On 2010-04-13 09:42:06 -0700, Kent Brockman said:

> On 13-Apr-2010, notbob > wrote:
>
>> So, the clerks at Krogers make union wages but the clerks at Walmart
>> make min wage so can't afford health insurance
>
> Problem solved, by 2014 the Kroger workers will be paying for the Walmart
> employees health insurance.

*All* of us, including the Walmart employees, will be paying for healh
insurance for such as the @almart employees. Just as we paid for their
use of emergency rooms when they came to die.
--
-- Beware the delicate, tiny, very talented celebrity starlets.

I only buy the canned goods frozen foods and such at WM. The prices seem to be a little lower than when I go to Meijer. I never really buy meat or anything there because it doesn't seem to be a good quality.

On Apr 13, 1:14*pm, gtr > wrote:

> In Walmart's approach, as with many corporate strategies, part of it is
> to choke all competitors to death. Like Home Depot, Staples,
> Blockbuster, Starbucks:

.... and the locally owned pharmacy, the locally owned butcher, the
locally owned optical store &c.
Walmart is happy to hire those folks at minimum wage once their
businesses go TU.

>Part of their approach to *eliminate
> competition*. *Well that's not evil, just good business.
>

On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:03:16 -0500, Pete C. wrote:

> Dimitri wrote:
>>
>> Supposedly Wally World has made some substantial price reductions in their
>> food sections.
>>
>> I do now have a WM super center or WM food store near by so I can not judge.
>>
>> I know a few years ago I could consistently beat their prices else ware.
>>
>> What say you?
>>
>> Dimitri
>
> I've got two Super Mal-Warts nearby, roughly 5 miles in each direction
> up/down the highway. I rarely do any food shopping or any other shopping
> at either one, but the few times I have wandered through their prices
> seemed pretty average. I find the prices at Sam's or Costco are pretty
> good for most things, but being single I don't pay a huge amount of
> attention to food prices since I don't have a big family to feed.

well, i'm single and i find food prices appalling even though i have only
puny old me to feed.

your pal,
blake

On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:15:35 -0400, Goomba wrote:

> Samantha Hill wrote:
>
>> Go to Hulu and watch, "The Age of Walmart" and "The New Age of Walmart,"
>> and you will get a better picture of what they are talking about. Things
>> like paying employees as little as possible and forcing suppliers to
>> slash their profits to the bone for the sake of lower prices so that
>> Walmart can make more profits. IMO, it's not the lower prices that are
>> the problem; it's the robber baron mentality.
>
> How much should unskilled labor get paid exactly?

anyone working forty hours a week should at least be able to support
themselves. this is no longer true in the u.s.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:

> anyone working forty hours a week should at least be able to support
> themselves. this is no longer true in the u.s.
>
> your pal,
> blake

Themselves alone?

"Goomba" > wrote in message
...
> Samantha Hill wrote:
>
>> Go to Hulu and watch, "The Age of Walmart" and "The New Age of Walmart,"
>> and you will get a better picture of what they are talking about. Things
>> like paying employees as little as possible and forcing suppliers to
>> slash their profits to the bone for the sake of lower prices so that
>> Walmart can make more profits. IMO, it's not the lower prices that are
>> the problem; it's the robber baron mentality.
>
> How much should unskilled labor get paid exactly? I work with a nurse who
> used to be a Walmart store manager and he informed me that benefits kick
> in after 24 hours a week, if I recall correctly? When I was a younger
> working unskilled jobs I didn't get ANY benefits years ago. I never
> expected much from those jobs and just considered them stepping stones up
> to something better. They certainly were motivational for wanting better
> and I worked to obtain that.
>
> I truly dislike Walmart, more because of the way they alter local
> businesses (those mom and pops) as well as the demands they make on their
> suppliers, but as far as their employees go, I see little different with
> them than a majority of other unskilled type jobs.


If everyone had a PHD you'd still have people working at Walmart, human
beings are not a 'labor cost', they are our brothers and sisters. Unskilled
labor should make enough money to live a decent life. Pay is not determined
by what is contributued but by how much a 'corporation' (the 5% of the
humans who own everything) can get away with. Gross wealth and gross poverty
both have to be monitored and controlled to eliminate both.

--
regards, piedmont (Mike)
The Practical BBQ'r - http://sites.google.com/site/thepracticalbbqr/
(mawil55)

In article <2010041310024629833-xxx@yyyzzz>, gtr > wrote:

> On 2010-04-13 07:52:30 -0700, Dan Abel said:
>
> > It works on me. I've bought lots of stuff at Costco that I hadn't
> > planned on buying, because the sample tasted good.
>
> Examples?

