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 <joe@actionline.com> wrote:
>
>From: joe@actionline.com <joe@actionline.com>
>Subject: Re: OT: Plug Digest, Vol 62, Issue 31 - the unfixable problem.
>To: "Main PLUG discussion list" <plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
>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&>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>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>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
---------------------------------------------------
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
(text/plain)