I must admire this effort by Wal-Mart to discredit people who think a very profitable enterprise should pay its employees decently by shifting the onus onto the low income consumers who are forced to shop in Wal-Mart to stretch what little income they have. A classic effort to dump problems on victims.

I do not admire the idea that people voluntarily work at a store that doesn't pay decently. If it didn't pay decently, then they wouldn't have employees standing in line trying to work there. The people would go start a fruit stand to make a living--or a furniture building company, or they'd get some other respectable source of income. Some cities in Kansas will give you free land just for moving there. The American dream is slipping out of our societal memory.

Unluckily we have people who want to shift the onus from off of themselves and onto their employers. Apparently employers are the only ones expected to plan, think, and be generally responsible; but they can't have their bottom-line as a top priority, anymore. That would be horribly unethical.

I will cheer and support profitable people, and I will criticize and help those who are subpar. Low-level employees have trouble paying for private health insurance after eating-out everyday of the month. Big surprise. Don't complain to Walmart.

It takes start-up capital, knowledge of how to run a business and some idea that could make the business profitable to get a business going and inspite of that the majority of new businesses fail. There a large portion of the population that have none of the necessities to get to the first stage, not to speak of succeeding. Ideally, according to the original submitter there would be no employees, only entrepreneurs. Reality doesn't seem to enter into the concept.

A business has three main functions. It is started to make money for the originator. It must perform a needed good or service to make that money and it should provide funds for the employees so that they can live a decent life. Neglecting any of these is a drag on society and a business that does so does not deserve to exist.

You mistake is when you say that a business must provide funds for employees so that they can live a decent life. Walmart shouldn't be compelled provide a single job at all, much less a job that pays anything above one penny per hour. Minimum wage laws are based on fallacies themselves. It was established only as a political move; a move to gain power. Don't fall into the trap of the power grabbers. They love for you to believe the way you do. They prey on our citizenry that thrives on envy. "They have it; I don't. I'll make the gov't take it from them and share it with me."

That is not liberty. If you want love and charity, then there must be an option to give or not to give. Without the option, then you can't have charity. A society with a little less liberty is a society with a little less love and charity.

A career is not a human right. It's to be earned through extreme sweat and great effort. It does take knowledge, capital, and innovative ideas. How dare you or anyone doubt the human ability to do it all and more. It doesn't happen overnight, but it will happen when people want to better their condition. If you do happen to get a cushy job, then you get a pat on the back for achieving such stability. Otherwise you must depend on yourself, and on the *choices* of others to help you. Imagine the satisfaction one experiences in such a system. It's truly rich.

Like most people with no sense of the interdependance of humans and the culture within which they operate you see no conflict between the individual who is endowed with untrammelled selfishness and the web of all the controls that make civilization possible. The only way talented humans can develop their capabilities and utilize them for their own and others' benefit is through the grace of universal education and the webs of communication and legal conventions maintained as a superstructure within which to operate. We are each born with individual capabilities and to disdain the basic humantarian concern that should see to it that each of us can survive decently would only create a society so savage that it would incur frightful criminality and the awful suppressive systems necessary to control it. The experience of Enron and like corporations is the fruit of "to hell with everyone else and the devil take the hindmost." Society provides the necessary curbs to see to it that those gifted with extraordinary ability should see to it that society as a whole should benefit and no human should be tossed into the garbage can.

I'm definitely not anti-helping other people. I spent two entire years voluteering to help refugees plan their lives. I'm pro-voluteer work. We must choose; that is what makes America, well, America. I'm so anti-coersion that I will shoot you in the face before I'll let you take our country down that path, if it comes to that.

I also why you think you're so sure that Wal-mart employees don't get paid their fair share. I work part-time for a wage well-below the average Wal-mart employee, while I go to school. I still can make ends meet. I just have to live like a poor person so that I don't run out of money for the important things. It's not glamorous, but it's satisfying. Just because someone says they're broke, it doesn't mean that they are victims of their greedy employers.

All humans should be able to choose to live in the garbage can or not. Why would anyone choose to, you ask? Because they are unwilling to do what it takes to get out, or like me, because I'm currently investing my efforts for the future.