It's been a lot of years, and I'm sure I can't remember most, but here's
a few:

Yoshida teryaki sauce
frozen pot stickers
frozen salmon portions
unfrozen ravioli and tortellini
fresh pears

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Dan Abel wrote:

> Yoshida teryaki sauce
> frozen pot stickers
> frozen salmon portions
> unfrozen ravioli and tortellini
> fresh pears
>

LOL. you too on the Yoshida? We tried it as a sample once about 10 years
ago and purchased it that one time. I couldn't get anything to taste as
good as the sample lady made, and was sick of the stuff and also the
large jug after a short while.
I'm more careful now.

Food Slob wrote:

>On Apr 12, 4:08*pm, George Shirley > wrote:
>> On 4/12/2010 3:33 PM, Dimitri wrote:
>>
>> > Supposedly Wally World has made some substantial price reductions in
>> > their food sections.
>>
>> > I do now have a WM super center or WM food store near by so I can not
>> > judge.
>>
>> > I know a few years ago I could consistently beat their prices else ware.
>>
>> > What say you?
>>
>> > Dimitri
>>
>> I quit buying food at Wally World years ago. That's when I happened to
>> read the "contents" on a meat label, it said, "beef and water." I don't
>> want my beef plumped up to look purty, I want it to taste good.
>
>WalMart beef should be avoided. The beef at Sam's is fine. I don't
>avoid shopping at WalMart, but I do know what is, and is not a good
>deal there. They are no more evil than most other corporations.
>They're just better than some at marketing their evil. It's the
>system itself that needs to be modified. If WalMart and everyone else
>had to pay living wages and provide health benefits, then the race to
>the bottom could be reversed.

They actually pay excellent wages for what their employees need to
know to work in a grocery... they only need relatively few with
college degrees to work in their offices. Walmart is no different
from any other similar retail establishment and better than most....
you really think other stupidmarket/department stores treat employees
better, you're from another planet.

Most positions at Walmart and other similar stores are no-skill/no
future jobs, they are not intended to be career positions... those are
the jobs meant to give students a little pocket change for the
weekends... and to give Seniors something to occupy themselves a
couple days a week and earn them a little golfing money... and they
also hire a lot of learning disabled, makes those poor souls feel
needed... Walmart pays them the same measly wage as normal people but
mostly it's us tax payers who support those poor souls... Walmart (and
many other big businesses) does a good deed by hiring those who by no
deed of their own made them needy. Walmart does a tremendous amount
of community service of all sorts, they just don't boast about it.

I'd much rather my grand kids toil at Walmart while earning an MBA
than they make those big bucks and bennies laboring in a coal mine or
some other dangerous filthy factory for the rest of their existance.
To me it's patently obvious that you work at a loser job (if you work
at all, I'm sure you don't) and you're proud that your kids (if any)
are loser acorns as well... only the envious losers slam Walmart. Only
the infantile insecure pinheads tell others not to shop someplace,
same as telling folks who to killfile... it'a an assault on their
intelligence that some useless non-thinking scumbag is telling folks
what to do as though they can't think for themselves. When you tell
folks what to do/what to believe, especially in a public forum, you
are attempting to discover which moronic loony birds are of your
feather.

On 2010-04-13, brooklyn1 > wrote:

> intelligence that some useless non-thinking scumbag is telling folks
> what to do as though they can't think for themselves.

Whew! It's a good thing you never do that.

nb

"Goomba" > wrote in message
...
> Dan Abel wrote:
>
>> Yoshida teryaki sauce
>> frozen pot stickers
>> frozen salmon portions
>> unfrozen ravioli and tortellini
>> fresh pears
>>
>
> LOL. you too on the Yoshida? We tried it as a sample once about 10 years
> ago and purchased it that one time. I couldn't get anything to taste as
> good as the sample lady made, and was sick of the stuff and also the large
> jug after a short while.
> I'm more careful now.


Once at Costco I had an Indian lady sari & all sampling frozen taquitos and
telling me how to convert then into Enchiladas or some such. She tried
hard.

I must say the powdered smashed potatoes at Sims are far superior to the
bags of junk Costco sells.

