Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tucker Carlson criticizes Amazon and Wall Mart for providing low wages to Workers

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Walmart is a greedy corporation run by the Waltons. Walmart even encourages it's employees to go on public assistance due to their wages. That's the capitalist market, Low cost = High profit.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by inevtiab1e View Post
      Walmart is a greedy corporation run by the Waltons. Walmart even encourages it's employees to go on public assistance due to their wages. That's the capitalist market, Low cost = High profit.
      As I said, the problem lies not with Walmart but with government. They set up the rules regarding their social-welfare state. Walmart is simply taking advantage of those rules, as do many people on their own. For example, there are people who know how much they can make working before they won't qualify for the maximum Earned Income Credit (EIC) on their taxes. They quit or better, get fired, just before that amount is reached. That lets them go on unemployment and other welfare and max out their tax return income which is often, combined, worth more than working a low wage job.

      When welfare pays equal or better than a low wage job, why would anyone work when they can simply be handed a paycheck for sluffing off? Getting labeled as "disabled" has become a national pastime. Once you are you get social security checks for life, can still work under the table, often qualify for other government handouts, and spend the rest of your life not doing anything while getting paid pretty damn good for doing it.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Gixxer86g View Post
        Right now, my company is competitive. But a $15 an hour minimum wage will destroy that. We will be forced to fire our drivers and adopt a delivery service. PDQ will no longer mean parts delivered quickly. No charts or liberal excuses will change that.
        How many current employees? What do you charge for delivery? Looks like you make your employees pay for gas.
        And this whole $15 thing is a eventual goal. Many want to start at 10, then 12, then work up to 15. The republicans don't want a minimum wage increase due to corporate policy. It's more important for them to enhance their absurd profits than to spread the love around to their workers.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by inevtiab1e View Post

          How many current employees? What do you charge for delivery? Looks like you make your employees pay for gas.
          And this whole $15 thing is a eventual goal. Many want to start at 10, then 12, then work up to 15. The republicans don't want a minimum wage increase due to corporate policy. It's more important for them to enhance their absurd profits than to spread the love around to their workers.
          We don't charge. We have a small fleet of delivery vehicles. Most of our drivers are retired. At 15 an hour they wont have jobs. We wiuld be forced to use a delivery service whixh would kill our business.

          We are a small company that is surviving. Your wage increase would kill us. So take your left wing talking point and shove it up your rear.
          ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

          BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

          BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
            I thought it odd that Carlson would say something like: " Wealthy Americans have a duty to give back." so I listened to his clip.
            Interestingly, he never said anything like that.
            He did say that the 3 businesses in question could afford to pay their employees more, and that the tax payer was actually, in essence, subsidizing those businesses. That is a valid point, but at no point did he say "wealthy Americans have a duty to give back".
            You did think it was odd that Carlson took a stand for the working class?

            Im sorry you are having a tough go at this. Why did you not note quote Carlson saying that wealthy people should give back? You talk about "he did say"



            Its ok, no worries friend sometimes even Tucker brings out the liberal side of himself,

            Tucker on Bezos

            " you have a moral obligation to make sure that you do something for them(amazon employees)"

            Amazon rep,

            Why is that Tucker?

            Tucker

            Because the powerful have an obligation to take care of the less powerful

            Amazon rep

            Why

            Tucker,

            Because I think that is inherent in our Christian code.

            Its matter of dignity , the Rich and wealthy of the American past like Ford and Carnegie felt it was the duty of the wealthy to give back, to build schools, hospitals and provide good jobs.

            Should also note that Carlson was wrong to be rude, as well as sarcastic toward the Amazon rep. Immediately after the Amazon rep made her first point, Carlson laughed very loud and that is not what a gentlemen does..Cambronnne I have Noted that you have typed out lol and similar type comments to other ACG posters as a response to a point, did you get that type of behavior from Tucker? There is no need for that friend. Carlson was right to call out Amazon and walmart for providing such low wages that those employees many of them need food stamps but Carlson should be kinder to his guests .

            Sorry to the few Trumpers(not all) that can not handle one of their own calling it out right. I just hope those few problematic Trumpers do not have to resort to personal attacks and undignified views. The greatest liberals and conservatives of US history were responsible men and women whom knew that yes giving back is the right thing to do, that wealthy folks can benefit the entire country like how Henry Ford did with providing so many good paying jobs to millions of Americans. Amazon and Wall mart can improve.






            Last edited by Stonewall_Jack; 18 Sep 18, 13:17.
            Long live the Lionheart! Please watch this video
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=jRDwlR4zbEM
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3DBaY0RsxU
            Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.

            George S Patton

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post

              You did think it was odd that Carlson took a stand for the working class?

              Im sorry you are having a tough go at this. Why did you not note quote Carlson saying that wealthy people should give back? You talk about "he did say"



              Its ok, no worries friend sometimes even Tucker brings out the liberal side of himself,

              Tucker on Bezos

              " you have a moral obligation to make sure that you do something for them(amazon employees)"

              Amazon rep,

              Why is that Tucker?

              Tucker

              Because the powerful have an obligation to take care of the less powerful

              Amazon rep

              Why

              Tucker,

              Because I think that is inherent in our Christian code.

