Supreme Court declines to take up Wal-Mart class action appeal….

[Bassman]

You mean the labor unions that have given us the 40 hour work week. You mean the labor unions that have given us paid vacation. You mean the labor unions that have successfully built a prospering middle class through paid labor by demanding living wages. Those unions have eroded the U.S. industrial base? I would agree with you that the U.S. government policies of trickle down economics have done almost irreparable damage to the U.S. industrial base. WalMart is a key example of that which is what I am arguing...so thanks for agreeing with me.

Again, ad-nauseum, this is not about the people who decide to work for WalMart. This about WalMart's business strategy.

Labor unions who's sole aim is to shut down companies, Labor unions with complete ties to the mob, labor unions who FORCE their rank and file to vote a certain way in political elections, and labor unions that utilize violence to get their way (Greyhound Strikes, anyone?)

 

[notquiteright]

It's quite obvious you don't shop there, because you haven't the slightest clue about what they carry. Furthermore, you must not care at all about the poor who rely on Walmart's low prices.

I'm thinking you are clueless where 'the poor' shop- (Dollar General) eace

 

[notquiteright]

What some, who want to argue about a single word a poster used, are missing is the Supreme Court is letting the suit stand so there must be some merit to the class action...

(oh wait- is this when the 'un-elected lawyers' and 'over reaching judiciary' dead horse gets trotted out???? )... eace

 

[notquiteright]

Labor unions who's sole aim is to shut down companies, Labor unions with complete ties to the mob, labor unions who FORCE their rank and file to vote a certain way in political elections, and labor unions that utilize violence to get their way (Greyhound Strikes, anyone?)

So Labor Unions want to shut down the companies that pay the union members so the union can draw dues...

Complete ties with the mob??? seriously... :shock:

Do union officials go into the voting booth with union members and watch which candidate the member selects???

Oh if only violence was just a Union thing... you seem ignorant of the use of police, state troops and scabs to break strikes... eace

 

[ludin]

So Labor Unions want to shut down the companies that pay the union members so the union can draw dues...

unreasonable union demands have lead to more than 1 company closing it's doors or moving other processes to different countries.
sorry companies can't afford to have people sit in a room do nothing all day except watch tv and pay them 25 an hour.

Complete ties with the mob??? seriously... :shock:

yep teamster history comes to mind.

Do union officials go into the voting booth with union members and watch which candidate the member selects???

That would be illegal, however it doesn't stop me from thinking that they definitely attempt to get their members to vote a certain way.

Oh if only violence was just a Union thing... you seem ignorant of the use of police, state troops and scabs to break strikes... eace

Show me where that has happened recently? PS you want to strike a company has a right to continue it's day to day processes.
if you don't want to work then they are able to find someone that will.

we have had a couple of strikes in my area from beoing people. I didn't feel sorry for them.
I would have gladly taken their 30 dollar an hour job. instead they chose 50 dollar a week strike pay.

 

[ludin]

What some, who want to argue about a single word a poster used, are missing is the Supreme Court is letting the suit stand so there must be some merit to the class action...

(oh wait- is this when the 'un-elected lawyers' and 'over reaching judiciary' dead horse gets trotted out???? )... eace

this case does have merit and there was no reason for the SCOTUS to hear the case.

 

[smb]

LOL consent does not imply contract. in fact that is the opposite of a contract.



LOL man talk about your leaps in logic that would clear the grand canyon and back. People give consent to the power of government.
however if that government abuses it's power then the people have the ability to stop it and or
even destroy that government.

Before continuing to embarrass yourself take political science 101 first. There is no leap of logic. The government exists and derives it power from the consent of the govern. This is a two way street. The people are then responsible to the government that they consented to as regards the laws they pass. If the people feel that government has usurped that power we have set up a remedy for that...elections. Your "argument" is ridiculous.

 

[ludin]

Before continuing to embarrass yourself take political science 101 first. There is no leap of logic. The government exists and derives it power from the consent of the govern. This is a two way street. The people are then responsible to the government that they consented to as regards the laws they pass. If the people feel that government has usurped that power we have set up a remedy for that...elections. Your "argument" is ridiculous.

LOL this is about as accurate as your stock does not mean you are not an owner of the company which got destroyed.

LOL my argument is based on the constitution and the declaration of independence. that the government can only do what
we the people allow it to do and the only power that the government has is the power that we the people say that it can have.
that is not a contract. it is sad because the system was setup to be the reverse of what we have today.

yours is based on some mythological item that doesn't exist.
that I never signed or agreed to.

 

[smb]

actually it does represent ownership....or a piece thereof

and current ownership is quoted on every stock issued by what is called the market capitalization number

you may only own .0000001 of the company, but if it gets bought, you have to get paid

and preferred shares may give more voting rights.....but i vote my regular shares in the 30 odd companies i own every year

In corporate law, a stock certificate (also known as certificate of stock or share certificate) is a legal document that certifies ownership of a specific number of shares or stock in a corporation.

No it does not mean you are the owner. It means you have invested your money in a corporation. Sometimes that investment gives you the right to vote on some things sometimes it does not. This isn't rocket science. This is investment 101. Stock is ownership in shares of a corporation they are NOT ownership in the corporation. What is the difference? Pretty huge difference. If you are the owner of a company you are liable for its credits, debits and assets. If you are the owner of an LLC you are responsible for the assets and credits and have limited liability for the debits. If you are stock holder you have no, zero, zip liability for the corporations assets and debits and are only granted access to the credits of the company as given in the contract laid out in the type of stock you own. Some stock also gives you the added benefit of voting on extremely limited issues confronting the corporations but you have no responsibility for running the corporation. You are stock holder not the owner.

 

[sookster]

They force people into food stamps?

I guess people don't have to work there....they can have no job

Would that be better?

walmart is a company....don't like their business practices....don't shop there

No one is holding a gun to their employees head and telling them they have to work for 10 bucks an hour

Most of them have no salable skills, and that is the best job they can find

Maybe they should have learned a trade, or maybe gotten a bit more education

No ones fault but their own

Why are you against helping other people out, so when they work, they can live? At the very least push the wage to the value of the 1950's. If people work hard, why shouldn't they be able to live?

 

[smb]

LOL so ever economic and business book in the world is wrong and you are correct. lol I would love for you to prove that.



You know what the board of directors is right? they are the representatives of the owners of the company. LOL
the owners of the company are people that have purchased shares of that company.

if you don't own shares you can't vote on the company elections or rules.

Stocks Basics: What Are Stocks? | Investopedia

The Definition of a Stock
Plain and simple, stock is a share in the ownership of a company.

your argument is completely destroyed.

No it is not and no business or economic book that I have ever read or been assigned to read other than books by the people selling stocks claim that stocks equate to ownership in a corporation. They equate to investment in the corporation. A way to quickly raise capital in order to facilitate large business enterprises. A way for people to make money off of their wealth instead of off of their labor. A way for people to make money with extremely limited liability if things go south. That is what stocks are. Investments in large business enterprises, not ownership of large business enterprises.

 

[smb]

Labor unions who's sole aim is to shut down companies, Labor unions with complete ties to the mob, labor unions who FORCE their rank and file to vote a certain way in political elections, and labor unions that utilize violence to get their way (Greyhound Strikes, anyone?)

I see that nowhere in comments did you dispute any of the points I made.

 

[smb]

LOL this is about as accurate as your stock does not mean you are not an owner of the company which got destroyed.

LOL my argument is based on the constitution and the declaration of independence. that the government can only do what
we the people allow it to do and the only power that the government has is the power that we the people say that it can have.
that is not a contract. it is sad because the system was setup to be the reverse of what we have today.

yours is based on some mythological item that doesn't exist.
that I never signed or agreed to.

I am truly embarrassed for you.

 

[gdgyva]

Why are you against helping other people out, so when they work, they can live? At the very least push the wage to the value of the 1950's. If people work hard, why shouldn't they be able to live?

i am not against helping people out

but not through arbitrary wages that cost jobs and cost people money

minimum wage can and should be raised to $ 9.00 an hour....but that is it

the problem here is this....3 million kids drop out of high school every year

and there are NO LONGER any line worker jobs for them to go to

those are your problems....they have no skills, no education, and it seems most have no desire to get ahead

you want the system to protect them from themselves

no....the world doesnt owe them a thing....they screwed the pooch as the saying goes

they threw the free education out because they didnt care....

now they get to adjust their thinking....and figure out another way to make it happen

be it trade school, ged, military, apprenticeships, etc

there are programs out there....

they have to be willing to work for them

 

[ludin]

No it is not and no business or economic book that I have ever read or been assigned to read other than books by the people selling stocks claim that stocks equate to ownership in a corporation. They equate to investment in the corporation. A way to quickly raise capital in order to facilitate large business enterprises. A way for people to make money off of their wealth instead of off of their labor. A way for people to make money with extremely limited liability if things go south. That is what stocks are. Investments in large business enterprises, not ownership of large business enterprises.

