• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How does Socialism deal with Human Selfishness?

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,465
Reaction score
20,323
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
The problem I have with Socialism is the failure to answer the question…how does it deal with human selfishness?

We tend to forget that humans are merely “greedy monkeys;” more intelligent perhaps, but typically unwilling to let go of the orange in the gourd trap.



The difference being that a human will figure out how to break the gourd and keep the orange. This translates into each persons drive to get as much out of their labors as they can, and then enjoy them without needing to share with others. Socialism does not address this drive.

Capitalism plays to human greed.

Most humans seek personal gain because with wealth comes freedom and security. The wealthy man is one who can live a life of unlimited choice, with the ability to satisfy all his wants and needs without further labor. Just about every human desires this, with relatively rare exceptions. At the same time, if they see that others can have the same benefits without as much effort, the motivation for personal effort diminishes. Why become a doctor if you can get the same return on your labor investment as a sales clerk or ditch digger? Capitalism says: "To each according to his ability...period!"

The problem I have with Capitalism is the short-sightedness of hoarding wealth. Instead of using excess wealth to build up a shared society so that more citizens can obtain disposable wealth to perpetuate the system, the wealthy only care about amassing more personal wealth out of fear they may lose their freedom and security. They then claim that when they have more than they really need they might be willing to share some with others. The motive is not to share, but simply to buy a little more security through good P.R. from those have nots they give to. That’s why so many Capitalists push “charity” rather than social welfare programs.

But for every Bill Gates who gives we have the Koch brothers, Walton family, and the Hiltons who take and hoard. Societies don’t need “charity” they need industry and development options for everyone to feel a valid part of the “opportunity to succeed.” Capitalism fails to address this because the "greedy monkeys" at the top simply don't want to share.

So what is the answer in Socialism?
 
Last edited:

Torrent

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2013
Messages
61
Reaction score
33
Location
Just outside of the Middle of Nowhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Speaking as an outsider looking at Socialism, of which I don't agree with, I see the anwers as...

Force.
The Greedy Monkeys are Greedy.
Which is a Sin.
Which will be corrected by force.
Either the monkey will change its way of thinking(re-education),
or be seprated from the group (prison or exile),
or killed.
 

tererun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 19, 2012
Messages
4,905
Reaction score
1,577
Location
The darkside of the moon
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
What part of socialism says everyone has to get the same thing? yes, i know some people may think that is the way socialism works, but it could also work with a rewards system which allows for the people with drive to have something more to work for.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,465
Reaction score
20,323
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
What part of socialism says everyone has to get the same thing? yes, i know some people may think that is the way socialism works, but it could also work with a rewards system which allows for the people with drive to have something more to work for.
The running complaint about Socialism is that it takes from the haves and provides for the have nots. This is anathema to a Capitalist, who believes that his wealth is his to dispose of. Since social welfare programs in Socialism are supported by taxes, and most people think the rich can afford to be taxed more heavily, of course the wealthy balk. You are attacking their freedom and security.

They also fight back by pointing out to the "middle class" and the "taxable poor" that THEIR minor wealth is also going towards social welfare for those who have not "earned it." Why do you think so many people who are not wealthy oppose social welfare???
 
Last edited:

EdwinWillers

Be different, be honest
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 24, 2013
Messages
4,361
Reaction score
2,324
Location
Divided States of Kardashia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The problem I have with Socialism is the failure to answer the question…how does it deal with human selfishness?

We tend to forget that humans are merely “greedy monkeys;” more intelligent perhaps, but typically unwilling to let go of the orange in the gourd trap.



The difference being that a human will figure out how to break the gourd and keep the orange. This translates into each persons drive to get as much out of their labors as they can, and then enjoy them without needing to share with others. Socialism does not address this drive.
Socialism IS that drive.

Most humans seek personal gain because with wealth comes freedom and security. The wealthy man is one who can live a life of unlimited choice, with the ability to satisfy all his wants and needs without further labor. Just about every human desires this, with relatively rare exceptions. At the same time, if they see that others can have the same benefits without as much effort, the motivation for personal effort diminishes. Why become a doctor if you can get the same return on your labor investment as a sales clerk or ditch digger? Capitalism says: "To each according to his ability...period!"
Actually, that's more what Socialism says Capitalism says. Always important to consider the source.