              Its matter of dignity , the Rich and wealthy of the American past like Ford and Carnegie felt it was the duty of the wealthy to give back, to build schools, hospitals and provide good jobs.

              Should also note that Carlson was wrong to be rude, as well as sarcastic toward the Amazon rep. Immediately after the Amazon rep made her first point, Carlson laughed very loud and that is not what a gentlemen does..Noted you have typed out lol and similar to other ACG posters, no need for that friend. Carlson was right to call out Amazon and walmart for providing such low wages that those employees many of them need food stamps but Carlson should be kinder to his guests .

              Sorry to any Trumper, sorry to few Trumpers(not all) that can not handle one of their own calling it out right. I just hope those few problematic Trumpers do not have to resort to personal attacks and undignified views. The greatest liberals and conservatives of US history were responsible men and women whom knew that yes giving back is the right thing to do, that wealthy folks can benefit the entire country like how Henry Ford did with providing so many good paying jobs to millions of Americans. Amazon and Wall mart can improve.






              So you lied about what he said, but it is somehow my fault?

              Gotcha.
              Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

              Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post
                . . . . the Rich and wealthy of the American past like Ford and Carnegie felt it was the duty of the wealthy to give back, to build school and provide good jobs. . . . .
                Henry Ford kept a company of goons on Ford Motor Company's payroll for the express purpose of not only squelching discontent and union agitation among his employees, but also to spy on them to ensure that they were leading "Christian" lives.

                That was just the start. Henry Ford wanted his workers to be model Americans, and to ensure that, he created a division within the Ford Motor Company to keep everyone in line. It was known as the Ford Sociological Department (or the Sociology Department, or the Society Department, really, depending on who you ask. But you get the idea.).

                What started out as a team of 50 “Investigators” eventually morphed into a team of 200 people who probed every aspect of their employees lives. And I mean every aspect.

                Investigators would show up unannounced at your home, just to make sure it was being kept clean. They’d ask questions that were less appropriate of a car company, than they were for the modern-day CIA. They’d query you about your spending habits, your alcohol consumption, even your marital relationships. They’d ask what you were buying, and they’d check on your children to make sure they were in school. . . . .

                https://jalopnik.com/when-henry-ford...-wo-1549625731
                All this moralizing -- from a guy who was a raving antisemite and Nazi-sympathizer, not to mention a known skirt-chaser: he even knocked up his secretary.

                https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...pimp-home.html

                Maybe Jeff Bezos and the Walton's don't look so bad after all. . . .

                And as for Carnegie:



                Can't recall if Jeff Bezos had hired guns fire into a gathering of his own workers or not.

                At least the dreamy Jock Robert Owen honestly tried to improve his workers' conditions. His understanding of political economy was admittedly infantile, but at least he was a lot closer to a model employer than Ford or Carnegie ever were in their wildest imaginings.
                Last edited by slick_miester; 18 Sep 18, 13:34.
                I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post

                  The problem with Wal-Mart is that its model trends towards pushing out competition. That and Wal-Mart doesn't care about the quality of its workforce, which means that it can pretty much always find someone willing to do the job for whatever they'll pay.

                  If Wal-Mart is paying and benefiting its full-time employees to a point that the Taxpayer has to subsidize said employees simply to have basics, I have some issue with that. I'm presuming a single person that doesn't have a whole host of children here. I would consider that to be bordering on fraud against the society at large. Of course if it's their part-time employees, well the point of a part-time job is that you need 2 or more to equal a full-time job. Can't really complain that Wal-Mart is abusing the system in that case.

                  And as for Wal-Mart being affordable.....they're very good at marketing. I've noticed over the years that their prices really aren't that low when compared to competitors. And especially once Wal-Mart has a corner on a local market their prices go right back up to what their now defunct competitors have. If you want low-cost food, go to Aldi....not walmart.
                  I had a friend who worked at wally world was on salary doing 60 hours a week and only getting 30k a year.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                    In a free country, people are allowed to do what they want with their money. But there will always be bigots who want to deny the freedom of others.
                    I'm not sure you can equate corporate wealth and policy with "freedom" in any way.

                    Corporations do not have the welfare of their employees as a prime directive - they are entirely profit driven. Walmart is infamous for the 38 hour work week, which allows them to avoid healthcare and other benefits that are mandatory for full time (40hr) employees, yet they expect, and force, their employees to put in more than the 40 hour full time week. And yes, I know this as a fact from a number of friends and acquaintances who work at the Canon City Walmart.

                    Screwing people over is not "freedom to do what they want with their money"; it is a predatory practice, period.

                    The Amazon sales paradigm will likely put a huge dent in Walmart's profits, and rightly so.
                    Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                      I'm not sure you can equate corporate wealth and policy with "freedom" in any way.

                      Corporations do not have the welfare of their employees as a prime directive - they are entirely profit driven. Walmart is infamous for the 38 hour work week, which allows them to avoid healthcare and other benefits that are mandatory for full time (40hr) employees, yet they expect, and force, their employees to put in more than the 40 hour full time week. And yes, I know this as a fact from a number of friends and acquaintances who work at the Canon City Walmart.

