Tucker Carlson criticizes Amazon and Wall Mart for providing low wages to Workers
Arnold J Rimmer
18 Sep 18, 16:59
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.
Corporations have their shareholders as a prime directive, which is exactly what their charters require.
You might not be sure, but the USSC is: corporations have the rights of individuals.
Wal Mart is applying Amazon's new methods; they are leading the retail industry in automation and innovation.
Screwing over employees is a universal practice. You were just commenting on how your Army pension is minimal given the passage of time.
Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.
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.
But at one point employees got a bigger share of the pie. Did I say they weren't suppose to make money no I did not.
Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
actually you what you say is a newer management strategy. For example the divide between CEO pay and employee pay has increased significantly
Stonewall_Jack
Originally posted by American87 View Post
We don't know much wealthy individuals (worth $50 Million+) give to charitable causes. The Giving Pledge is a group of America's wealthiest individuals who decided to give most of their wealth away to Charity. It was fouded by Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, and the website can be found here: https://givingpledge.org
A strong desire to help others through charitable giving can also be a motive for acquiring wealth. It certainly has more sustainable power than buying another Rolls Royce. Curing cancer, feeding the poor, or even sponsoring archaeological digs at historic sites are all possible motives for acquiring vast wealth.
That being said, the Walton family, that owns Wal-Mart, has historicaly been stingy with their profits. But with their business model-providing affordable food to low income families and individuals-does require a certain cap on wages. I don't know the math, but let's say they use their own profits to pay higher wages-how much, on average, will the bump in workers wages be?
This article explored the question back in 2010: https://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-employees-pay
Back then, Wal-Mart employed 1.4 million people in the US. It paid the average "associate," which I take it means in-store employee, $11.75 an hour, which was more than the minumum wage of $7.25. It was only slightly less than average income for all retail employees at the time, $12.04. A single WalMart employee made $20,744 a year, which was below the $22,000 poverty line. But a dual-income household of WalMart employees would have made $41,488 a year, which in many parts of the country is sufficient to live a middle-class economic lifestyle.
The Waltons can probably afford to pay their employees the national retail average. They can probably afford to pay higher than the average. But there's no laws punishing them for not doing it. Perhaps they're just stingy. But also, Wal-Mart employs so many people and has weathered the recession well because it sells necessary and even luxury goods at a cheap price. People will ALWAYS go to Wal-Mart because they get things cheaply, and they get what they want. At some point, increasing employee wages would force WalMart to up its prices, and then the jobs will start to go.
Here is something to ponder and great points btw,
The issue is that the USA needs to bring back the steel and automobile plant jobs. Those against steel, those against America those that peddle for low paying jobs they want guys like you and I to not care about our fellow Americans.
The argument is that folks like Bezos and the Waltons have made a fortune while paying millions of employees little, and yes we get that working for Walmart does not require the same skill as working at a Steel plant.
That said keep in mind that the likes of great Americans like Henry Ford made a fortune and paid employees a middle class wage. That is the difference between Ford compared to the Waltons and Jeff Bezos.
Perhaps Bezos and the Waltons can open up a side business that pays Americans middle class wages.
I made this thread to show that even Tucker Carlson is right every now and then, the main point that Wealthy folk have a command to give back, and that here in the USA in 2018 the middle class is not what it used to be.
We are living in a diff time, young Americans today do not have the same opportunity that older Americans had.
We have a ton of Walmart stores , and Amazon has these huge factories paying workers low wages in our country....it is what it is. I'm not against Walmart or Amazon, but room in the USA needs to most importantly be provided to companies and factories that provide millions of middle class jobs. Gov should give grants not to Tesla which does not come with Union Jobs or a sense of duty, but to American steel companies with Unions the kinds of steel companies that won the allies WW2.
Last edited by Stonewall_Jack; 18 Sep 18, 20:37.
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
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.
Remember one time I picked up bacon that was 3 weeks expired at Wall mart. Glad I caught it before digging in.
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.
15 $ an hour barely cuts in America these days, those jobs are for kids.
Hope you make at least 30$ an hour, you work a factory job right?
Adjusted for inflation, American Steel and Auto workers were making 30 an hour back in the day.
Talked to a Ford Employee today, his Dad at Republic Steel made that 30 an hour, but this fellow American of ours at Ford after years on the job is making what Ford Employees made in 1998....19$ an hour.
My Dad, Uncle and Grandpa worked for American Steel and Auto Companies. Those were great paying jobs, anti Americans want good people to except a low wage and a US society built on greed, well aint gonna happen. Americans wont let it happen. Numerous times in our countries history have good Employers and Employees teamend up for a great cause such as Ford, GM, Republic Steel the list goes on.
Dont worry, hope is always there. The spirit of FDR will prevail good jobs will come back.
If you do a low skilled job you aren't going to be paid much. That's life. Anyone can do your job.
if you want to be paid more you have to train and study and obtain a skill that is in demand.
Wal Mart, Aldi etc aren't charities. If they didn't pay the going rate they wouldn't be able to hire people.
Wall mart is meant for college and high school students to work for. But even with that, even those jobs need to pay a little bit more, a few dollars more per hour to get those adult employees working full time off the food stamps.