Dimitri

"brooklyn1" > wrote in message
...
> Food Slob wrote:
>
>>On Apr 12, 4:08 pm, George Shirley > wrote:
>>> On 4/12/2010 3:33 PM, Dimitri wrote:
>>>
>>> > Supposedly Wally World has made some substantial price reductions in
>>> > their food sections.
>>>
>>> > I do now have a WM super center or WM food store near by so I can not
>>> > judge.
>>>
>>> > I know a few years ago I could consistently beat their prices else
>>> > ware.
>>>
>>> > What say you?
>>>
>>> > Dimitri
>>>
>>> I quit buying food at Wally World years ago. That's when I happened to
>>> read the "contents" on a meat label, it said, "beef and water." I don't
>>> want my beef plumped up to look purty, I want it to taste good.
>>
>>WalMart beef should be avoided. The beef at Sam's is fine. I don't
>>avoid shopping at WalMart, but I do know what is, and is not a good
>>deal there. They are no more evil than most other corporations.
>>They're just better than some at marketing their evil. It's the
>>system itself that needs to be modified. If WalMart and everyone else
>>had to pay living wages and provide health benefits, then the race to
>>the bottom could be reversed.
>
> They actually pay excellent wages for what their employees need to
> know to work in a grocery... they only need relatively few with
> college degrees to work in their offices. Walmart is no different
> from any other similar retail establishment and better than most....
> you really think other stupidmarket/department stores treat employees
> better, you're from another planet.
>
> Most positions at Walmart and other similar stores are no-skill/no
> future jobs, they are not intended to be career positions... those are
> the jobs meant to give students a little pocket change for the
> weekends... and to give Seniors something to occupy themselves a
> couple days a week and earn them a little golfing money... and they
> also hire a lot of learning disabled, makes those poor souls feel
> needed... Walmart pays them the same measly wage as normal people but
> mostly it's us tax payers who support those poor souls... Walmart (and
> many other big businesses) does a good deed by hiring those who by no
> deed of their own made them needy. Walmart does a tremendous amount
> of community service of all sorts, they just don't boast about it.
>
> I'd much rather my grand kids toil at Walmart while earning an MBA
> than they make those big bucks and bennies laboring in a coal mine or
> some other dangerous filthy factory for the rest of their existance.
> To me it's patently obvious that you work at a loser job (if you work
> at all, I'm sure you don't) and you're proud that your kids (if any)
> are loser acorns as well... only the envious losers slam Walmart. Only
> the infantile insecure pinheads tell others not to shop someplace,
> same as telling folks who to killfile... it'a an assault on their
> intelligence that some useless non-thinking scumbag is telling folks
> what to do as though they can't think for themselves. When you tell
> folks what to do/what to believe, especially in a public forum, you
> are attempting to discover which moronic loony birds are of your
> feather.



I had been doing business with Wal Mart for the past 20 years. Regardless of
their reputation there are several factors to consider.

1. The internal systems at Wal Mart are 2nd to none. Their inventory
control and sales recording systems are head and shoulders above almost
every other mass merchant I have ever dealt with.

2. The vendor access to sales records and inventory is spectacular - the
system is called RETAIL-LINK and is a proprietary system

3. Wal Mart along with IIRC Penny's were instrumental in the adoption of
the UCC128 shipping label format which has greatly increased the efficiency
of the movement of goods as well as their data entry into the inventory
systems. The next time you get a UPS shipment look at the label its
virtually universal in its adoption.

4. The buyers control is unbelievable - do you want to know which stored
sell the most Nintendo DS game cartages? In a heart beat he./she can tell
you.

5. There is a system called VMI (vendor managed Items) where the vendor
like Coca-Cola is in full control of their inventory - as example.

6. Finally - it is important to understand the MOST IMPORTANT PART OD A
BUYERS JOB is not buying or selecting merchandise - that's the easy part -
it is the control of the Dollars that determines their success.


I don't agree with many of the ways they do things but they are very good at
what they do. You don't get as big as they are and not be good at what you
do.

Dimitri

Food Snob® wrote:
>
> You listed two concerns for the well
> being of business entities, but callously said that you don't give a
> shit about the lowly worker. Someone has to do those jobs. What if
> everyone *bettered themselves*? You are calling those "unskilled"
> workers lazy.


For me it's a matter of they are making a HUGE percentage of profit and
selfishly keeping it to themselves and not sharing their bounty with
their employees. No profit-sharing, no making the health care benefits
they offer affordable so most of their employees can afford to purchase
them, etc.