The problem I have with Capitalism is the short-sightedness of hoarding wealth. Instead of using excess wealth to build up a shared society so that more citizens can obtain disposable wealth to perpetuate the system, the wealthy only care about amassing more personal wealth out of fear they may lose their freedom and security. They then claim that when they have more than they really need they might be willing to share some with others. The motive is not to share, but simply to buy a little more security from those have nots they give to. That’s why so many Capitalists push “charity” rather than social welfare programs.
Again, best to consider the source before repeating its nonsense. Socialists gleefully use the term "hoarding wealth" because characteristically, it's so intellectually dishonest. But your average person of whatever economic strata knows it as "SAVING." And your average person knows too the power of saving, of suspending one's base human urges to instantly gratify and "buy now" in favor of something better in the future for them or for their families. It's called common sense. It's called rational thought. It's called responsible behavior.

For Socialists however, any notions of common sense and responsible behavior seem to be governed less by their intellects and more by their emotions - their self-righteous altruism clouding all rational thought, raining judgment after judgment down on people and matters and concepts they willfully know not. They love to exercise their holier-than-thou compassion for anyone with a dollar less than them by stealing it at the point of a gun from those who have a dollar more than they so they can distribute it under the greedy caveat that they will only give it if the recipient understands it is they who are giving it: 1) out of their intense love for mankind; 2) out of their own ability; and 3) if they will vote for them.

But for every Bill Gates who gives we have the Koch brothers, Walton family, and the Hiltons who take and hoard. Societies don’t need “charity” they need industry and development options for everyone to feel a valid part of the “opportunity to succeed.” Capitalism fails to address this because the "greedy monkeys" at the top simply don't want to share.
Bill Gates? :thinking: As the wealthiest man in the world, it would seem he's the epitome of your objection to Capitalism and its best example of "greed." He's got so much wealth, he can't give it away fast enough - even if he wanted to. And understand this, please, he doesn't want to - which also fits your example of "greed."

So what is the answer in Socialism?
The shortest and most obvious answer: enlist as many people as it can with their hands in the gourd. Promise them more if they keep their hands inside (a wonderful propagandistic trick, that), vilify and demonize those who won't put their hands in the gourd. Demonize people who work hard and save to better their own lives. Demonize people who give to others - not to broadcast their giving so the world can see and pronounce them wonderful people. Demonize the very notion of wealth while pretending to be its champion on behalf of "the poor."

How does Socialism deal with Human Selfishness? It reminds humans that they are nothing but greedy monkeys so it can maintain the gourd.
 

Guy Incognito

DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2010
Messages
11,216
Reaction score
2,818
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
This is the reason why free market capitalism works and socialism doesn't. Socialism is automatically subverted from within by human nature, making it a practical impossibility. Free market Capitalism (which is NOT the corporatist capitalism we have today) harnesses selfishness, and therefore is as reliable as human nature itself.

In summation, socialistic systems will always be subverted internally, meaning they will fail on their own terms. Whereas free markets can only be subverted externally, by unnatural, coercive forces.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,465
Reaction score
20,323
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Socialism IS that drive. Actually, that's more what Socialism says Capitalism says. Always important to consider the source.
Actually, it IS what humans are and it IS what Capitalism plays to.

Again, best to consider the source before repeating its nonsense. Socialists gleefully use the term "hoarding wealth" because characteristically, it's so intellectually dishonest. But your average person of whatever economic strata knows it as "SAVING." And your average person knows too the power of saving, of suspending one's base human urges to instantly gratify and "buy now" in favor of something better in the future for them or for their families. It's called common sense. It's called rational thought. It's called responsible behavior.
False analogy. An “average person” saves in order to meet future needs, i.e. I want a car but I need to save up to buy one. A wealthy person “saves” merely to acquire more wealth. A wealthy person does not have to “suspend one’s base human urges” because he can afford to revel in them. He does not even have to think, “Can I afford this?”, he just gets it. That’s the nature of wealth, enabling the holder to exercise the freedom to obtain whatever he wants without a second thought.

For Socialists however, any notions of common sense and responsible behavior seem to be governed less by their intellects and more by their emotions - their self-righteous altruism clouding all rational thought, raining judgment after judgment down on people and matters and concepts they willfully know not. They love to exercise their holier-than-thou compassion for anyone with a dollar less than them by stealing it at the point of a gun from those who have a dollar more than they so they can distribute it under the greedy caveat that they will only give it if the recipient understands it is they who are giving it: 1) out of their intense love for mankind; 2) out of their own ability; and 3) if they will vote for them.
Very flowery rhetoric. Does nothing to respond to my question “How does socialism deal with human selfishness?” though.