That said, there is a better method...note the OP did not say Walmart or Amazon should be banned...rather the USA as a whole needs to bring back the middle class. To that point Jeff Bezos of Amazon who is worth 150 billion USD reportedly....could perhaps start a side automobile company and pay workers a middle class wage while continuing his other projects at Amazon.
Industry makes a country whole, look at how Industry made the British Empire and the USA honorable.
Anti Americans want folk to believe that hey technology is changing and Robots will soon take over and we should all bow down and just accept the downfall of the USA as we used to know it. Well let it be said that Steel and other commodities are still in massive use, and will be always.
Those adults working for Walmart need to have the chance to get a job at Ford, GM, or one of the Steel companies in our country. Those jobs can be brought back, there is work to be done.
Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
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.
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.
Fords so called goons also went in to employee homes on Sundays, making the sure the men lived upright lives...take what you want from it. Ford doubled the salaries of his employees at one time, Ford brought in the 8 hour workday to Ford employees.
Ford had Jewish and African workers, Ford was a man of his time but in the end stood for the allied cause.
Here is what counts above all. Bezos and Amazon do not provide the types of jobs that Ford, GM, and Republic Steel once provided to Americans of all stripes, black and white all types of religions.
Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
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.
Those are great points relating to US history, of how workers in the past struggled and had to continue to fight for rights, literally fight sometimes these were our ancestors fighting for freedom, in the military and then when they got back home to fight for rights in the workplace.
As for Factory Towns, look at Detroit and Buffalo NY. In Buffalo specifically look up Lackawanna otherwise known as Steelawanna now that was a Factory town...I was just there today talking with a woman whom was married to a steel worker, she brought up how there was smoke sometimes in her neighborhood from the mill, but that her husband made great money and she reminisced about the great steel days this country once had. In that neighborhood btw, in Lackawanna today I filmed a video showing a neighborhood that was once a factory town, they had US flags all over, and a picture raised high of a missing Korean War vet. I got to get that video up on youtube soon.
In the 1940s-1990s when there were strong Unions and a American feeling of pride, there were beautiful homes right by the Steel mills and Auto plants...tens of thousands of American men and women of all backgrounds in these times did not have to work for Amazon or Walmart, but they proudly worked for Ford, GM, Bethlehem Steel, Republic Steel, and did so in a free way they could work and then do whatever they wanted.
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?
It's always better to learn from other people's mistakes.
However there are enough problems over her. Red Theresa seems to be determined to reverse Thatchers reforms and return us to the 70s.
i still dream of the time when Thatcher was PM here and Regean was president in the US.
Last edited by Surrey; 19 Sep 18, 06:36.
"To be free is better than to be unfree - always."
ljadw
Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post
good jobs will come back.
Not if it depends on Bill Kristol who said in 2016 that he would vote for Hillary
inevtiab1e
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.
No wonder your business is barely making it by. Not all businesses are meant to survive off peanuts and paying employees in peanuts. I'd start with getting a website going first.
You should listen to democratic policies, they help economies. Which is why blue states have better economies than red states. The writing is on the wall, I don't think you care to notice it.
slick_miester
Fords so called goons also went in to employee homes on Sundays, making the sure the men lived upright lives...take what you want from it.
As a working man, how would you feel about your boss sending spies to your home, checking up on you in busy-body fashion? What would that say about your employer's view of your personal dignity?
You do work, don't you?
Ford doubled the salaries of his employees at one time, Ford brought in the 8 hour workday to Ford employees.
You obviously did not read the links that I furnished. The higher salaries were offered only to those who qualified: English speaking, married if 22 years of age or older and male.
Henry Ford was most definitely a man of his time and place, for both good and ill, but he was anything but foursquare for the Allied cause.
