Sam's Club closings, now we know the rest of the story. - Page 5
REPORTSREGIONSFORECASTPHOTOSBOATINGHOW-TOSPORTFISHGEARVIDEOSSTORE
Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 99
  1. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,209
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarponator View Post
    Setting aside the silly left-leaning generalization, I agree there is a difference between capitalism and corporatism. However, I'm curious as to what you think the difference between capitalism and corporatism is. Particularly as it relates to the topic at hand. Or, said a bit differently/directly, is a company whose operations and employees are subsidized by the government (i.e. favorable tax laws/rates and employees paid below the poverty line) being favored by corporatist or capitalist policies?


    Take care...Mike


    Mike,
    With regards to Walmart pay scale and the fact that many employees are receiving "benefits" from local/state/fed... ?
    That's a damn tough one. Obviously, we can assume that Walmart chooses to pay low wages due to the govt indirectly-subsidizing their payroll. If this is correct, then there is little we can do about it?
    Somehow fine Walmart to recoup taxpayers losses?
    "Force" Walmart to pay more?
    Unionize their workers?

    I am against govt intervention in any voluntary employment, etc..

    Overall I'd like to see a reversal in the federal govt role in our lives. I'd rather each local/state govt deal with their own issues. So...if the fed govt backed off their "subsidies" for walmarts workers, the local/state would be forced to make changes.

    I'm not sure how well this would play out. But, overall I think each local/state govt can better control their own issues than someone in DC.

    As for tax incentives: I'm ok with local/state govts using them to lure companies into their area. It's competition, and the local tax payers can voice their opinion about it.
    This happened when I lived in Melbourne; numerous large defense contractors/engineers were expanding into the area... Lots of high-paying jobs moved into the area.
    *obviously corruption can and does happen when any incentive occurs, and all of these deals should be closely inspected.

  2. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    6,023
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarponator View Post
    Setting aside the silly left-leaning generalization, I agree there is a difference between capitalism and corporatism. However, I'm curious as to what you think the difference between capitalism and corporatism is. Particularly as it relates to the topic at hand. Or, said a bit differently/directly, is a company whose operations and employees are subsidized by the government (i.e. favorable tax laws/rates and employees paid below the poverty line) being favored by corporatist or capitalist policies?

    Preachy.

    I could not agree more. Well said.

    What's more is I think we can do even better, and should strive to do so. Because when it comes to our 200+ year experiment in capitalism, I think there's a lot of room for improvement yet in this graph:



    Take care...Mike
    Super preachy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heatwave View Post
    Where they able to get this to all the news wires before the days deadline ? Too bad it wasn't part of the PUMPED PR about increases to trigger news. Everyone who makes millions a day will back track with no problem if in a Public Relations disaster. It is only money they need to fix it, and they have plenty of that sitting in huge accounts.

    Bottom line is that the country business atmosphere has become so much ME ME ME... Mo Money mo money....
    I use to love going to company picnics back in the 60s and 70s. The owner, or BOSS would shake hands, play horseshoes, and be part of the Gang. Now that guy is isolated so that he doesn't have to look employees in the eye while he takes it ALL.

    Everybody that runs a business wants to make profit, that is the name of the game. When you start contributing the statement WELFARE, DRUGS, Taking advantage of benefits, etc. to ALL Employees, then things fall apart. The country could have kept doing what it was doing, running legit businesses while paying good wages, working with UNIONS, and keeping it fair for all. In place of that the GREED took over. Everytime there is a problem with 1 worker out of 10, the ownerships punishes ALL employees by taking away. That was just a good excuse, and put out on TV for all to see as to WHY they had to cut back on wages, cut benefits, and so on. Thus we have a huge gap...

    Anyone, can use just about any excuse to say why it is like this... Poor workmanship, not caring, DRUGS again, but really, that is just an excuse to NOT CARE. Spin it how you will, not going to change anytime soon.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarponator View Post
    I think what you should really be asking "what can we do to make it even better".

    You know, try to address the "it's not perfect" part you agreed with.

    So, how do you think it can be improved?

    Just curious...Mike
    Morality preaching according to Tarp.

