At 06:38 AM 8/31/2010, you wrote: >This has been a good discussion in that it has helped me understand >why I think Wal-Mart is a cancer. > >I have had this deep seated feeling that I could not fully >articulate, that I think I understand better now why I felt that way. > >I do not have the time nor the energy to fully articulate the entire >reasoning, in depth. > >Let's start at the most fundamental point. As a Christian I believe >we are part of the community. I believe we are blessed to >bless. In other words we should share our time, talents, and >treasures with our community. I also believe the word of God says >the worker's wages cry our for him. - James 5:4 - "Look! The wages >you failed to pay the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out >against you.". > >There is two issues here. > >1) The government is in the process of creating a welfare state >which allows those who are so inclined to redirect that subsistence >into their own pockets. > >2) Wal-Mart has become an expert in creating an environment where >they funnel our tax dollars, indirectly thought government >subsistence, into their pockets. > >My point is just because you can does not make it right. I do not >see Wal-Mart moving to limit government subsistence. Nor do I see >them working to create an environment where less government >subsistence is necessary. What I do see is a very powerful company >taking advantage of the system instead of working towards fixing >it. I believe in the book of James it says that a person shall be >know by his works or the fruit he bears. > >Wal-Mart impacts the community in a bad way. They lower wages and >kill main street. I call that sin. Each one of us has a fiduciary >responsibility to do good not evil. > >Just one small example. Wal-Mart contracts with China to make some >of it's products. It has been documented that these Chinese >companies are sweatshops. Now just because one can does not mean >one should. This comment only addresses the labor issues, it does >not address the product safety issues. As of late we have found >that China has a real product safety problem. > >Lets look at this from my business prospective. I am a LAMP >developer and I have SEO skills. I could expand my website to bring >in lots of projects and I could hire some Indian programmers and >designers for $5/hr and I could charge American companies over >$100/hr. I could probably build a business that could bring in 200k >or 300k a year doing so. Under this model I would be able to keep >the vast majority of of what I would charge. I would be well off >and living high off the hog. > >I could do this and it is completely legal. If I took on this >business model, I would be thinking only of myself. Sure I could >tithe to my church and even give to other charities so I could point >to all the good I had done. In the end I would only be thinking of >Keith. I would have missed an opportunity to impact my community in >a good and necessary way. > >Lets look at a different model. I expand my website and start >bringing in lots of projects. I hire LAMP programmers from the >local community, and I'm not cheap about it. I make less, however I >have just created wealth within my local community. These are >American citizens who buy products and services within the local >market. They pay taxes. This model helps us all. Doing business >this way is doing business the right way. > >Each of us has a responsibility to our community. If we have, we >must give back in some significant way. We must get to a point were >we understand what it means to give a hand up not a hand out. There >are circumstances where long term subsistence is needed, however >there is no place for a dependent class. We must create an economy >that allows the worker to make a living wage and have NO need for >government subsistence. > >Just because Wal-Mart can does not mean they should. > >Notice I have not suggested any government intervention. Sorry -- you said "They pay taxes." > We need no artificial wage control nor do we need vast welfare > programs. What we need is 1) moral business leaders 2) the Church > to take on it rightful roll in helping those who cannot help > themselves and creating a "hand up" environment. > >Recently a Christian pastor told me that the government is only >doing what the Church has failed to do. > >The only problem with the government filling that void is the >government had perverted and is now using dependency for its own >political gain. There are strings attached when government gets involved. > >Lets come together as a community and solve this problem. > >------------------------ >Keith Smith > >--- On Mon, 8/30/10, joe@actionline.com wrote: > >From: joe@actionline.com >Subject: Re: OT: Plug Digest, Vol 62, Issue 31 - the unfixable problem. >To: "Main PLUG discussion list" >Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 3:10 PM > > > > I would say Wal-mart is a great example of true greed. > >Keith, I'm really sorry that you seem to have such a hateful attitude >toward Walmart. I don't want to pick a fight with you my good friend, >but I do feel it's important to clarify a couple things. > >You asserted: > > They require tax cuts to build in your area > > and they pay the lowest of low wages. > >Neither Walmart nor any other business can "require" or coerce any >government, city, state, or federal to provide "tax cuts." > >It is common practice and not in the least bit unethical for any >business or any other entity that brings jobs and economic activity to an >area to seek incentives to move in to that area. No government is >"required" to capitulate to providing such incentives. > >There is nothing wrong with any business offering whatever wage rates that >they may choose to offer. Walmart can not offer lower wages than the >minimum wage and nobody is required to accept or stay in any job that >Walmart or any other employer may offer. > > > They tell their employees to get government subsistence as part > > of their model. > >I seriously question that Walmart "tells" their employees any such thing; >however, the point is that Walmart (and every employer) has every right to >decide whatever wage rates they want to offer, and nobody is "required" to >accept any job that employer may offer. > > > Basically we subsidize their business model by supporting their > > employees with section-8 housing, food stamps, and state funded > > health care. > >That is not Walmart's fault. It is unrealistic to blame Walmart for what >the anti-American socialists among our elected representatives have >contrived. Walmart did not do that, did not advocate that, and is not >responsible for that. > > > I have no problem with the needy being helped however when it > > becomes part of a business plan, I am against it. > >Do you really disagree with the notion that you (if you were an employer) >or any other employer (including Walmart) should have the right to decide >whatever wage rates that they want to offer? Nobody is holding a gun to a >Walmart employment applicant's head coercing them to accept any job that >Walmart may wish to offer. It is still a free country (so far). > > > People need to make a living wage. > >Do you really believe that employers should be coerced by our government >to set wage rates that employers should be required to offer other than >minimum wage? Even setting a minimum wage is debatable. > > > And as they move up they should make a decent wage. In 2002 I worked > > with a guy who had been a department manager at Wal-Mart and he left > > Wal-Mart because he was only making $8/hr. > >So what? Good for him that he was free to leave. > > > Walmart is a cancer in my opinion. > >Of course you are entitled to your opinion, but what benefit is it and >what does it accomplish to hate and berate the largest employer in the >world because they have a successful business that provides more >employment for more people than any other private sector entity in the >world? > >You recommended: > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiSmlmXp-aU& > >Robert Greenwald is just another anti-everything Michael Moore type -- a >radical, liberal, elitist, left-wing extremist, socialist. It is very >surprising to me that you of all people would be swayed by any of his >one-sided drivel and distortions. > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Greenwald > >Greenwald's approach has been to adapt guerrilla filmmaking to political >documentaries ... in affiliation with politically sympathetic groups such >as Moveon.org. > > > >--------------------------------------------------- >PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us >To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > > >--------------------------------------------------- >PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us >To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss