Which is more Evil: Wal-Mart of Microsoft?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

rbrandon

Banned
Oct 10, 2002
423
0
0
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: CPA
They both employee tens of thousands of people, their presence are the reason many, many other companies no longer even exist
Fixed.
Originally posted by: CPA
they both contribute millions of dollars to trade deficits with proven human-rights-abusing nations, and the artificial inflation of their stock-market value, creating a balloon-valuation and a great risk of triggering an economic collapse
Fixed.
Originally posted by: CPA
they both sell products we need at inflated prices after they ruthlessly eliminate all of their competition, they both give great returns to investors.
Fixed.
Originally posted by: CPA
Sorry, I don't have a problem with either of them. And please spare me the lame "but, but they put all the mom and pop shops out of business" cry.
You're right. We should live in a future, in which both gov't and all corporations have merged together into a singular all-powerful GlobalUnifiedGovCorp.

We will all also be wearing embedded bar-codes under our skin by that time as well. Enjoy the future that you envision. You've earned it, with that line of thinking.
Originally posted by: CPA
edit: and one more thing, Walmart only supported the increase, it was the truckers themselves who mostly pushed the issue.
Is that like when MS pushes forth a new marketing initiative, and then claims it was purely because "our customers requested it", when in fact that is a totally BS line?


Looks like someone needs to adjust their tinfoil hat :roll:
 

PingSpike

Lifer
Feb 25, 2004
21,747
579
126
Walmart is pure evil.

Microsoft is more like a power hungry benevolent super power.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: toekramp
do you really think that walmart operates alone? their size demands that many business support. not only does walmart help those companies
It's well known that Wal-Mart pressures their supplies on cost, to the very bone, some of them don't even make much money at all with their dealings with Wal-Mart, compared to any of their other available distribution channels. But they can't afford to ignore the volume.

It's also very well-known how Wal-Mart undercuts and destroys all of the smaller businesses that they can, and essentially destroys entire local economies. Sucking the life of middle-america dry, to fuel Wal-Mart's economic outposts in China.
Originally posted by: toekramp
whenever one is built an entire community develops around it. including new stores that wouldn't have been there in the first place. go hug a tree.
You have that absolutely and completely backwards. You need to do some more reading on how Wal-Mart carefully selects where they place their stores. It's definately not a "build it, and they will come" sort of thing in the middle of an economic desert. Quite the opposite. They don't build and grow local economies, they seek out fresh juicy ones, and proceed to slowly suck them dry. Wal-Mart's business model is one of an economic symbiotic vampire. Eventually, the host dies.


I used to live in a small town (about 16k). We had a small mall that contained a KMart, JCPenney and other shops.

KMart was doing poorly, as we all know. JCPenney wasn't doing much better.

Walmart came in and after a couple years KMart closed. But guess what happened with the small businesses? They are still there, in fact some of them have supplier agreements with the Walmart that allowed them to sell their goods in their store. KMart never did this, nor did JCPenney. I'm not going to say the small shops flourished, but whenever you can expand your visibility at low cost it helps. I know it particularly helped one craft store that I did the books for back then.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,548
10,171
126
Originally posted by: CPA
In that regard, though, all states give companies tax incentives. Is that the company's fault? Or is it the fault of local and state government's upping the ante to get businesses in to employ people and raise their economies?
Most of those "incentives" are not freely offered, at least not past any initial ones offered to company as an incentive to re-locate to your state. They are more likely extracted yearly through economic coercion. For example, MS threatening to leave the state, and then the job loss would put their economic base even further behind, in terms of being able to afford basic services. It's like being held hostage, in a way.

I don't know if I can still find it, but I found an article last year talking about the dire state of education in the state of WA, and how MS hasn't paid any corporate state taxes for the past N years, because they funnel all of their profits through a shell corporation in NV. I think it might have been in the Seattle P-I, not sure.

Edit: Found it - SeattleWeekly on 'Citizen Microsoft'
I may have made a mistake; MS saved some millions of WA state taxes, and does not pay any state corporate income tax (due to the laws of NV) for the income that gets "diverted" to their nevada corporation. That does not neccessarily mean that they pay zero WA state taxes. The article is fairly long, I didn't re-read the whole thing, it may say more about the situation exactly.