                      Screwing people over is not "freedom to do what they want with their money"; it is a predatory practice, period.

                      The Amazon sales paradigm will likely put a huge dent in Walmart's profits, and rightly so.
                      I said this before somewhere in the last 30 plus years success of a company is irrelevant to the workers because they will not see the rewards

                      Maximizing the profit for the investors and stock holders is the prime goal.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by craven View Post

                        I said this before somewhere in the last 30 plus years success of a company is irrelevant to the workers because they will not see the rewards

                        Maximizing the profit for the investors and stock holders is the prime goal.
                        The directors of a corporation have a "fiduciary duty" to protect the interests of the stock holders.
                        In other words, they have a duty to try and maximize profit for those shareholders.
                        They do not behave as they do because they are heartless, but because they have a legal obligation to do so.

                        If you were given responsibility for managing an inheritance received by your minor child you would have the same obligation to protect that asset and maximize growth as the directors of a corporation.
                        Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

                        Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by craven View Post

                          I said this before somewhere in the last 30 plus years success of a company is irrelevant to the workers because they will not see the rewards

                          Maximizing the profit for the investors and stock holders is the prime goal.
                          Exactly, which is why the insistence on "corporate loyalty" is a sign of corporate insanity. You get what you pay for. Loyalty cannot be demanded; it must be earned and it is the most expensive thing to try and obtain, which is why corporate types will not put out the energy needed to begin with. They will, however, make absolute certain that they have their own personal "golden parachute" if they have to leave, and screw the slaves below deck who have to row the boat.
                          Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by craven View Post

                            I said this before somewhere in the last 30 plus years success of a company is irrelevant to the workers because they will not see the rewards

                            Maximizing the profit for the investors and stock holders is the prime goal.
                            You make it sound as if that is a bad thing.

                            Of course corporations seek to maximise share holder value. That is what they were set up to do. That is what pays most of our pensions and drives the economy, pays our wages. They are not charities. They are supposed to make money.
                            "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post

                              You did think it was odd that Carlson took a stand for the working class?

                              Im sorry you are having a tough go at this. Why did you not note quote Carlson saying that wealthy people should give back? You talk about "he did say"



                              Its ok, no worries friend sometimes even Tucker brings out the liberal side of himself,

                              Tucker on Bezos

                              " you have a moral obligation to make sure that you do something for them(amazon employees)"

                              Amazon rep,

                              Why is that Tucker?

                              Tucker

                              Because the powerful have an obligation to take care of the less powerful

                              Amazon rep

                              Why

                              Tucker,

                              Because I think that is inherent in our Christian code.

                              Its matter of dignity , the Rich and wealthy of the American past like Ford and Carnegie felt it was the duty of the wealthy to give back, to build schools, hospitals and provide good jobs.

                              Should also note that Carlson was wrong to be rude, as well as sarcastic toward the Amazon rep. Immediately after the Amazon rep made her first point, Carlson laughed very loud and that is not what a gentlemen does..Cambronnne I have Noted that you have typed out lol and similar type comments to other ACG posters as a response to a point, did you get that type of behavior from Tucker? There is no need for that friend. Carlson was right to call out Amazon and walmart for providing such low wages that those employees many of them need food stamps but Carlson should be kinder to his guests .

                              Sorry to the few Trumpers(not all) that can not handle one of their own calling it out right. I just hope those few problematic Trumpers do not have to resort to personal attacks and undignified views. The greatest liberals and conservatives of US history were responsible men and women whom knew that yes giving back is the right thing to do, that wealthy folks can benefit the entire country like how Henry Ford did with providing so many good paying jobs to millions of Americans. Amazon and Wall mart can improve.
                              Until you get like say George Pullman and the Pullman Railway Carriage company did. Pullman wanted to do exactly what Carlson, and you, call for. He wanted to raise his workers up. His method to this was build factory towns for them to live in. The towns were quite nice and very elaborate. The problem living in one was you had to follow Pullman's rules. There was a curfew. Drinking and such wasn't allowed for the most part. Religious services were mandatory, etc.
                              Workers that saved and could eventually move out into the "free" world made those stuck in the factory town chaff at their predicament. Then the Pullman company suffered a downturn in business. Wages stagnated but rents went up on those in the factory town. It came to a head in 1894 with the first general strike in US history. A nationwide railway strike was declared and the railways shut down.
                              The President, Grover Cleveland, said the strike was illegal as it would cripple the economy and sent in the US Army to put it down... machineguns and all. Eugene Debs, head of the railway union at the time was pilloried in the press and the public at large didn't support the strike.

                              The factory towns were broken up and Pullman's dream of raising his workers up ended.



                              A duplex home in a Pullman factory town.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Surrey View Post

                                You make it sound as if that is a bad thing.

                                Of course corporations seek to maximise share holder value. That is what they were set up to do. That is what pays most of our pensions and drives the economy, pays our wages. They are not charities. They are supposed to make money.
                                Do you ever look mournfully at your former Colonials across the pond and wonder if we'll deliberately replicate the British experience from 1945-1980?
                                I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X