In people's quest for more and more materialistic things, they have
forgotten the philosophies expressed by Benjamin Franklin and John Ruskin:

"The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low
price is forgotten."
-- Benjamin Franklin

There is hardly anything in the world that someone cannot make a little
worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only
are this man’s lawful prey. It’s unwise to pay too little. When you pay
too much, you lose a little money...that is all. When you pay too
little, you sometimes lose everything because the thing you bought was
incapable of doing the thing it was bought to do. The common law of
business balance prohibits paying a little and getting a lot...it can’t
be done. If you deal with the lowest bidder, it is well to add something
for the risk you run; and if you do that, you will have enough to pay
for something better.”
-John Ruskin (1819 - 1900)
English critic, essayist, & reformer

piedmont wrote:

> not determined by what is contributued but by how much a 'corporation'
> (the 5% of the humans who own everything) can get away with. Gross
> wealth and gross poverty both have to be monitored and controlled to
> eliminate both.

Well, nobody is controlling Walmart's gross wealth that is creating the
(relative or actual) gross poverty among their employees and suppliers.

On 2010-04-13 11:34:58 -0700, notbob said:

> On 2010-04-13, Virginia Tadrzynski > wrote:
>
>> when in training, we were told the main goal was a Walmart every 5 miles and
>> a Super Walmart every 10....across the country.
>
> No doubt they're acheiving it. I've seen 'em as close as 3.5 miles
> apart.

As mentioned upstream in central OK two SuperCenters are 1.8 miles apart.
--
Thank you and have a nice day.

On 2010-04-13 11:49:22 -0700, George Leppla said:

> On 4/13/2010 1:26 PM, notbob wrote:
>> On 2010-04-13, Ms > wrote:
>>
>>> Because the majority of Walmart stores aren't in cities where people have
>>> lots of choices. Walmarts are in smaller towns where they put the
>>> competition out of business and those people don't have any choices left.
>>
>> Nonsense.
>>
>> Walmart will put up a store wherever they can insinuate themselves on
>> their own terms for their own benefit.
>
> OK. What is illegal about that?

Legality isn't what puts people out of business. It's the disregard
corporations have for humanity. There's nothing illegal about moving a
plant out of a town that will collapse without it. And moving it to
asia where the work will be done by what would pass for slave labor.

It's legal both places.

There are lots of things that are inhuman, destructive to families and
to our country's future; but legal!

> I run my business on my own terms for my own benefit. I do nothing
> illegal... so what am I doing wrong?

The only way to know would be to find out how many lives you ruin in
the process, if any.
--
Thank you and have a nice day.

On 2010-04-13 11:54:54 -0700, brooklyn1 said:

> I'd much rather my grand kids toil at Walmart while earning an MBA
> than they make those big bucks and bennies laboring in a coal mine or
> some other dangerous filthy factory for the rest of their existance.

And if instead they weren't working toward any degree at all, and could
not afford to go to school, pay their rent and car tab without working
full time at Walmart? You know, like the average Walmart worker?

> To me it's patently obvious that you work at a loser job (if you work
> at all, I'm sure you don't) and you're proud that your kids (if any)
> are loser acorns as well...

I notice since the recession began that millions and millions of
American workes suddenly became losers, and now it turns out they are
lazy losers, and so their unemployement must be yanked for punishing
them.

> Only the infantile insecure pinheads tell others not to shop someplace,
> same as telling folks who to killfile... it'a an assault on their
> intelligence that some useless non-thinking scumbag is telling folks
> what to do as though they can't think for themselves. When you tell
> folks what to do/what to believe, especially in a public forum, you
> are attempting to discover which moronic loony birds are of your
> feather.

Is that what they teach folks on Fox?
--
Thank you and have a nice day.

On 2010-04-13 12:03:25 -0700, Mark Thorson said:

> George Leppla wrote:
>>
>> Oh... and I bought a bunch of green onions for $1. A bunch half the
>> size would have cost $1.49 at Kroger. Crap... I went further down the
>> path of social and financial ruin by buying two reams of paper at $2.96
>> instead of $3.88 at Office Depot.
>
> Around here, the lowest prices on food are
> at the Asian supermarkets. Currently, a bunch
> of green onions is $0.49 (up from $0.34 a couple
> weeks ago), while at Safeway it's $0.99.

That's the same around here. But over there they seem to cost alot,
and way over there--no, no, over THE Well the prices are
ridiculously high!
--
Thank you and have a nice day.