Another interesting link, on MS's stock-market based pyramid scheme. Google for "Microsoft paid no federal taxes", for more interesting info too. The statement that MS paid $4 bil this last year, is because MS finally agreed to start "properly" expensing stock options, I believe, whereas due to the *huge* amount of stock-options normally granted by MS in a year, they were able to use that number to write-off much of their federal income-tax liabilities for those years. Last year, that stopped. For quite a few years before that, they paid zero or nearly zero.
 

shenaniganz

Golden Member
Aug 20, 2003
1,019
0
71
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: toekramp
do you really think that walmart operates alone? their size demands that many business support. not only does walmart help those companies
It's well known that Wal-Mart pressures their supplies on cost, to the very bone, some of them don't even make much money at all with their dealings with Wal-Mart, compared to any of their other available distribution channels. But they can't afford to ignore the volume.

It's also very well-known how Wal-Mart undercuts and destroys all of the smaller businesses that they can, and essentially destroys entire local economies. Sucking the life of middle-america dry, to fuel Wal-Mart's economic outposts in China.
Originally posted by: toekramp
whenever one is built an entire community develops around it. including new stores that wouldn't have been there in the first place. go hug a tree.
You have that absolutely and completely backwards. You need to do some more reading on how Wal-Mart carefully selects where they place their stores. It's definately not a "build it, and they will come" sort of thing in the middle of an economic desert. Quite the opposite. They don't build and grow local economies, they seek out fresh juicy ones, and proceed to slowly suck them dry. Wal-Mart's business model is one of an economic symbiotic vampire. Eventually, the host dies.

Pressuring suppliers to lower prices is common for many big as well as small companies. If Wal-Mart is evil for doing this then why not the automakers? Heck, even my company is evil, I guess (employs around 120 people).
 

BrokenVisage

Lifer
Jan 29, 2005
24,770
12
81
Yeah, I use to have several cubicals at Microsoft HQ too. :roll:

I don't see Gates hiring illegals to run the lowest levels of his corporation though.
Walmat = the devil, something lke 4 of the 10 richest people in the world are part of that family who founded it.. how can it NOT be evil?
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: CPA
In that regard, though, all states give companies tax incentives. Is that the company's fault? Or is it the fault of local and state government's upping the ante to get businesses in to employ people and raise their economies?
Most of those "incentives" are not freely offered, at least not past any initial ones offered to company as an incentive to re-locate to your state. They are more likely extracted yearly through economic coercion. For example, MS threatening to leave the state, and then the job loss would put their economic base even further behind, in terms of being able to afford basic services. It's like being held hostage, in a way.

I don't know if I can still find it, but I found an article last year talking about the dire state of education in the state of WA, and how MS hasn't paid any corporate state taxes for the past N years, because they funnel all of their profits through a shell corporation in NV. I think it might have been in the Seattle P-I, not sure.

That's not a shell game. The majority of companies are either incorporated in Delaware or Nevada. It gets them out of paying State Franchise Tax. Big whoop.

And the only reason they could threaten the pullout is because you have other state's providing the same incentives as Washington. Is it not their right to relocate for a better deal? Hell Boeing did it several years ago and noone complained.

 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: shenaniganz
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: toekramp
do you really think that walmart operates alone? their size demands that many business support. not only does walmart help those companies
It's well known that Wal-Mart pressures their supplies on cost, to the very bone, some of them don't even make much money at all with their dealings with Wal-Mart, compared to any of their other available distribution channels. But they can't afford to ignore the volume.

It's also very well-known how Wal-Mart undercuts and destroys all of the smaller businesses that they can, and essentially destroys entire local economies. Sucking the life of middle-america dry, to fuel Wal-Mart's economic outposts in China.
Originally posted by: toekramp
whenever one is built an entire community develops around it. including new stores that wouldn't have been there in the first place. go hug a tree.
You have that absolutely and completely backwards. You need to do some more reading on how Wal-Mart carefully selects where they place their stores. It's definately not a "build it, and they will come" sort of thing in the middle of an economic desert. Quite the opposite. They don't build and grow local economies, they seek out fresh juicy ones, and proceed to slowly suck them dry. Wal-Mart's business model is one of an economic symbiotic vampire. Eventually, the host dies.

Pressuring suppliers to lower prices is common for many big as well as small companies. If Wal-Mart is evil for doing this then why not the automakers? Heck, even my company is evil, I guess (employs around 120 people).