Era of neutrality
During the first 27 months of World War II, when the U.S. was neutral (to December 1941), Ford was hesitant to participate in the Allied military effort. Ford insisted that peaceful trade was the best way to avoid war. Ford had a subsidiary in Germany. In 1936, a Ford executive visiting Germany was informed by a Nazi official that Ford's Cologne plant manager was a Jew (he had one grandparent who was Jewish), prompting discussions at Ford offices in both Germany and the U.S. Heinrich Albert, Ford's Germany-U.S. liaison, insisted that the manager be fired. The manager was replaced by Robert Schmidt, who would play an important role in Germany's war effort.[25]
Henry Ford had said war was a waste of time, and did not want to profit from it.[14][26] He was concerned the Nazis during the 1930s might nationalize Ford factories in Germany. Ford nevertheless established a close collaboration with Germany's Nazi government before the war—so close, in fact, that Ford received, in July 1938, the Grand Cross of the German Eagle medal from the regime.[25] Ford's outspoken anti-semitism, including his newspaper, The Dearborn Independent, which published The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, also lent credence to the view that he sympathized with the Nazis.[25][27] In the spring of 1939, the Nazi government assumed day-to-day control of many foreign-owned factories in Germany. However, Ford's Dearborn headquarters continued to maintain a 52% ownership over its German factories but with no voice or control or financial reward. Ford factories contributed significantly to the buildup of Germany's armed forces. Ford negotiated a resource-sharing agreement that allowed the German military to access scarce supplies, particularly rubber. During this same period, Ford was hesitant to participate in the Allied military effort.[25] In June 1940, after France had fallen to the Wehrmacht, Henry Ford personally vetoed a plan to build airplane engines for the Allies.[28]Wartime
The company enthusiatically supported the war effort after Pearl Harbor, making it a major component of the "Arsenal of Democracy" that President Roosevelt had promised would mobilize industrial resources to win the war. Henry, aged 76 and early senile, played a minor role even though he had 55% ownership of the company stock. His son Edsel Ford, the company president and owner of 42% of the stock, had never been a pacifist like his father and now made all the decisions.[29]
The company produced 390,000 tanks and trucks, 27,000 engines, 270,000 Jeeps, over 8000 B-24 Liberators, and hundreds of thousands of parts, gun mounts, and machine tools for the war effort.[30] It ranked third among corporations in the value of wartime production contracts.[31]
The Company's new Willow Run factory was designed for the production of B-24 bombers although the production line was initially characterized by bungling and incompetence.[32] Ford's efforts benefited the Allies as well as the Axis. After Bantam invented the Jeep, the US War Department handed production over to Ford and Willys.[citation needed]
The Treasury Department investigated Ford for alleged collaboration with German-run Ford plants in occupied France, but did not find conclusive evidence. After the war, Schmidt and other Nazi-era managers kept their jobs with Ford's German division.[28] In the United Kingdom, Ford built a new factory in Trafford Park, Manchester during WWII where over 34,000 Rolls-Royce Merlin aero engines were completed by a workforce trained from scratch.[citation needed]
In 1943, a despondent Edsel Ford died of stomach cancer. Henry decided then to resume direct control of the company, but this proved a very poor idea as he was 78 years old and suffering from heart problems and atherosclerosis. His mental state was also questionable, and there was a very real possibility that the company would collapse if he died or became incapacitated. The Roosevelt Administration had a contingency plan in place to nationalize Ford if need be so that they wouldn't lose vital military production.[citation needed]
At this point, Ford's wife and daughter-in-law intervened and demanded that he turn control over to his grandson[33]Henry Ford II. They threatened to sell off their stock (amounting to half the company's total shares) if he refused. Henry was infuriated, but there was nothing he could do, and so he gave in. When Henry II, who came to be called affectionately "Hank the Deuce," assumed command, the Company was losing US$9 million a month and in financial chaos.[34]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor..._of_neutrality
The story I heard had it that former Ford Motor Co and GM hand William Knudsen was commissioned a US Army general officer in order to whip a reluctant Detroit into line to support the war effort. Towards that end Old Man Henry Ford had to step aside. Knudsen worked with Ford's grandson, Henry Ford II, to shunt the old man aside, such was the fear in official Washington that the Old Man's senility and antisemitism might hamper Ford Motor Co's contribution to the war.
If you're looking for an industrialist who really put a charge into the US war effort, try fellow New Yorker Henry J Kaiser. Look also at the members of the War Production Board, like Donald Nelson, William Murphy, and Charles Wilson -- President of General Electric. They did far more than Henry Ford to prosecute the war against Fascism.
I can see that you've never worked in a factory. I have. Freezing in the winter, boiling in the summer, surrounded by dangerous machinery -- missing fingers were almost a badge of honor -- repetitively performing menial tedious chores to the point of mind-numbing. A few months of that more than convinced me of the paramount desirability of a college education. That kind of work, which demands as little as possible from workers' brains, should never be an aspiration. Reminds me of a fellow I knew near Plattsbugh: might have been one of the two stupidest people I've known who weren't legally retarded. He was also startlingly lazy: he could go hours without moving a muscle -- people would yell at him just to ensure that he was still alive. A local dairy farmer felt sorry for him so he gave the dummy a job -- shooing flies away from cattle. Said dummy would sit on a fence -- remember he was too lazy to move much -- and he would occasionally wave a horse-hair fly fan
at the cattle. For that he got $1 or $2/hr. The funny part was that he eventually got married -- to a woman that was almost as stupid as him, only with a nasty estrogen-fueled edge. She expressed a belief that her husband was cheating, so she avenged herself by getting herself knocked up by some other dude. These human paperweights, these detriments to the species, were actually employed, and they procreated, when by rights they should have been sewn into rock-filled sacks and tossed into Lake Champlain.
Why anyone would want to work in an unskilled position and rely on the good graces of a single employer in perpetuity is beyond me. Anyone who advocates that kind of model should be charged with fraud.
I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison
Our version of the '70s wasn't exactly a party either.
It makes my head spin to think that otherwise rational people want to relive that.
And yet they do.
pamak
Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
So you lied about what he said, but it is somehow my fault?
Stop BS us!
you are simply provoking the original poster when in reality you are the one who shamelessly lies when you said "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.
I listened also to his clip.
Here is the one from the first clip @ 4:08 when he mentions the "moral obligation" of the more powerful to take care of the less powerful in the world
Now feel free to discredit your self even more by starting the game of semantics ..
My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...