rest. Bah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Originally posted by urbanscallywag

Communism or capitalism. Choose 1. A mix doesn't work. It disappoints me too, but...

 

 

Well, that's called socialism (according to Marxist theory), and the Scandinavian countries seem to be doing pretty well with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Originally posted by urbanscallywag

Communism or capitalism. Choose 1. A mix doesn't work. It disappoints me too, but...

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I'm sorry, Urb. I don't want it to appear that I'm singling you out. :) But this is leper lame.

 

Go read your Frederic Bastiat La Loi/The Law.

 

Next, go to www.dailyreckoning.com

 

Start reading:

 

Mogambo Guru aka Richard Daughty, and

Bill Bonner

 

Not a long heavy slog. A few hours at most.

 

Still confused?

 

Watch Ferris Bueler's Day Off, Shower Scene at the beginning, nice sermon on "isms." :)

 

Still want more???? Read up on the Oneida. Zionist Kibbutzim. The peasant classes are the true stalwarts. But why?

 

Your young heart is pure. :) The world is anything but. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Originally posted by SynthBaron

There is nothing wrong with a monopoly

There generally is, because it leaves all the power to the company instead of the customers. One of the advantages of capitalism is that one's free to compete, and the nice side effect is that you're sort of forced to make a better product than your competitor - otherwise it won't work. A monopoly can cause innovation and striving for efficiency to halt - innovation because there's no competition, and efficiency because people'll pay for it anyway since there's no alternative.

 

if you have an uncorrupt government at the same time.

You don't even need a corrupt government - you just need a ruthless company ;).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Originally posted by urbanscallywag

Socialism is just a stop on the train to communism.

 

 

I agree (so does Marx). On the journey from Capitalism to Communism, Socialism is a trainstop. It's a mix of both systems. It's also been done quite effectively, contrary to your original assertion. Get your head out of the cold war, man. It's over. We no longer live in fear of a Red planet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Originally posted by BOBA JFET



I agree (so does Marx). On the journey from Capitalism to Communism, Socialism is a trainstop. It's a mix of both systems. It's also been done quite effectively, contrary to your original assertion. Get your head out of the cold war, man. It's over. We no longer live in fear of a Red planet.

 

 

Do you seriously believe this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Originally posted by BOBA JFET



I agree (so does Marx). On the journey from Capitalism to Communism, Socialism is a trainstop. It's a mix of both systems. It's also been done quite effectively, contrary to your original assertion. Get your head out of the cold war, man. It's over. We no longer live in fear of a Red planet.

The world as a whole has to step into socialism for it to be considered a success, and the same with communism. If everyone doesn't play the game's no fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Originally posted by SynthBaron

It is certainly a side effect, though.


Same thing here with the Mexicans. They love the mandatory hospital treatment laws and welfare.

 

 

Well, they're sensible people. I love those things, too (although I don't directly benefit from them). The fact the USA has played it's part in ensuring that Mexicans in general remain firmly lodged in the lower classes means that they're more likely to be recipients of these programs, but that shouldn't be taken to mean that they are taking advantage of the system by default. Virtually every Mexican (or Guatamalan, etc.) I've met has been quite willing to work and earn their own keep. I'm sure there are some that aren't, there are some native-born caucasian Americans who also take advantage of the system, and I'd hazard to guess that it's probably porportionally a larger amount when adjusted for income.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Originally posted by urbanscallywag

The world as a whole has to step into socialism for it to be considered a success, and the same with communism. If everyone doesn't play the game's no fun.

 

 

I'm not really getting you there. Could you elaborate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Originally posted by SynthBaron



The two go hand-in-hand. You cannot have ruthless corporations without renting politicians.

I see both sides of the coin. You COULD have a company that is ruthless, but is kept in check by a strong government; this probably doesn't happen in reality. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Originally posted by Smokin-Man



Do you seriously believe this?

 

 

Why shouldn't I? By definition, socialism *is* a mix of capitalist and communist ideals, and the countries that identify themselves as socialist exemplify these ideals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Originally posted by BOBA JFET



Well, they're sensible people. I love those things, too (although I don't directly benefit from them). The fact the USA has played it's part in ensuring that Mexicans in general remain firmly lodged in the lower classes means that they're more likely to be recipients of these programs, but that shouldn't be taken to mean that they are taking advantage of the system by default. Virtually every Mexican (or Guatamalan, etc.) I've met has been quite willing to work and earn their own keep. I'm sure there are some that aren't, there are some native-born caucasian Americans who also take advantage of the system, and I'd hazard to guess that it's probably porportionally a larger amount when adjusted for income.

 

 

I'm just saying that our socialist policies ENCOURAGE them to take advantage of it. I don't blame them for doing so, I blame politicians garnering for votes. I'd be happy to have them here if they'd go though normal immigration channels.

 

Lower classes? Hmm, I don't know that I'd be labling a different way of life necessarily as a "lower class".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...