Monday, August 07, 2006

Advice to the Poor

"it's not Wal-Mart's fault that its associates are poor. "
You see these people are poor because:
1) They charged too much on their credit cards.
2) Had kids and now can't support them.
3) Didn't get an education.
4) Failed to save for the future.
5) Made unnecessary purchases.

Can anyone think of other reasons why people are poor and should be punished or abandoned? Maybe you add some more good advice for the poor.

con't. "If they had made the correct choices in life, the wages they receive would be sufficient to sustain them and they would be on their way to better lives".
Yes, you can easily live on the wage Wal-Mart pays you if:

1) Tear up all those credit cards
2) Give the kids up for adoption and get sterilized
3) Go to medical school or law school
4) Save up at least 50% of all the money your poor relatives give you
5) Don't buy unnecessary stuff. Wait, forget that last one, Wal-Mart wants you to buy unecessary stuff.

Then just live on the $320 (minus taxes and health insurance) you take home everyweek.
(No this isn't from me, it came from a pro-Wal-Mart blog. With friends like that, Wal-Mart really doesn't need any enemies.)


Someone in USA said...

It looks like someone paid a visit to my blog. Are you disputing the fact that making poor decisions can contribute to poverty? The misguided individuals that post on anti-Wal-Mart blogs and the unions behind the movement are always talking about how people can't afford children and other things that I mentioned. Somehow this is Wal-Mart's fault. These things are choices - why should Wal-Mart subsidize their lifestyle? Taking it a step further, how is Wal-Mart obligated to pay more than minimum wage?

Also, I don't care that you quoted and paraphrased my work, but it's good protocol to provide a link to the source.

Anonymous said...

"Why should Wal-Mart subsidize their lifestyle"? Hunh...perhaps taxpayers should be asking why we should be subsidizing Wal-Marts wages, low prices and hence the incredible profit margin Wal-mart enjoys. This isn't a case of smart planning for the future. This is a case of Machiavellian chess...and the little people are the perfect pawns.

Someone in USA said...

1. Taxpayers are covering the employees' costs, not Wal-Mart's. Perhaps you would prefer it if they were slaves. Then Wal-Mart would be obligated to cover their care.

2. Wal-Mart's profit margin is a paltry 3.54%. That's hardly incredible.

Anonymous said...

to someone in the usa,
I followed the labarynth of sites from this site. I came across a Wake up Walmart site that had articles and comments following the articles. I find you posting here on this blog as well as other sites lauding the merits of the poor picked on Wal-Mart. The time and energy it takes, the facts you must gather...Do you do this for a living? and you have a blog as well? You are either getting paid for this you you really need to get a life.

Anonymous said...

"someone in usa" sounds an awful lot like a Wal-Mart stooge to me (Webster's definition of "stooge": a) one who plays a subordinate or compiant role to a principal b) puppet

Anonymous said...

oops - typo: "compiant" in my last comment was supposed to be "compliant"... one who is compliant to a principal

Anonymous said...

The Bully Of Bentonville by Anthony Bianco has this to say on page 86. "Scott rarely mentions Wal-Mart's turnover rate when he steps foward to agrue that the company is a great place to work. Instead the CEO focuses attention on the application rate. "We had 500 job openings, we had 5,000 applications," said Scott of a new store opening in Phoenix. "Maybe it's different where you live, but where we live, people don't line up to get a job that pays les and has less benefits. The world does not work that way."
But note what Bianco says in his book about Scotts statement.
"Actually, it does when better paying jobs for the unskilled are scarce. As the writer John Dicker aptly put it, "Wal-Mart's claim that the number of applicants for its jobs reflects the quality of jobs is like saying soup-kitchen lines are a referendum on soup."
Wal-Mart employs mostly unskilled workers. Where are these people going to work if they leave Wal-Mart? Is McDonalds or Burger King going to pay more? Are they going to end up as a janitor or chamber maid someplace? And I'm sure many of these people apply at Wal-Mart thinking they are going to be making more only to discover they're still making poverty wages. But if they leave they will only end up in another job for the unskilled.
Currently, Wal-Mart has a 50% turnover rate for their hourly employees. This means they must replace 52,500 employees EVERY SINGLE MONTH OR 600,000 EMPLOYEES EVERY YEAR!! Wal-Mart deliberately pays poverty wages. This puts many workers in a bind. If they stay there they make poverty wages, but if they leave, they won't make more either. Wal-Mart could raise the prices of their products by only a few cents and pay their workers more, but they choose not to. I wonder what would happen if Wal-Mart workers went on strike in all their stores demanding higher wages? Now that would be a story, wouldn't it?

TourPro said...

1) Tear up all those credit cards - People with poor Income/Debt ratio shouldn't borrow money from credit card companies.
2) Give the kids up for adoption and get sterilized - I have kids, they require money.
3) Go to medical school or law school - How about just finishing HS? Or learning self-reliance?
4) Save up at least 50% of all the money your poor relatives give you - I know plenty of people from poor families that have studied, saved, invested, and succeeded without depending on someone else to do it for them.
5) Don't buy unnecessary stuff. Nuff said.