GTaudiophile
Lifer
- Oct 24, 2000
- 29,767
- 33
- 81
It is pretty sad when American corporations have more economic power than most countries, isn't it? However, I suspect much of the difference is the result of proximity, with Walmart being headquartered in an adjacent state.
Don Vito Corleone
Elite
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 67
- 91
I appreciate their donation, but couldn't this news have been posted without the nasty sarcasm? Is that really what we need under the circumstances? I say no.
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
It's not bad for PR either. Of course getting PR for helping othjers is not wrong. In fact I believe that it is the best and most worthy PR any Company/person could get.
:thumbsup: to Walmart and any other Company, Organization or Person who gives in this time of need!
When Wal-Mart stops abusing their monopoly and other immoral practices., then they can have my respect.
noone cares about your respect for Wal-Mart.
this is not a thread for that
all decent people will thank Wal-Mart not only for the $17 million in aid, but countless millions of dollars of merchandise they are donating, such as foods, clothing, diapers and medicine.
again, thanks Lee Scott and Wal-mart.
this is not a thread for that
all decent people will thank Wal-Mart not only for the $17 million in aid, but countless millions of dollars of merchandise they are donating, such as foods, clothing, diapers and medicine.
again, thanks Lee Scott and Wal-mart.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
Wal-Mart is not a monopoly. Neither legally nor by the definition of the word. They hold only ~20% of the US retail store market share, and they do not have the ability to put upwards pressure on prices against market forces (like Microsoft, for example, which is a monopoly, was able to keep the price of its products high when all other prices in the PC market were falling). Quite the contrary, Wal-Mart's effect on the marketplace has been a strong downward pressure on prices and costs, which is only good for consumers. True, their ultra-competitiveness has taken out a number of uncompetitive businesses along that way, but that is not monopolism, that's just business.
Originally posted by: loki8481
good for them :thumbsup:
but don't hail them like they're awsome heroes... I mean, it's a pretty paltry sum in terms of their total profits, it's great press, and the faster these people get on their feet, the quicker they can go back to shopping in and working at Walmarts
it's not evil or anything, just more pragmatic than benevolent.
ditto
trenchfoot
Lifer
- Aug 5, 2000
- 15,660
- 8,202
- 136
consider this...walmart and others that do business like it is profiting by giving back what's not rightfully theirs to begin with.
like most other large businesses, the bulk of walmarts employees are at the bottom of the food chain. therefore, the bulk of walmarts expenses via pay/benefits are found there. their pay is for the most part at the subsistence level or below depending on what part of the country they're at. walmart relies on aquiring employees that will accept these working conditions, and have structured their business plan to prosper in low skill/high employee turn-over conditions (read-*part-time workers*)
it is a successful business strategy and it obviously works.... however, this business plan works in part because this methodology requires that these employees are then forced to rely on our tax dollars via public welfare programs to survive. in other words, we taxpayers are subsidizing walmarts employees. monies that rightfully should have been provided by walmart by way of essential pay/benefits is being provided by us.
it's the best of all worlds for walmart. the cost savings we think we're getting in cheaper prices when we shop there is only only being added on through increased taxes that we have to pay to subsidize walmarts employees through the public coffers. these extra tax-dollars that we cough up in welfare services that go to provide public health services to walmarts employees go directly to walmart corporate profits.
to put icing on the cake, walmart then gets a tax break on the tax dollars we provided them through their "donations" back to us.
the profits have to come from somewhere........it's not magical... it's smart business.
*edited for clarity*
like most other large businesses, the bulk of walmarts employees are at the bottom of the food chain. therefore, the bulk of walmarts expenses via pay/benefits are found there. their pay is for the most part at the subsistence level or below depending on what part of the country they're at. walmart relies on aquiring employees that will accept these working conditions, and have structured their business plan to prosper in low skill/high employee turn-over conditions (read-*part-time workers*)
it is a successful business strategy and it obviously works.... however, this business plan works in part because this methodology requires that these employees are then forced to rely on our tax dollars via public welfare programs to survive. in other words, we taxpayers are subsidizing walmarts employees. monies that rightfully should have been provided by walmart by way of essential pay/benefits is being provided by us.
it's the best of all worlds for walmart. the cost savings we think we're getting in cheaper prices when we shop there is only only being added on through increased taxes that we have to pay to subsidize walmarts employees through the public coffers. these extra tax-dollars that we cough up in welfare services that go to provide public health services to walmarts employees go directly to walmart corporate profits.
to put icing on the cake, walmart then gets a tax break on the tax dollars we provided them through their "donations" back to us.
the profits have to come from somewhere........it's not magical... it's smart business.
*edited for clarity*
Ask yourself how long are they willing to donate free food, water, medicine, ect. One day?????how long
Ugh. The only "tax break" Wal-Mart gets is that it doesn't pay taxes on the money it gives away. It means that Wal-Mart loses $15 million, rather than $15 million + however much in taxes to the government.
trenchfoot
Lifer
- Aug 5, 2000
- 15,660
- 8,202
- 136
up to the point where to the bean counters there's no more value in doing it anymore (by way of tax breaks or improving their public relations position).
Yea, it's just business. :roll: Wal-Mart practices are like those of a monopoly, an abusive one to specific.
It's retarded to see people go "Oh! Look at Wal-Mart there donating to a good cause, that makes all the bad sh1t they do go away!" BULLSH1T, Wal-Mart is morally bankrupt company, you don't become moral by doing more "moral" things to cancel out all the "immoral" things you do.
Wal-Mart supply chain and other "buisness tatics" are just as impressive as what Karl Rove did for the election.
trenchfoot
Lifer
- Aug 5, 2000
- 15,660
- 8,202
- 136
look at the bigger picture...they wouldn't do it if it didn't improve their bottom line one way or another. walmart and it's investors would demand nothing less.
Now I know that's nitpicking, but: Math doesn't work this way. So they loose 15 mil MINUS what they would have payed in taxes instead of 15 mil.
But anyway, back to the issue.
I'm not even sure why it seems that some people feel that corporations *have* to donate any money at all.
they're just doing this to combat their hugely negative image.
i can't say that I'm complaining though. more money is much better, but it won't change my opinion of Walmart.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter