(January 12, 2018 at 4:21 pm)alpha male Wrote: Yes. Companies close locations because those particular locations aren't profitable. It's generally done independently of overall wage policy. You're making a connection based on timing of announcements alone.

Closing 63 locations at once is a pretty big deal. There wasn't actually an announcement of the closings until the news had been leaked. I find the timing suspicious to say the least.

It still does not ignore the fact that both the wage hikes and layoffs are employment related. One is good, the other is bad. The layoffs make the wage hike pretty meaningless. You can't really hold any moral high ground saying you are rewarding employees with wage increases and bonuses when you are firing a load of them at the same time. The visual isn't good for WalMart.

Quote:Timing of announcements doesn't indicate a logical connection.

Again, not saying they are "connected" but they are both employment related.

Quote:Yes, and there's nothing wrong with that message. If they built stores in areas that can't sustain them, it doesn't make any business sense to keep them open just because they employ people.

The problem is, WalMart has a history of starting up multiple stores in some areas, driving out local businesses, and then closing down stores to leave one store. It's great for business I'm sure, but not so good for employees.

It's not great for "business" either, unless you only mean their business.....but even that's been backfiring recently.  Dollar stores are driving the remaining walmart out on brick and mortar in areas that have been previously depressed by walmart.  That's a big part of the reason that they're refocusing on fulfillment centers and losing those brick and mortar stores.

"Small business this, small business that" -hands walmart a wad of money.  The GOP needs to get their shit together. This is exactly the same con we read centrist dems to filth for. Remember when Osama Bin Obama bailed out the banks instead of the people? This is more of that, except now there's no premise of crisis or hardship on the part of walmart or business in general.

Wouldn't that make it double plus ungood, or is that only the case when the kenyan does it?

I worked for Wal-Mart and they were good to work for. That changed. When Sam was alive, he took good care of his employees. So good in fact, they are still non-union. That will change.

When Sam died everything started to change. The benefits, pay, everything went south. Instead of an entrepreneur, we got a matrix they teach in college. Then shareholder value became more important then the employees. They started diminishing pay and benefits for the sake of shareholder value. You know, we gots to make that promised penny per share right! So they stole it from the employees for the shareholders, some of which, are rapist, child molesters, communists and Islamic terrorists whom hate America and Americans! They took care of them instead of the employees! Sam would turnover in his grave if he knew what they are doing in his name!

Living on Maui I have met many Wal-Mart former employee millionaires! Man, do they have some great stories! Both about working for Wal-Mart and that man!

(January 11, 2018 at 4:31 pm)wallym Wrote:

(January 11, 2018 at 3:53 pm)Wololo Wrote: Hey nazi, nice straw man you're building there. Why not, like the rest of us, work your figures off real world examples?

Oh yeah, that's right nazi, it's because real world examples fuck your worldview up the arse good and hard.

Here's what I like about you Wololo, you're so spectacularly absurd, that the first time I remember interacting with you, I thought you were doing a bit.  That you were playing a caricature of a stereotypical dumb person with no self-awareness, and I laughed at your joke, because I thought the portrayal was dynamite.  Then after a few posts I realized that it wasn't an act at all.  You were just being you, and I got an even bigger laugh at that.  You brought my cold nazi heart a lot of joy.  

And even today, I still have the nagging doubts in the back of my mind if you are not just doing a bit, because it's so fucking silly.  The imagery I have of you typing away at the computer calling people nazi's puts a huge smile on my face.  You are everything that is right about everything wrong with the internet.  

Anyhoo, I wasn't making a logical argument, it was just mockery.  Mocking the idea that someone takes a very simple number, $1000, and does a bunch of unnecessary math to present it in a way that makes it seem like less than $1000.  It's so silly, I find it funny.  Not as funny as you, but still funny.

Wololo's go to argument is calling people Nazi's lol.

And he's not always wrong

(January 12, 2018 at 6:05 pm)Tiberius Wrote:

(January 12, 2018 at 4:21 pm)alpha male Wrote: Yes. Companies close locations because those particular locations aren't profitable. It's generally done independently of overall wage policy. You're making a connection based on timing of announcements alone.

Closing 63 locations at once is a pretty big deal. There wasn't actually an announcement of the closings until the news had been leaked. I find the timing suspicious to say the least.

It still does not ignore the fact that both the wage hikes and layoffs are employment related. One is good, the other is bad. The layoffs make the wage hike pretty meaningless. You can't really hold any moral high ground saying you are rewarding employees with wage increases and bonuses when you are firing a load of them at the same time. The visual isn't good for WalMart.

Quote:Timing of announcements doesn't indicate a logical connection.

Again, not saying they are "connected" but they are both employment related.

Quote:Yes, and there's nothing wrong with that message. If they built stores in areas that can't sustain them, it doesn't make any business sense to keep them open just because they employ people.

The problem is, WalMart has a history of starting up multiple stores in some areas, driving out local businesses, and then closing down stores to leave one store. It's great for business I'm sure, but not so good for employees.

Lynchburg Va had nothing but right wing radio talk shows, and even back then, when Clinton was president, the odd thing was that Rush Limbaugh would argue against emanate domain being used by the private sector, which is how big corporations would bully homeowners and small businesses to take their land for under value. Ironic isn't it?

Emanate domain was never intended for private sector use, but because of corporate lobbyists, that is exactly what they managed to pull off.

http://reclaimdemocracy.org/independent_...nt_domain/

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB110245261831593568

(January 12, 2018 at 6:05 pm)Tiberius Wrote: The layoffs make the wage hike pretty meaningless.

Not at all. You're ignoring the fact that they can close stores without giving other employees raises and bonuses.

Quote:Again, not saying they are "connected" but they are both employment related.

Do you always talk out of both sides of your mouth like this? If you acknowledge that they're not connected, then stop pretending like they are connected.

Quote:The problem is, WalMart has a history of starting up multiple stores in some areas, driving out local businesses, and then closing down stores to leave one store. It's great for business I'm sure, but not so good for employees.

And if that's true, it still has nothing to do with giving remaining employees bonuses and raises.

(January 14, 2018 at 12:41 pm)alpha male Wrote: Do you always talk out of both sides of your mouth like this? If you acknowledge that they're not connected, then stop pretending like they are connected.

You do understand there’s a difference between “connected” and “related” right? I’m not pretending they are connected. They are both employment issues, hence they are related in that way. I’ve acknowledged that the raises are a good thing. I’m just pointing out that they have laid off thousands of workers at the same time. That’s a bad thing. You seem to only want to acknowledge the good thing WalMart did and dismiss the bad thing.

It’s irrelevant the reason behind the layoffs, layoffs are a bad thing for the employees. Celebrating a company which has just laid off a bunch of employees isn’t my thing.

Indeed Tib . It's a bit like praising a dog owner who is kind one dog but very cruel to another .

(January 14, 2018 at 5:42 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: Indeed Tib . It's a bit like praising a dog owner who is kind one dog but very cruel to another .

Right!

"My rabies infested dog only bit one neighbor"