Bill Gates? :thinking: As the wealthiest man in the world, it would seem he's the epitome of your objection to Capitalism and its best example of "greed." He's got so much wealth, he can't give it away fast enough - even if he wanted to. And understand this, please, he doesn't want to - which also fits your example of "greed."
Not the epitome because he is the most “charitable” of all the wealthy. His charity would be better served by rebuilding American industry so citizens can get work and earn a living though. Handouts fall into that category “give a man a fish,” rather than the more productive one “teach a man to fish.”

The shortest and most obvious answer: enlist as many people as it can with their hands in the gourd. Promise them more if they keep their hands inside (a wonderful propagandistic trick, that), vilify and demonize those who won't put their hands in the gourd. Demonize people who work hard and save to better their own lives. Demonize people who give to others - not to broadcast their giving so the world can see and pronounce them wonderful people. Demonize the very notion of wealth while pretending to be its champion on behalf of "the poor."
Again, thanks for the rhetoric but it hardly portrays how control by the wealthy 1% of 80% of the world’s “wealth” is “working hard to better their own lives." LOL

How does Socialism deal with Human Selfishness? It reminds humans that they are nothing but greedy monkeys so it can maintain the gourd.
Sorry, I am not a Socialist but I recognize that we ARE greedy monkeys. I want to know how Socialism deals with that reality. Hopefully with something other than the sample of opinionated rhetoric you’ve used to support Capitalism.
 
Last edited:

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,465
Reaction score
20,323
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I appreciate that, I am aware of Mr. Chomsky's work. However, how does turning over the means of production to the working class...work?

Where do the new ideas come from? How does investment in them start? Who guides production? Who handles the problems of competition? I've had a problem with the idea of "democracy in the workplace." Having been a soldier I know that fellow soldiers can't vote on when to fight and when not to fight, or what mission to go on and what mission to refuse. LOL

This does not address the basic problem of personal selfishness. It seems too altruistic to be effective.
 

Canell

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
3,851
Reaction score
1,170
Location
EUSSR
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I appreciate that, I am aware of Mr. Chomsky's work. However, how does turning over the means of production to the working class...work?
Workers-shareholders. With CEOs elected by the same shareholders. ;)

From each according to his abilities, to each according to his merits (work). :)
 
Last edited:

tererun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 19, 2012
Messages
4,905
Reaction score
1,577
Location
The darkside of the moon
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
The running complaint about Socialism is that it takes from the haves and provides for the have nots. This is anathema to a Capitalist, who believes that his wealth is his to dispose of. Since social welfare programs in Socialism are supported by taxes, and most people think the rich can afford to be taxed more heavily, of course the wealthy balk. You are attacking their freedom and security.

They also fight back by pointing out to the "middle class" and the "taxable poor" that THEIR minor wealth is also going towards social welfare for those who have not "earned it." Why do you think so many people who are not wealthy oppose social welfare???

I would say lots of the opposition seems to be due to spin and politics. The right wing has demonized the idea pretty much litterally since they have even used religion to call it evil. You are asking a question about a system most people do not understand due to misinformation. You will get answers that are wrong and based on feelings and BS. If a real debate is to be had on socialism it has to be stripped of the rhetoric. otherwise every discussion becomes chanting on both sides about talking points.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,465
Reaction score
20,323
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Thanks, however as I've expressed to another member "charity" is not what our society needs. Remember, give a man a fish is not as good as teaching a man to fish. Americans don't need handouts, they need decent jobs and a lot of them. If Wal-mart really cared about the American economy they would build factories and produce real jobs HERE and not in China or Bangladesh. We've talked about this before. ;)
 

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Thanks, however as I've expressed to another member "charity" is not what our society needs. Remember, give a man a fish is not as good as teaching a man to fish. Americans don't need handouts, they need decent jobs and a lot of them. If Wal-mart really cared about the American economy they would build factories and produce real jobs HERE and not in China or Bangladesh. We've talked about this before. ;)
You could say the same thing about most any company. Walmart, however, is not a producer of the goods it sells--it is a retailer.
 

Penderyn

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
276
Location
UK, Cymru mostly.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The problem I have with Socialism is the failure to answer the question…how does it deal with human selfishness?

We tend to forget that humans are merely “greedy monkeys;” more intelligent perhaps, but typically unwilling to let go of the orange in the gourd trap.



The difference being that a human will figure out how to break the gourd and keep the orange. This translates into each persons drive to get as much out of their labors as they can, and then enjoy them without needing to share with others. Socialism does not address this drive.

Capitalism plays to human greed.