"projectile vomit chick" > wrote in message
...
On Apr 12, 3:33 pm, "Dimitri" > wrote:

>
> What say you?
>

I say:

Learn some grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Then try back next
week.

NO!

Dimitri

On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:38:02 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote:

>In article <2010041310024629833-xxx@yyyzzz>, gtr > wrote:
>
>> On 2010-04-13 07:52:30 -0700, Dan Abel said:
>>
>> > It works on me. I've bought lots of stuff at Costco that I hadn't
>> > planned on buying, because the sample tasted good.
>>
>> Examples?
>
>It's been a lot of years, and I'm sure I can't remember most, but here's
>a few:
>
>Yoshida teryaki sauce
>frozen pot stickers
>frozen salmon portions
>unfrozen ravioli and tortellini
>fresh pears

I buy stuff from trying samples all the time that I'd very likely not
have otherwise... I'm especially vulnerable to deli and bakery
samples... and I sample produce and then I buy. And I'm not one of
those gimme a 1/4 this and a 1/4 that types, I can't remember ever
buying less than a pound at a deli or bakery and fresh fruit I'll buy
no less than three pounds of any one item... three pounds of grapes
hardly fill my small colander. At Sam's Club I'm a sucker for their
big trays of baked products because of samples, their muffins are
wonderful, all are great but especially their raisin bran. Stores
want folks to sample, especially perishables, better they eat a bunch
of grapes and buy a sackful than they don't sell and sit there to
spoil. Studies show over and over that offering samples not only
makes sales it also increases the size of sales dramatically. It's
like the produce department cutting up whole water melons for sampling
is exactly the same reason car dealerships want you to take a test
drive, the majority of folks who sample a slice of melon will buy a
whole one... at the auto dealership the test drive closes the deal,
all the sales person need do is find you the financing.

"Samantha Hill" > wrote
> Go to Hulu and watch, "The Age of Walmart" and "The New Age of Walmart,"
> and you will get a better picture of what they are talking about. Things
> like paying employees as little as possible and forcing suppliers to slash
> their profits to the bone for the sake of lower prices so that Walmart can
> make more profits. IMO, it's not the lower prices that are the problem;
> it's the robber baron mentality.

Wal-Mart has never forced a supplier to slash their profits. They do it
willingly, mostly due to greed and the big volume they can get selling to
Wal-Mart.

About five years ago our largest customer (major appliance manufacturer)
tried to get similar concessions from us on pricing. We told them no, where
do you want us to ship your tooling? They moved the $1 million worth of
business to one of our competitors that happily grabbed the business at the
low price offered. A year later or, they closed there plant and filed
Chapter 11.

Google the articles on Wal-Mart and Vlasic pickles and Wal-Mart and Snapper
mower. One said yes, the other said no.

Shed no tears for their suppliers. They have options.

"Samantha Hill" > wrote
> For me it's a matter of they are making a HUGE percentage of profit and
> selfishly keeping it to themselves and not sharing their bounty with their
> employees.

What is the percentage of profit they make? How does it compare to other
retailers, such as K-Mart, Kohls, etc?



>
> In people's quest for more and more materialistic things, they have
> forgotten the philosophies expressed by Benjamin Franklin and John Ruskin:
>

True, but I blame the customer for that, not the store. You see it all the
time, people spend hours finding the lowest possible price on a camera,
that big flat screen TV, etc and will drive many miles to save $10 on a $900
purchase. The people of China thank us for that too.

gtr wrote:
> On 2010-04-13 07:52:30 -0700, Dan Abel said:
>
>> It works on me. I've bought lots of stuff at Costco that I hadn't
>> planned on buying, because the sample tasted good.
>
> Examples?



I'm not Dan, but I usually end up buying at least one new cheese
every trip due to the samples they offer.

gloria p

On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:29:41 -0400, Goomba >
wrote:

>blake murphy wrote:
>
>> anyone working forty hours a week should at least be able to support
>> themselves. this is no longer true in the u.s.

That's never been true, no one in the US has ever been able to support
themselves on minumum wage, but that's all most unskilled labor is
worth... unless unskilled labor is inherently perilous or entails some
other mitigating circumstances, like cleaning bed pans where there's
risk of disease

>Themselves alone?

Ask the mick when was the last time he worked a forty minute week... I
seriously doubt he's ever worked, he posseses no marketable skills.