As Henry Grady Weaver wrote, in his book, THE MAINSPRING OF HUMAN PROGRESS:"Most of the major ills of the world have been caused by well-meaning people who ignored the principle of individual freedom, except as applied to themselves, and who were obsessed with fanatical zeal to improve the lot of mankind-in-the-mass through some pet formula of their own....THE HARM DONE BE ORDINARY CRIMINALS, MURDERES, GANGSTERS, AND THIEVES IS NEGLIGIBLE IN COMPARISON WITH THE AGONY INFLICTED UPON HUMAN BEINGS BY THE PROFESSIONAL 'DO-GOODERS', who attempt to set themselves up as gods on earth and who would ruthlessly force their views on all others--with the abiding assurance that the end justifies the means." (p. 40-1, p. 313)

I assume you include within the "do gooder class" those people who support a police force devoted to preventing rape and child abuse and financial corruption, not to speak of those "do gooders" who discourage sweat shops and sexual and other forms of slavery. Also those idiots who are concerned with global warming and acid rain and the depletion of fish stocks and of course thse imbeciles who do not enjoy general cruelty to animals. There are, of course, those mental defectives who want every child to get a decent education whether they want it or not and to see to it that poor people who must decide whether to eat or buy critical meicines so that they can survive are well cared for. We evidently all must suffer such mental incompetents . After all we have a most generous president with a razor sharp mind who is presenting all sorts of vital policies to discourage misuse of funds to see to it that the country is healthy and well fed and well educated and that a major portion of the US economy brings freedom and well being to all the benighted people of the world. Who could ask for anything more?

If you read the book, then you'll find out exactly what I mean by do-gooders. Your guess is quite the straw man.Are you done trying to argue against Wal-mart human resource policy, or what?

The point is that participants within a society must act to limit their motivations to permit all members to enjoy a minimum standard of living that is generally beneficial. The general trend in the USA within businesses is to maximize their profits with little or no regard for the consequences to the rest of society. I am not condemning businesses for this as this is the purpose for which they are organized. But it is for the rest of society that these operations do not become detrimental to society in general. WalMart, aside from their policy of not paying employees a wage that permits them to live at a decent level, has a policy of not seeing to it that their employees have any health benefits and as a consequence their employees must resort to emergency room medical treatment which is detrimental to the whole health system. Beyond that although labor organization has been accepted as a right of employees in the US for decades their policies have been violently aggressive in not permitting this. Take a look at http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/facts/ if you want a bit of education on the matter. You are either grossly underinformed or a paid propagandist for WalMart.

If you have better ideas for starting a business, then, please, start a business. But you'll have to figure out how to convince me to be upset about Wal-mart's behavior. As it is, people really want to work there. They get paid quite well. And their insurance is great, too.

http://www.lasvegasweekly.com/2005/09/08/awsi1.html

This article might help you to unwrap yourself from union propaganda. Why would you want to trust union thugs anyway? There about 2 ticks away from being mofia.

Also, sand, a question:Are you in support of boycotting Wal-mart, or are you in support of legislating laws to stop Wal-mart from paying their employees their current "low" wages?

That's an interesting reaction. No, I am all for WalMart paying a decent wage to keep employees above the poverty level so that they can become consumers that can afford to be good consumers. It is estimated that an increase of 1 penny per sale would permit this with no loss to the management. The current wage does not provide sufficient income for an employee to be a secure citizen earning above the poverty level. If people work at WalMart at such low wages then the economy must be really bad to permit this. An article in the New York Times today indicates that the wage level in the USA is way out of synch with the rise in productivity of the work force. Obviously you have not read the material at the site I suggested. Take a peek and learn something beyond your prejudices.If you want to compare thuggery, you might consider the large number of corporation heads lately indicted for illegal practices and compare that number to the number of labor leaders in trouble with the law for stealing funds.

You're not going to slip between my fingers that easily, sand. My question is in regards to what your personal action should be. Would you vote for legislation to get the government to plunder wal-marts coffers? Or are you in favor of boycotting the retail giant, hoping that your choice to shop elsewhere would loosen their greedy grip on their gold?

I explored that web site you cited; it's not like I've never been exposed to anti-Wal-mart sentiment before. You can easily review that this post started off with me giving a suggestion to all the anti-wal-mart crowd, who bother me. If I didn't get exposed to their complaints, then how would I be able to dismiss their ridiculous complaints so easily, as the type of complaints that pseudo intellectual, "caring" socialist people have?