Most humans seek personal gain because with wealth comes freedom and security. The wealthy man is one who can live a life of unlimited choice, with the ability to satisfy all his wants and needs without further labor. Just about every human desires this, with relatively rare exceptions. At the same time, if they see that others can have the same benefits without as much effort, the motivation for personal effort diminishes. Why become a doctor if you can get the same return on your labor investment as a sales clerk or ditch digger? Capitalism says: "To each according to his ability...period!"

The problem I have with Capitalism is the short-sightedness of hoarding wealth. Instead of using excess wealth to build up a shared society so that more citizens can obtain disposable wealth to perpetuate the system, the wealthy only care about amassing more personal wealth out of fear they may lose their freedom and security. They then claim that when they have more than they really need they might be willing to share some with others. The motive is not to share, but simply to buy a little more security through good P.R. from those have nots they give to. That’s why so many Capitalists push “charity” rather than social welfare programs.

But for every Bill Gates who gives we have the Koch brothers, Walton family, and the Hiltons who take and hoard. Societies don’t need “charity” they need industry and development options for everyone to feel a valid part of the “opportunity to succeed.” Capitalism fails to address this because the "greedy monkeys" at the top simply don't want to share.

So what is the answer in Socialism?
Capitalism is totally contrary to human nature: we are a co-operative species. 'Human' greed has to be forced into humans by this mad system, and when we get shot of it will disappear. What humans love is status, which is easily arranged.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,465
Reaction score
20,323
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
You could say the same thing about most any company. Walmart, however, is not a producer of the goods it sells--it is a retailer.
Check again, as I did and I think you'll find that is not quite the case. Or not, and continue to believe they are just a friendly retailer like any local supermarket.
 
Last edited:

Fenton

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
29,771
Reaction score
12,231
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The problem I have with Socialism is the failure to answer the question…how does it deal with human selfishness?

We tend to forget that humans are merely “greedy monkeys;” more intelligent
perhaps, but typically unwilling to let go of the orange in the gourd trap.



The difference being that a human will figure out how to break the gourd and keep the orange. This translates into each persons drive to get as much out of their labors as they can, and then enjoy them without needing to share with others. Socialism does not address this drive.

Capitalism plays to human greed.

Most humans seek personal gain because with wealth comes freedom and security. The wealthy man is one who can live a life of unlimited choice, with the ability to satisfy all his wants and needs without further labor. Just about every human desires this, with relatively rare exceptions. At the same time, if they see that others can have the same benefits without as much effort, the motivation for personal effort diminishes. Why become a doctor if you can get the same return on your labor investment as a sales clerk or ditch digger? Capitalism says: "To each according to his ability...period!"

The problem I have with Capitalism is the short-sightedness of hoarding wealth. Instead of using excess wealth to build up a shared society so that more citizens can obtain disposable wealth to perpetuate the system, the wealthy only care about amassing more personal wealth out of fear they may lose their freedom and security. They then claim that when they have more than they really need they might be willing to share some with others. The motive is not to share, but simply to buy a little more security through good P.R. from those have nots they give to. That’s why so many Capitalists push “charity” rather than social welfare programs.

But for every Bill Gates who gives we have the Koch brothers, Walton family, and the Hiltons who take and hoard. Societies don’t need “charity” they need industry and development options for everyone to feel a valid part of the “opportunity to succeed.” Capitalism fails to address this because the "greedy monkeys" at the top simply don't want to share.

So what is the answer in Socialism?
Greedy Monkeys ? LOL !!

No, I'm no monkey, not even close and your fatalistic
 

avery45

Member
Joined
May 17, 2011
Messages
203
Reaction score
38
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Greed is human nature. Remember greed doesn't dissipate just because you are elected to office. Instead of regulating greed, use it. And that is where taxes come in play. I wish The U.S. had every big business in the world. That way the American people could benefit from the collected revenue.

The Walton family may be hoarders but they also employ a million people. Low wages yes. But low wages are better than no wages.
 

Fenton

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
29,771
Reaction score
12,231
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The problem I have with Socialism is the failure to answer the question…how does it deal with human selfishness?

We tend to forget that humans are merely “greedy monkeys;” more intelligent
perhaps, but typically unwilling to let go of the orange in the gourd trap.



The difference being that a human will figure out how to break the gourd and keep the orange. This translates into each persons drive to get as much out of their labors as they can, and then enjoy them without needing to share with others. Socialism does not address this drive.

Capitalism plays to human greed.