Usta be many young folks became an apprentice to learn a trade, for
their efforts they were given room and board plus a small stipend
which increased as they advanced. Apprentices were able to live quite
well for less them minimum wage, but eventually they were able to earn
way above minimum wage and could rest assured that after finishing
their apprentiship they'd never be without employment for as long as
they lived... this is still true today in many trades. I have a 78
year old neighbor who began as an apprentice and still earns a very
good living shoeing horses... he doesn't need the money, he enjoys his
work.

On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 20:05:27 GMT, notbob > wrote:

>brooklyn1 wrote:
>
>> intelligence that some useless non-thinking scumbag is telling folks
>> what to do as though they can't think for themselves.
>
>Whew! It's a good thing you never do that.

Stop lying... I never told anyone where not to shop or who to
killfile. Actually with your editing you're the worst kind of liar, a
criminal purjurer.

On 2010-04-14, brooklyn1 > wrote:

> Stop lying... I never told anyone where not to shop or who to
> killfile.

Never directly. You just assault, insult, and belittle anyone who
doesn't agree with you.

nb

On 2010-04-14, brooklyn1 > wrote:

> Actually with your editing you're the worst kind of liar....

You mean like that alleged picture of yourself in the mugshot section?

nb

In article <2010041316481691155-xxx@yyyzzz>, gtr > wrote:

> On 2010-04-13 11:49:22 -0700, George Leppla said:

> > I run my business on my own terms for my own benefit. I do nothing
> > illegal... so what am I doing wrong?
>
> The only way to know would be to find out how many lives you ruin in
> the process, if any.

George puts people on cruise ships.

Hey George! Could you ruin my life, please?

:=)

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Apr 13, 10:08*am, notbob > wrote:
> On 2010-04-13, Goomba > wrote:
>
> > who used to be a Walmart store manager and he informed me that benefits
> > kick in after 24 hours a week.....
>
> ....as if everyone in the store actually gets to work at least 24 hrs
> a week.
>
> This is an old business tactic. *Hire twice as many workers to work
> half as many hours, then save big $$$ by not having to pay bennies.
> Most of the time when you see a major grocery chain with clerks on
> strike, this is what they are striking over. *Not more money, not more
> benefits, but merely to work enough hours to even qualify for benefits
> they already have, which the chain would dearly love to eliminate, by
> said tactic, so as to reduce its overhead and increase profits.
>


I've worked at a grocery store for 21 years now. I have never once
gone below the minimum hours for insurance. It is 60 hours per month
(average of 15 per week) for individuals or 80 hours per month for
family (average 20 per week).

The only people who get fewer hours (unless they ask for fewer) are
courtesy clerks who are in school (and probably on their parents'
insurance).

We have one employee who works 2 days a week, specifically for the
insurance. It's the only reason she works. Rather than pay a high rate
for insurance, she gets good insurance and an okay paycheck too.

I've never heard any co-workers complain about getting enough hours
for insurance. Yes, many would like more hours in general since most
do not get full time hours. But we do get our full insurance.

On Apr 13, 3:08*pm, Samantha Hill > wrote:

>
> There is hardly anything in the world that someone cannot make a little
> worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only
> are this man s lawful prey. It s unwise to pay too little. When you pay
> too much, you lose a little money...that is all. When you pay too
> little, you sometimes lose everything because the thing you bought was
> incapable of doing the thing it was bought to do. The common law of
> business balance prohibits paying a little and getting a lot...it can t
> be done. If you deal with the lowest bidder, it is well to add something
> for the risk you run; and if you do that, you will have enough to pay
> for something better.
> * * *-John Ruskin (1819 - 1900)
> * * * English critic, essayist, & reformer


So true.

When I am shopping around for a particular item that will be
expensive, i tend to look at a variety and not choose the cheapest.
For example, when buying a new tv, appliance, or other expensive item
that needs to last a while. I may choose the cheapest store when price
checking, but usually not the cheapest brand or model.

Years ago, I bought a set of pans that I thought was a good deal, but
the teflon came off easily from the larger pans. I still use the 2
skillets, but not the pots. Since then, I have picked up several
stainless steel pots and pans at thrift stores. I got a cheaper price
and a better quality product that way. My parents still have the same
set they got as a wedding gift (48 years ago). The smallest pan lost
its handle last year, but the set has been great.

wrote:
>
> I've never heard any co-workers complain about getting enough hours
> for insurance. Yes, many would like more hours in general since most
> do not get full time hours. But we do get our full insurance.


You are lucky. Walmart charges their employees such a high proportion
of the cost of their health insurance that a lot of the employees cannot
afford it.