My company does the same thing. It's economy of scales.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,548
10,171
126
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Is anedotal evidence the fact that there are lawsuits that are being filed and won against Wal-Mart for their practices? My original statement said they treat their employees like crap and don't pay well. I don't feel I need evidence to back that up. As stated..it was an opinion.
Actually, there was an article in, I think BusinessWeek, talking about the corporate sucess of CostCo, and how, in spite of the fact that the pay and the benefits are far higher for employees at CostCo, they still show greater profits than Wal-Mart, because the morale is much higher and individual employee productivity is higher because of that. Wal-Mart attempts to cut their costs to the bone in every way that they can, including their labor costs, and it ends up costing them in a lot of intangible ways as well, such as customer satisfaction and employee productivity. I think it was also mentioned in that article that Wal-Mart's pay was below the industry norm for those positions.[/quote]
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
I worked for microsoft for a few years. I know first hand how good they treat their employees and the benefits. Between the two...The enviroment and the treatment you get at MS is far greater. Of course it's done by many companies..but does two wrongs make a right??? They shouldn't do that. Especially with their revenues and workforce.
MS may treat their employees well, but they sure screw over a lot of other people, including their very customers and distributors and small computer shops, but that's a thread for a different time.

 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,548
10,171
126
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: Amused
Neither.
What is evil are those people who mindlessly target whatever company or person who is on top or the most popular.
You believe that a person that acts in self-defense and self-preservation, is "evil"? How curious. Remember to turn and run away if anyone ever threatens you, lest you be accused of being similarly "evil".
What are you "defending" yourself against? :confused:
Are you implying that Walmart and/or MS are somehow threatening you physically?
Physically? No. Where did I ever suggest that? There are a lot more ways to get threatened and hurt than just physically. Having your legal rights taken away or weakened, can be a lot more serious and more dangerous than any singular physical threat can be, and it also affects far more victims.
 

LikeLinus

Lifer
Jul 25, 2001
11,518
670
126
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Is anedotal evidence the fact that there are lawsuits that are being filed and won against Wal-Mart for their practices? My original statement said they treat their employees like crap and don't pay well. I don't feel I need evidence to back that up. As stated..it was an opinion.
Actually, there was an article in, I think BusinessWeek, talking about the corporate sucess of CostCo, and how, in spite of the fact that the pay and the benefits are far higher for employees at CostCo, they still show greater profits than Wal-Mart, because the morale is much higher and individual employee productivity is higher because of that. Wal-Mart attempts to cut their costs to the bone in every way that they can, including their labor costs, and it ends up costing them in a lot of intangible ways as well, such as customer satisfaction and employee productivity. I think it was also mentioned in that article that Wal-Mart's pay was below the industry norm for those positions.
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
I worked for microsoft for a few years. I know first hand how good they treat their employees and the benefits. Between the two...The enviroment and the treatment you get at MS is far greater. Of course it's done by many companies..but does two wrongs make a right??? They shouldn't do that. Especially with their revenues and workforce.
MS may treat their employees well, but they sure screw over a lot of other people, including their very customers and distributors and small computer shops, but that's a thread for a different time.

[/quote]

No doubt that MS business practices haven't been the best at times. Everyone knows that. But from an employee and how they treat their own? It's lightyears of difference.
 

LikeLinus

Lifer
Jul 25, 2001
11,518
670
126
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Yeah, I use to have several cubicals at Microsoft HQ too. :roll:

I don't see Gates hiring illegals to run the lowest levels of his corporation though.
Walmat = the devil, something lke 4 of the 10 richest people in the world are part of that family who founded it.. how can it NOT be evil?

Was that "several cubicals at Microsoft HQ" comment towards me? I'm just wondering if you are saying I didn't work there or not.
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
1
0
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
My original statement said they treat their employees like crap and don't pay well.

Am I missing something? Are people being forced to work at Wal-Mart?

Do me a HUGE favor. Right now, get out of your chair and go tell the president of your company that he needs to pay you much more and give you more benefits and that, if he doesn't agree to your demands, that you'll quit. You'll be on the street and they'll have somebody else doing your same job within a week for the pay rate they were paying you. See? Now your current company is just as evil as Wal-Mart for not paying you over market value for your position.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,548
10,171
126
Originally posted by: CPA
I used to live in a small town (about 16k). We had a small mall that contained a KMart, JCPenney and other shops. KMart was doing poorly, as we all know. JCPenney wasn't doing much better.