I just posted it for you? then I have to question whatever books you read because they are 100% wrong.

The Definition of a Stock
Plain and simple, stock is a share in the ownership of a company.

LOL you are so wrong it isn't even funny.

 

[ludin]

I am truly embarrassed for you.

at this point this is meaningless. you have lost both of these debates hands down no doubt about it.
you seriously don't understand what stocks are or what they mean.

you also seriously do not understand that there is no such thing as a social contract.

 

[countryboy]

I'm thinking you are clueless where 'the poor' shop- (Dollar General) eace

Huh? I don't think you are qualified to determine who's clueless.

Poor, and middle class of all stripes shop at multiple places where low prices can be found, including Dollar General. I personally love DG, especially since they are, rather smartly, going up in every one horse town in my area.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

They force people into food stamps?

I guess people don't have to work there....they can have no job

Would that be better?

walmart is a company....don't like their business practices....don't shop there

No one is holding a gun to their employees head and telling them they have to work for 10 bucks an hour

Most of them have no salable skills, and that is the best job they can find

Maybe they should have learned a trade, or maybe gotten a bit more education

No ones fault but their own

The same stupid arguments labor has been defeating for over a century, move right along....

 

[smb]

I just posted it for you? then I have to question whatever books you read because they are 100% wrong.

The Definition of a Stock
Plain and simple, stock is a share in the ownership of a company.

LOL you are so wrong it isn't even funny.

You posted a wikileak...really dude now that is funny.

 

[smb]

at this point this is meaningless. you have lost both of these debates hands down no doubt about it.
you seriously don't understand what stocks are or what they mean.

you also seriously do not understand that there is no such thing as a social contract.

Only in your mind. It is clear you have no clue about political science or economics. That much is clear.

 

[gdgyva]

The same stupid arguments labor has been defeating for over a century, move right along....

Labor has been defeating arguments?

Hell....I thought they were trying to defeat companies.....and losing those battles too

What is the percentage of union employees now compared to say forty years ago?

Sorry....but unions are almost dead....especially for non governmental jobs

They had their usefulness....but they have outlived it

 

[gdgyva]

Exactly

My wife shops there

Values are values....wherever you can find them

And my wife is not afraid to go looking

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Labor has been defeating arguments?

Hell....I thought they were trying to defeat companies.....and losing those battles too

What is the percentage of union employees now compared to say forty years ago?

Sorry....but unions are almost dead....especially for non governmental jobs

They had their usefulness....but they have outlived it

Primarily because companies like Wal Mart are illegally retaliating against workers who attempt to organize, eventually the courts will settle that out. Another problem is states passing anti labor legislation, but again that will eventually die off once democrats get congress again.

In the meantime new labor protections like higher wages are working their way through states and ballot measures

 

[notquiteright]

unreasonable union demands have lead to more than 1 company closing it's doors or moving other processes to different countries.
sorry companies can't afford to have people sit in a room do nothing all day except watch tv and pay them 25 an hour. yep teamster history comes to mind. That would be illegal, however it doesn't stop me from thinking that they definitely attempt to get their members to vote a certain way. Show me where that has happened recently? PS you want to strike a company has a right to continue it's day to day processes.if you don't want to work then they are able to find someone that will. we have had a couple of strikes in my area from beoing people. I didn't feel sorry for them. I would have gladly taken their 30 dollar an hour job. instead they chose 50 dollar a week strike pay.

Oh the Conservative BS spin is in high gear- you mean countries that pay their workers 5 dollars a week??? Yeah it had NOTHING to do with that!!!! :doh

IF you had a REAL understanding of history you'd know there were many violent attacks on Those forming and trying to keep Unions by owners using Police and troops... but of course many Conservative minds can't look past the parts they love to hate....

So you admit there really isn't a way for Unions to force people to vote a certain way- just want to believe it is so.... :roll:

Why didn't you 'gladly' take their job???

A lot of opinion, little fact.... but i didn't expect much... eace

 

[ludin]

You posted a wikileak...really dude now that is funny.

that is not a wiki link you evidently don't know what investitopia is.

it is a listing of financial definitions and terms. highly accurate.

What Is a Stock? - MONEY

When you buy shares of a company, you become a co-owner. As an owner, you have, in theory, a right to piece of the profits the company generates. But the ways those profits end up in investors’ pockets (if at all) will vary from stock to stock.

I guess that is a wiki article as well.

Investing 101: What Is a Stock? - DailyFinance
If you own stock, you own part of a company

yet another link that says I am right and you have no clue about what you are talking about.

now that this has been established.