So instead of getting cash that you can spend on food you prefer, you get a random mix of food that you may or may not like. Our local food bank was collecting the other day; the list they handed out at the grocery store was pasta sauce, noodles, rice, cereal, peanut butter, dried beans...can't remember what else. I'm sure hungry people are grateful for anything they can get, but with cash they can pick what they like.
And given WalMart associates' low pay, that bonus isn't going to have much in taxes taken out of it. Let's see... $100 that's maybe $80 after taxes vs random canned food...I'd take the money.
As far as getting a tax deduction -seriously? do you track how much you spend when you put a couple cans in the donation bag and deduct it later? I don't. And yes, I bought stuff for the food bank based on their list (think I went with two kinds of pasta sauce - organic; two kinds of pasta - both organic, one gluten free; and a huge jar of peanut butter - Skippy - smooth, which is "MY" favorite PB but for all I know the person who eats it prefers chunky Peter Pan....) and No, I don't have a separate receipt to use for taxes.
Seriously? you deduct a couple cans of food?
The Rachel Maddow Show on msnbc
I don't have cable and have to watch pundits once the shows are on-line. I'm just now getting around to last night's when I heard the BEST one sentence about this topic to date... It's in the 3rd video at the RMS. A former Walmart employee, current anti-Walmart activist is being interviewed by RM.
Vanessa Ferreira says, "What do they want these associates to donate with, their food stamps?"
Don't get us wrong, we don't have anything against food drives or charities if it goes to the needy. Whoever set this up obviously cared for the welfare of those employees. Maybe it was concerned co-workers or maybe management frustrated by company policies. The point is that it revealed a truth about the company and our times that is difficult to ignore, that the new normal is that the needy may be fully employed and still be needy.
What good does it do them if society still pays for their food stamps? :shrug:to say nothing of the jobs they provide to undereducated unskilled workers in those communities, right?
I don't know too many families that have 15 kids anyhow. :2razz:I'm not really seeing what the issue is here. If someone have 15 kids and is trying to support them while working at Walmart, is that really Walmart fault? It's not really walmart's place as an employer to address the various issues of every employee and it's not like the skills needed to work at walmart are the most demanding.
So if you have a point you are trying to make about the general wage they employ, you could likely find better ways to do that
Well it appears that a Cleveland, Ohio Walmart is holding a food drive so that it's employees can have a nice Holiday meal. The sign in the store, accompanied by several plastic bins, reads: "Please donate food items so associates in need can enjoy Thanksgiving dinner."
Really? Thank goodness those people are employed so those associates don't have to get on food stamps. :roll:
What cracks me up with some people that see nothing wrong with what Walmart is doing would probably go berserk if you wished them "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas." :roll:
No one is forced to go to Walmart.
So they can hire people. Its a vicious cycle but it is what it is.But we are forced to pay Wal-Mart via taxpayer-funded corporate subsidies.
Not all that work for Walmart's low wages are poor. A quick look at the federal poverty level will confirm that. For many of these workers that low wage Walmart job is a second or even third income in their household. For those few low wage Walmart workers that have large families and little or no other income this is likely a welcome helping hand as they can then afford to feed their extended family and guests too. Why is private charity seen as bad by those constantly demanding that ever more charity be given by the gov't?
Hey, it's not about me being correct that is what a Wal-mart spokesman (Kory Lundburg) told Bloomburg News: that the vast majority of associates are full time, (1.3 million.) and if that is so that is a sizable chunk of people.So, assuming you're correct,
Why can't I? Seeing that the Right says the answer to getting people off of government assistance (and give Wal-Mart subsidies.) is to give them tax breaks, and seeing that they have been getting them now for quite a long time, why do we still have gainfully employed people needing assistance to live? :roll:1. You can blame the full time employee settling for $25,000 in yearly income because they didn't complete their education or didn't take seriously their education and now they have no skills or skills that are unattractive and of low value to the people who hire.