Walmart came in and after a couple years KMart closed. But guess what happened with the small businesses? They are still there, in fact some of them have supplier agreements with the Walmart that allowed them to sell their goods in their store. KMart never did this, nor did JCPenney. I'm not going to say the small shops flourished, but whenever you can expand your visibility at low cost it helps. I know it particularly helped one craft store that I did the books for back then.
So, Wal-Mart let them continue to "live", barely subsisting as a distribution extension of the evil empire's stronghold itself. Interesting, but still very disturbing when you look at the overall picture.

Btw, I don't consider one large retail chain outlet to be "small business", so I don't consider KMart closing to be that "evil". Let the "giants" battle amongst themselves.

But I too live in a "small town", which saw a Wal-Mart go in just a few years ago. Already, several locally-owned small businesses, ones that were literally considered landmarks, because they had been there for so many years (one over 100 years in business!) ... closed. Forever. Many, many more are struggling to survive and compete. This town used to have a very vicarious main street. It thankfully still exists as such, but I truely wonder, for how long will that be?

It's like watching magnificent cliffs, being slowly eroded, and eventually, they fall into the vast sea that is "attacking" them, because they cannot withstand the (economic, in this case) assult.
 

imported_Sasha

Senior member
Aug 29, 2004
286
0
0
Originally posted by: Reck
lol and yet how many of you still shop at wallmart? damn hypocrites.

I think there is my hypocrite in one's character then most are willing to admit. And I'm not the one with bag over my head (i.e. hiding behind paper product).
 

crystal

Platinum Member
Nov 5, 1999
2,424
0
0
The amount of people choose to use their services tell me they are not evil. To those people, these companies are doing a good thing.
 

imported_Sasha

Senior member
Aug 29, 2004
286
0
0
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Walmart by far. You know the quality of the company by how they treat their employees. Microsoft treat's there employees very well and they have a wonderful working enviroment. Walmart on the other hand? They treat their employees like crap, pay like crap..and just suck all around.

What is your definition of treating employees like crap?

Demotions to jobs they are overqualified for. Treating women poorly. Having workers stay after their shifts. Paying poorly. Discrimination in general.

I'm sure there?s more but I've never worked at Wal-Mart.


And where do you get these allegations? Your considerable study of Walmart's work practices?

Some questions to ponder that they newspapers generally don't ask:

1) Why the demotion?
2) What was the actual treatment of the women and was it company policy? Did Walmart react to any allegations?
3) Was this widespread practice? (Does MS do this, hmmmm?) Was it condoned by the company?
4) Payed poorly? huh? To what standard? What is the job worth?
5) Discrimination in general. Nice catch phrase for "I don't really have any solid evidence or proof, but I'll throw this out and see if it sticks."

I've never seen or heard of a WM employee not in management yet making $30K or more from a 40-hour/week WM job.
 

imported_Sasha

Senior member
Aug 29, 2004
286
0
0
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: toekramp
neither i hate these threads
how much has microsoft donated over the last few years?
Not nearly enough to offset how much of their profits they have funneled through out-of-state shell corporations, to avoid paying taxes in their "home" state, and supporting the services that they depend on themselves, instead demanding a handout from gov't at the taxpayers expense, rather than MS paying their fair share of the burden.
The hypocracy in this regard is utterly, utterly, staggering.
Most of the "donations" haven't been from MS corporate anyways, they've been from BillG himself, IIRC, or the "Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation", rather.

Walmart paid $5B in federal taxes last year.

Microsoft paid $4B last year.

Please people, if you're going to throw around allegations do your homework first.

And what was the average income earner of the two companies?
 

LikeLinus

Lifer
Jul 25, 2001
11,518
670
126
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
My original statement said they treat their employees like crap and don't pay well.

Am I missing something? Are people being forced to work at Wal-Mart?

Do me a HUGE favor. Right now, get out of your chair and go tell the president of your company that he needs to pay you much more and give you more benefits and that, if he doesn't agree to your demands, that you'll quit. You'll be on the street and they'll have somebody else doing your same job within a week for the pay rate they were paying you. See? Now your current company is just as evil as Wal-Mart for not paying you over market value for your position.