Did you have a chance to check out the article I cited from las vegas weekly? It's linked, ready to go--for your enjoyment. Another noble act reported by a union. Should I even mention Jimmy Hoffa? The Teamsters are one of the largest labor unions in the USA. Wikipedia has an entire section devoted to organized crime ties to organized labor.

I always tell people, "Don't try to get a job--make a job, and don't stop making." That is the American way--a way based on liberty. That is exactly why we have such an amazing nation. We can afford to pay smart people to chase corporate corruption. It's hard though; the tops of corporations are the brightest people. You can't beat the best. You can only teach and preach morality. That's where strong families come in, and it's where socialism goes out.

Please don't give me the nonsense about the American way as if all people who work for a wage are unAmerican. Name calling is a typical strategy to push a discussion into idiotic emotional hysteria and your resort to that technique degrades your motivations. Starting and running a business is a very special skill requiring capital reserves usually not available to a great many people. If everybody started their own business there would be nobody to work for a corporation or small business. The amount of conceptual garbage you proffer is rather amazing. That slavery was a great thing for the agriculture of the south before a modicum of decency entered the American consciousness is no defense of the nasty business. A business is a participant in society and benefits greatly from much of its physical and sociological infrastructure. It's behavior is much determined by legal restrictions to the benefit of everybody and for a business to dump its obligations to society in the name of greed is really not acceptable. The associated benefits of workers receiving an appropriate decent wage benefits not only the wage earner but the health, skills, purchasing capability and many other adjunct benefits of society and it is noted everywhere by economists that there is a pejorative spread between the wealthy and the poor in the country where well over 40% cannot afford health insurance. WalMart is doing its best to screw its employees even forcing some to work for nothing beyond their clock time. This is illegal and like any criminal activity should be stopped.

You look foolish when you don't answer my twice asked question: What do you think you can do personally to make Wal-mart a better place? You think legislation can solve the woes? You think that a boycott could work? What? Please, I need your wisdom. What do you think about Wal-mart's pay for the employees? You think it's too low? I've already told you that I make less, and I have enough money. What do you think about that?
I don't think that Wal-mart should steal the employees' fair wages. The government should keep their citizens from taking the life, liberty, or property of other citizens.

A thought question: What is unique about the American Way? Is it that people here create legistlation to help the poor? Nope, that is most definitely the communist way. Sorry if that sounds like name calling to you. The unique American Way characteristic is clearly that people's life, liberty and property are protected so that they can do their business. A culture centered on wage earning is not the American way. Have you ever met people who came to the USA? My great friend from another country just started his own business. You absolute statements about starting your own business are nonsense, and beyond that they are dangerous nonsense because if people believe it then America will fade out. It will become like England or France; their countries are screwed up--full of people holding their hands out.You want me to believe that my buddy is a super special person, of a elite class that has responsibility to coddle their share of the non-special citizens? I wasn't born yesterday, sand. People just don't want to start their own businesses because it's "too hard." Too bad--that's the American way, and it is beautiful. You can do whatever you think tickles your fancy--whatever you think people will trade you money for. You could get a spray paint can and a stencil and spray addresses onto the curb in your neighborhood. How much capital is required with that business? You really think that business is a huge mystery, don't you? Don't get scared of the freedom we all have. Don't get scared of the fact that if someone doesn't want to give you a paycheck for your list of needs then he WILL NOT be forced to. Rejoice that this is a nation of freedom. You can work in our nation, and find a niche, and make your personal dream happen. At the moment the government takes lots of your money (especially if you own your own business). That's a problem with socialist ideals bleeding into our laws. The freedom to own a business is most definitely the unique characteristic of The American Way. If you don't have a good job, then you must make a good job for yourself. I just quit my job about 2 months ago. I had worked there for a few years, but it just wasn't for me. I don't blame my employer because they didn't pay me enough to support a family. Why should they be forced to? According to your previous answer, that business shouldn't be allowed to exist. Nobody wise believes that.

As fewer and fewer people start businesses, then the divide between poor and rich gets wider

It sems that you actually believe that nobody should work for wages. This is beyond idiocy and not worth talking about.

I support a balance: if you have a job that could work as a career, then you take it. If you don't then you organize yourself and your friends to make a new business. If you don't wish to think about it anymore, then leave it for another day.

and you still have avoided the question I've asked mutliple times...