Well it appears that a Cleveland, Ohio Walmart is holding a food drive so that it's employees can have a nice Holiday meal. The sign in the store, accompanied by several plastic bins, reads: "Please donate food items so associates in need can enjoy Thanksgiving dinner."
:Really? Thank goodness those people are employed so those associates don't have to get on food stamps. :roll
What cracks me up with some people that see nothing wrong with what Walmart is doing would probably go berserk if you wished them "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas." :roll:
As usual you attack the source and avoid the content. It's a simply question, regardless of your position.Gee - using a "former Walmart employee and current anti-Walmart activist" as an unbiased source. Wounder why she's a former employee? Couldn't have anything to do with her attitude, I'm sure.
Private charity is indeed much better than govt. charity.
That's why we hate corporations (i. e. Wal-Mart) that insist on getting govt. handouts (i. e. subsidies) instead of working to earn business (or charity) from those willing to pay Wal-Mart.
As usual you attack the source and avoid the content. It's a simply question, regardless of your position.
They pay for the work done, not for the lifestyle of the employee.
Also, I'd need to see the math on your claim about buy back stock and raising wages. Walmart has 1.6 billion shares held by outside parties with a total street value of $126 billion dollars. How much of that do you want them to buy back, exactly, and with what money?
Yep. Does that mean that SNAP, and various ther social spending, is really "corporate welfare"?
That's basically what it comes down to. Wal-mart is the best at what they do, and what they do is often hated by liberals. They supply low-wage, low-skill jobs to the masses. They do create a net increase in jobs, but often not as much as believed because mom-and-pop stores will often close down due to pricing that they cannot compete with.
It's not like it's a new idea that someone should pay a wage for someone to live on. Adam Smith criticized shop owners that didn't pay workers a wage that allowed them to sustain themselves. What's new is this idea that applauds squeezing workers as much as possible in order to increase gains for the owners.What I don't get is how people think that Wal-mart "owe" their people something. They provide a legal, mutually agreed upon wage for services rendered. Since when is that not enough?
Agreed! :thumbs:At some of the places where I have worked from time to time we took up collections to help fellow employees with various things. I'm sure that this goes on all over the USA.
That being said, I'm sure that Walmart could raise its employee's pay and still make a profit.
This isn't a struggling corporation.
Yea I dont give my money to companies who exploit the poor for extreme profits. I'm not ashamed of that. I support business who better their communities, better the lives of people.
And you have proof, somehow, that the needy employees are "fully employed and still needy"? Couldn't be someone working 10 hours a week, could it? Couldn't be someone who just lost a spouse in a car accident or through illness and money is tight? Couldn't be someone who's just had twins and is now on maternity leave and doesn't have as much disposable income any more?
You know, there is all kinds of need out there. For me, personally, I could give a rat's ass how or why a charitable drive was set up - I just say, thank God people care enough to think of it and God bless those who participate. The ones who stand on the sidelines and gripe about it or use it to drive some agenda are lower than a rat's ass, in my book.
Actually for the most part I admire Wal-Mart. They take keeping cost low seriously. Their corporate office is an old WalMart warehouse. Their inventory and supply chain system is innovative and has set the standard. There's a lot of things they do very well and deserve to be successful and yes put less efficient companies out of business.
It's not like it's a new idea that someone should pay a wage for someone to live on. Adam Smith criticized shop owners that didn't pay workers a wage that allowed them to sustain themselves. What's new is this idea that applauds squeezing workers as much as possible in order to increase gains for the owners.
Oh, how charitable to ignore the underlying problems. You don't get to claim moral superiority for supporting charity and simultaneously supporting a system that causes charity to be needed.
Sure...wouldn't you agree anything that makes it possible for WalMart to pay their employees wages they could never live on benefits WalMart? How long do you think their employees would take getting paid those wages if they couldn't feed their family/pay rent/clothe themselves etc etc?
Yeah, I googled them. Something like 350 stores, where Walmart has 11,000. Can't really compare the two.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?