In news:rec.food.cooking, Sqwertz > posted on Mon,
12 Apr 2010 20:53:57 -0500 the following:

> Texas, Austin in particular, is probably the only market where Walmart
> still hasn't won the grocery share over HEB after 10-12 years of trying.
> Walmart announced plans to start catering to Mexicans by opening up a
> new brand of "Walmart Mercados" to get that share, but that plan fizzled
> far as I can tell.

Yes, if the cost analysis showed that Wal-Mart would have had to spend
three cents more than they wanted to, they'd scrap the whole plan.

Damaeus
--
"Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on
white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice."
-William Randolph Hearst

In news:rec.food.cooking, Samantha Hill > posted
on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 21:34:55 -0700 the following:

> Sqwertz wrote:
> >
> > Texas, Austin in particular, is probably the only market where
> > Walmart still hasn't won the grocery share over HEB after 10-12
> > years of trying.
>
> My kudos to all the Texans out there who are making this possible. LOL

I prefer shopping anywhere besides Wal-Mart. I used to buy groceries at
Albertson's, Kroger and Brookshire's, even though I was aware the food was
costing me a lot more. Those three grocery stores just have a much better
selection than Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart, on the other hand, has cut their
brands and selections down so they can buy more of those for less money. I
suppose some shoppers just accept that Wal-Mart doesn't carry their
favorite brand of tomatoes, so rather than make a special trip to a real
grocery store, they just get whatever Wal-Mart has. It's sad. And the
interesting part is that this is just the kind of selection cutting my
10th grade history teacher warned us would happen under communism. But
here it is happening under capitalism instead.

Damaeus
--
"Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on
white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice."
-William Randolph Hearst

In news:rec.food.cooking, George Shirley > posted on
Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:08:43 -0500 the following:

> I quit buying food at Wally World years ago. That's when I happened to
> read the "contents" on a meat label, it said, "beef and water." I don't
> want my beef plumped up to look purty, I want it to taste good.

Beef, blood, fat, a small sprinkling of feces.

Damaeus
--
"Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on
white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice."
-William Randolph Hearst

In news:rec.food.cooking, George > posted on Tue, 13
Apr 2010 07:33:13 -0400 the following:

> There are lots of businesses that are honest and pay decent wages and
> benefits. There is nothing inherently evil about corporations.

I think all companies have people they pay crappy wages to, but it costs
just as much for those people to live as anyone else. No business in the
world cares how low your wages are. You pay the same price as those who
make a lot of money, or you don't get the product at all. (And then those
companies wonder why their sales are crappy.)

> Meanwhile you choose to support one of the most rotten examples. There
> certainly are stores that pay considerably more than walmart and have
> benefits. Why not support them?

Because if you're one of the ones being paid crappy wages, you must go
where the prices are the lowest, especially if the place with lower prices
sells the same items as the higher-priced places.

I don't know what wages are like for checkers nowadays, but even when I
worked for Safeway in 1986, ours was a nonunion store; checkers at union
stores were making $15.00 and more per hour. Albertson's grocery stores
are often union stores, they have the highest prices of all the stores I
have checked, and they sell the same stuff. So the point is, the only
reason I'd really care about going to a more expensive place to buy
groceries is so I won't have to shop along side dirty, trashy people who
come to the store wearing flip flops, oversized shorts riding up into
their crotches, and a jelly-stained t-shirt they've been wearing for the
last two weeks.

Damaeus
--
"Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on
white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice."
-William Randolph Hearst

In news:rec.food.cooking, Samantha Hill > posted
on Tue, 13 Apr 2010 07:52:09 -0700 the following:

> Go to Hulu and watch, "The Age of Walmart" and "The New Age of Walmart,"
> and you will get a better picture of what they are talking about.
> Things like paying employees as little as possible and forcing suppliers
> to slash their profits to the bone for the sake of lower prices so that
> Walmart can make more profits. IMO, it's not the lower prices that are
> the problem; it's the robber baron mentality.

It's the result of capitalism and competition. Competition is what sets
up the conditions that pit companies against each other to see who can
draw more customers with lower prices.

I worked for Target for a short time, and their business model was one of
service instead of low prices. Target said they didn't want to, and
probably couldn't compete with Wal-Mart on prices, so they don't even try.
Instead, they just make sure you don't have to wait in long lines, and
they make sure they actually have the store staffed with people. Most of
the time, when I go into a Wal-Mart, lines are long, and there's hardly
anybody on the sales floor to ask questions of. That's all the result of
competition.