I think you don't understand how sometimes lower income people do not realize they are being underpaid because they don't have the education or knowledge about the corporate world and the actual market value for certain jobs. You and I know the difference, but we were raised in a different environment. Some people are born into that and they don't know anything different. Taking advantage of an employee is something entirely different. If you read the article that is posted above...you'll see that WalMart does pay their people too low. Does that make it right just because YOU know the difference?

Edit: Nevermind about my company. No point in proving anything.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,548
10,171
126
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
My original statement said they treat their employees like crap and don't pay well.
Am I missing something? Are people being forced to work at Wal-Mart?
Do me a HUGE favor. Right now, get out of your chair and go tell the president of your company that he needs to pay you much more and give you more benefits and that, if he doesn't agree to your demands, that you'll quit. You'll be on the street and they'll have somebody else doing your same job within a week for the pay rate they were paying you. See? Now your current company is just as evil as Wal-Mart for not paying you over market value for your position.

Here's a question. You're a working guy, off the street, you want a job. There are "established standards" for a "full-time" job. Wal-Mart is offering a "full-time" job. Other stores are also offering a "full-time" job. You, thinking that Wal-Mart might be a "neat" place to work, decide to get a job there, instead of at some other store. But then you find out, that when Wal-Mart claims that they are offering you a "full-time" job, that's not 40hr/wk. In fact, they keep your hours just under the minimum needed to qualify for certain benefits. Intentionally. Wal-Mart knows that they have the upper-hand, because of their "size", and because of that, they exploit it to the fullest in cutting their costs, both from suppliers (and their profitability), as well as their laborers (and their profitability which directly translates into living standards for them).

In short, Wal-Mart may employ people, but it collectively brings down the living standards for the community in which it operates. That's a fact, unfortunately. This is, IIRC, one of the things that they are or have been the subject of a lawsuit over.
 

imported_Sasha

Senior member
Aug 29, 2004
286
0
0
Originally posted by: crystal
The amount of people choose to use their services tell me they are not evil. To those people, these companies are doing a good thing.

What? WM markets directly to the lowest income household. The poor people are attempting, maybe--just maybe--to make their dollar go farther. This doesn't mean they agree with the operating decisions to change the DOT regs for 16-hour PTR driving, but rather they are simply trying to make what little money they have go farther.

I am not aware of any effort to poll any WM customer at the door to get their view on the OTR element this thread was created upon.
 

Injury

Lifer
Jul 19, 2004
13,066
2
81
Originally posted by: Sasha
What? WM markets directly to the lowest income household. The poor people are attempting, maybe--just maybe--to make their dollar go farther. This doesn't mean they agree with the operating decisions to change the DOT regs for 16-hour PTR driving, but rather they are simply trying to make what little money they have go farther.


It's moreso that they probably don't give a crap like people of a more intellectual and open-minded status do.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: Sasha
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: toekramp
neither i hate these threads
how much has microsoft donated over the last few years?
Not nearly enough to offset how much of their profits they have funneled through out-of-state shell corporations, to avoid paying taxes in their "home" state, and supporting the services that they depend on themselves, instead demanding a handout from gov't at the taxpayers expense, rather than MS paying their fair share of the burden.
The hypocracy in this regard is utterly, utterly, staggering.
Most of the "donations" haven't been from MS corporate anyways, they've been from BillG himself, IIRC, or the "Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation", rather.

Walmart paid $5B in federal taxes last year.

Microsoft paid $4B last year.

Please people, if you're going to throw around allegations do your homework first.

And what was the average income earner of the two companies?

What does that have to do with the income tax argument.

Should a cashier make as much as a programmer? Should a stock clerk make as much as the software engineers? Should assistant managers make as much as finance, HR, software development management? the market pays what those jobs are worth.
 

Kelemvor

Lifer
May 23, 2002
16,928
8
81
Originally posted by: torpid
Well let's see... one company unscrupulously crushes competition while offering good jobs to people and with a super rich guy who donates tons to charity all while continuously researching and expanding technology and who got that way by price gouging and charging their customers insanely high prices for everything they sell just because there is no real competition so they can do whatever they want; the other unscrupulously crushes competition, hires illegal immigrants, overworks and underpays its people, and offers little advancement so that they can pass along rock bottom prices to consumers so everyone can have a better quality of life by being able to buy products for less money therby allowing you to buy more products. Thus stimulating the economy and making the world a better place for everyone

Yeah, tough call.

Fixed that for ya... heh heh. ;)