Most humans seek personal gain because with wealth comes freedom and security. The wealthy man is one who can live a life of unlimited choice, with the ability to satisfy all his wants and needs without further labor. Just about every human desires this, with relatively rare exceptions. At the same time, if they see that others can have the same benefits without as much effort, the motivation for personal effort diminishes. Why become a doctor if you can get the same return on your labor investment as a sales clerk or ditch digger? Capitalism says: "To each according to his ability...period!"

The problem I have with Capitalism is the short-sightedness of hoarding wealth. Instead of using excess wealth to build up a shared society so that more citizens can obtain disposable wealth to perpetuate the system, the wealthy only care about amassing more personal wealth out of fear they may lose their freedom and security. They then claim that when they have more than they really need they might be willing to share some with others. The motive is not to share, but simply to buy a little more security through good P.R. from those have nots they give to. That’s why so many Capitalists push “charity” rather than social welfare programs.

But for every Bill Gates who gives we have the Koch brothers, Walton family, and the Hiltons who take and hoard. Societies don’t need “charity” they need industry and development options for everyone to feel a valid part of the “opportunity to succeed.” Capitalism fails to address this because the "greedy monkeys" at the top simply don't want to share.

So what is the answer in Socialism?
Greedy Monkeys ? LOL !!

No, I'm no monkey, not even close and your fatalistic and generic descriptions are extremely one dimensional.

Capitalism has taken into account human "WILL" , not greed and the fact we can through will control our greed, ( many people do ) just shows the massive distinction that exist between man and monkey.

And although there is proof of variation and natural selection I don't think we're descendent from apes.

In fact, the idea that one animal morphed into another isn't justified by any irrefutable fossill, Gennetic, anatomical evidence.

All fossil evidence shows is that a specoes of up right bi-pedal apes existed once, and then went extinct ( Australopethicines ) .
 
Last edited:

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,465
Reaction score
20,323
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Greedy Monkeys ? LOL !!

No, I'm no monkey, not even close and your fatalistic
:)

That's the best you can do? I provide a humorous turn of phrase (humans being both primates and selfish) to illustrate a point (hence the picture) and you respond to that instead of the issue? Thanks for your lack or participation. :)
 

Cameron

Politically Correct
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 26, 2010
Messages
4,297
Reaction score
2,562
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
The problem I have with Socialism is the failure to answer the question…how does it deal with human selfishness?
Personally, I find pure capitalism (which hasn't existed in this country for a while) to be the system that doesn't adequately address the problem of human selfishness.

The smart American leftists do not want a socialist system that makes life comfortable and easy for everyone. That indeed rewards selfishness and laziness. What they do want is a system that makes sure those who are working full time or at least trying full time to find work have the bare minimum to support themselves and to take reasonable steps to better their own circumstances. That type of system does not reward selfishness. Nor does it encourage laziness -- since people are naturally greedy and selfish, people will still be encouraged to work harder so they can get more than the bare minimum.
 
Last edited:

Fenton

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
29,771
Reaction score
12,231
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
:)


That's the best you can do? I provide a humorous turn of phrase (humans being both primates and selfish) to illustrate a point (hence the picture)
and you respond to that instead of the issue? Thanks for your lack or participation. :)
I DID respond, by making the distinction between GREED AND WILL.

As I get older and acquire more wisdom I find myself turning away from the Cynical musings I was once known for.

As it turns out , Knowledge and the abillity to discern whether its relevent, is the cure for " grumpy old man" disease.

Capitalism takes into account human WILL. There is a huge difference between greed and will, the distinction that makes us human, is that we have the choice to not be greedy and the WILL to act on our decision.

Socil
 

Fenton

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
29,771
Reaction score
12,231
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
:)


That's the best you can do? I provide a humorous turn of phrase (humans being both primates and selfish) to illustrate a point (hence the picture)
and you respond to that instead of the issue? Thanks for your lack or participation. :)
I DID respond, by making the distinction between GREED AND WILL.

As I get older and acquire more wisdom I find myself turning away from the Cynical musings I was once known for.

As it turns out , Knowledge and the abillity to discern whether its relevent, is the cure for " grumpy old man" disease.

Capitalism takes into account human WILL. There is a huge difference between greed and will, the distinction that makes us human, is that we have the choice to not be greedy and the WILL to act on our decision.

Socialism is for the intelectually bereft and the weak of character......period.
 

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Check again, as I did and I think you'll find that is not quite the case. Or not, and continue to believe they are just a friendly retailer like any local supermarket.
Then what does Walmart manufacture itself overseas that they could manufacture here? I have never seen anything that indicates that Walmart produces any of the goods it sells.
 
Top Bottom