Damaeus
--
"Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on
white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice."
-William Randolph Hearst

In news:rec.food.cooking, Goomba > posted on Tue, 13
Apr 2010 11:15:35 -0400 the following:

> Samantha Hill wrote:
>
> > Go to Hulu and watch, "The Age of Walmart" and "The New Age of Walmart,"
> > and you will get a better picture of what they are talking about. Things
> > like paying employees as little as possible and forcing suppliers to
> > slash their profits to the bone for the sake of lower prices so that
> > Walmart can make more profits. IMO, it's not the lower prices that are
> > the problem; it's the robber baron mentality.
>
> How much should unskilled labor get paid exactly?

Since it costs just as much for unskilled laborers to live their lives as
skilled laborers, they should be paid an amount that is comparable to
skilled laborers. The only advantage one should acquire after learning a
skill is that they don't have to work at menial jobs like stocking
groceries, sweeping floors, or whatever. Being able to sit at a desk and
think, or work on computer electronics is the reward of learning a skill,
as those jobs are not as tiresome or depressing as having to fill the same
shelves with the same groceries night after night. Yet the people who do
the menial jobs still must have places to live, food to eat, and ways of
getting around. Paying them less only damages the economy because it
results in fewer people having enough money to buy the things that
companies want to sell: electronics, furniture, cars, houses, etc....

> I work with a nurse who used to be a Walmart store manager and he
> informed me that benefits kick in after 24 hours a week, if I recall
> correctly? When I was a younger working unskilled jobs I didn't get ANY
> benefits years ago. I never expected much from those jobs and just
> considered them stepping stones up to something better. They certainly
> were motivational for wanting better and I worked to obtain that.
>
> I truly dislike Walmart, more because of the way they alter local
> businesses (those mom and pops) as well as the demands they make on
> their suppliers, but as far as their employees go, I see little
> different with them than a majority of other unskilled type jobs.

Well, competition and mistreatment of unskilled labor go hand in hand.
These stores are staffed with just enough people to get the job done, and
everyone must work at breakneck speed to get it done. If we didn't have
competition between stores, but instead cooperation, they could have more
workers with livable wages, and if someone has to call in sick, the
managers won't have to put the whip to the backs of those who did show up,
just to see that the work gets done.

Essentially capitalist-run stores under an umbrella of competition /must/
run their stores with almost a skeleton crew just to make a profit. Let a
few people call in sick, and everybody runs behind for the whole night,
and/or people must stay and work longer to make up the difference.

Damaeus
--
"Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on
white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice."
-William Randolph Hearst

In news:rec.food.cooking, "Ed Pawlowski" > posted on
Tue, 13 Apr 2010 22:32:24 -0400 the following:

> True, but I blame the customer for that, not the store. You see it all
> the time, people spend hours finding the lowest possible price on a
> camera, that big flat screen TV, etc and will drive many miles to save
> $10 on a $900 purchase. The people of China thank us for that too.

That's why there should really be far fewer brands of televisions. Just
make *all* TVs of a certain size the same way, and simply make sure it has
*all* the features of *all* the current brands combined. Then since
everyone would have the same TV (of a specific size), they could be mass
produced at a much lower price than having to make 300 different models
for different levels of affordability. It's incredibly stupid to go into
a single store and see 30-40 different models of television when one could
be produced that is superior to all others, and be sold for a lower price
because of that mass production advantage.

Damaeus
--
"Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on
white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice."
-William Randolph Hearst

In news:rec.food.cooking, George > posted on Tue, 13
Apr 2010 12:31:44 -0400 the following:

> Meanwhile somehow walmart qualifies for KOZs (Keystone Opportunity
> Zones) which were intended to help employers who were going to create
> good jobs. Basically we pay to acquire and develop land, pay for
> traffic signals, access roads and other infrastructure and give then a 9
> year tax exemption.

So Wal-Mart gets corporate welfare, and their employees are on partial
welfare, just so they can sell their stuff at lower and lower prices.
Don't they realize that low wages prevent people from buying things? And
that buying things is what keeps the economy going?

> There are 3 walmarts in this immediate area. We already moved 2 of them
> literally across the street because their tax exemption was about to run
> out and have spent a huge amount of money leveling the top of a mountain
> to relocate the 3rd walmart so its tax exemption can be restarted.

What a waste.

Damaeus
--
"Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on
white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice."
-William Randolph Hearst