  3. #43
    Senior Member Reptile Dysfunction's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    LP and Parts Unkown
    Posts
    2,982
    Quote Originally Posted by dave44 View Post

    Morality preaching according to Tarp.
    And don't forget, there's always a good dose of virtue signaling with every Tarponator post.
    "If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free" - P. J. O'Rourke

  4. #44
    Senior Member Gardawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Islamorada
    Posts
    6,723
    Yep, taxpayers subsidize low wage paying corporations.
    “Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves.

    Heres Tom with the Weather.”

  5. #45
    Senior Member Gardawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Islamorada
    Posts
    6,723
    crack.jpg
    Attached Images Attached Images
    “Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves.

    Heres Tom with the Weather.”

  6. #46
    Senior Member Tarponator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Under a Bridge
    Posts
    8,181
    Quote Originally Posted by dave44 View Post
    Super preachy.

    Morality preaching according to Tarp.
    Quote Originally Posted by Reptile Dysfysfunction
    And don't forget, there's always a good dose of virtue signaling with every Tarponator post.
    Improvement isn't morality preaching or virtue signaling.

    It's a lesson you should have learned in childhood.

    Instead you are fearful and respond with ad hominem.

    I hope your children are better equipped.

    Scared and angry is no way to go through life.

  7. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    6,023
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarponator View Post
    Setting aside the silly left-leaning generalization, I agree there is a difference between capitalism and corporatism. However, I'm curious as to what you think the difference between capitalism and corporatism is. Particularly as it relates to the topic at hand. Or, said a bit differently/directly, is a company whose operations and employees are subsidized by the government (i.e. favorable tax laws/rates and employees paid below the poverty line) being favored by corporatist or capitalist policies?



    I could not agree more. Well said.

    What's more is I think we can do even better, and should strive to do so. Because when it comes to our 200+ year experiment in capitalism, I think there's a lot of room for improvement yet in this graph:



    Take care...Mike
    Quote Originally Posted by Heatwave View Post
    Where they able to get this to all the news wires before the days deadline ? Too bad it wasn't part of the PUMPED PR about increases to trigger news. Everyone who makes millions a day will back track with no problem if in a Public Relations disaster. It is only money they need to fix it, and they have plenty of that sitting in huge accounts.

    Bottom line is that the country business atmosphere has become so much ME ME ME... Mo Money mo money....
    I use to love going to company picnics back in the 60s and 70s. The owner, or BOSS would shake hands, play horseshoes, and be part of the Gang. Now that guy is isolated so that he doesn't have to look employees in the eye while he takes it ALL.

    Everybody that runs a business wants to make profit, that is the name of the game. When you start contributing the statement WELFARE, DRUGS, Taking advantage of benefits, etc. to ALL Employees, then things fall apart. The country could have kept doing what it was doing, running legit businesses while paying good wages, working with UNIONS, and keeping it fair for all. In place of that the GREED took over. Everytime there is a problem with 1 worker out of 10, the ownerships punishes ALL employees by taking away. That was just a good excuse, and put out on TV for all to see as to WHY they had to cut back on wages, cut benefits, and so on. Thus we have a huge gap...

    Anyone, can use just about any excuse to say why it is like this... Poor workmanship, not caring, DRUGS again, but really, that is just an excuse to NOT CARE. Spin it how you will, not going to change anytime soon.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarponator View Post
    Improvement isn't morality preaching or virtue signaling.

    It's a lesson you should have learned in childhood.

    Instead you are fearful and respond with ad hominem.

    I hope your children are better equipped.

    Scared and angry is no way to go through life.

    Amen, brother! Preach it!

  8. #48
    Senior Member Tarponator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Under a Bridge
    Posts
    8,181
    Quote Originally Posted by MelbourneMark View Post
    Mike,
    With regards to Walmart pay scale and the fact that many employees are receiving "benefits" from local/state/fed... ?
    That's a damn tough one. Obviously, we can assume that Walmart chooses to pay low wages due to the govt indirectly-subsidizing their payroll. If this is correct, then there is little we can do about it?
    Somehow fine Walmart to recoup taxpayers losses?
    "Force" Walmart to pay more?
    Unionize their workers?
    First off, thanks for the thoughtful response, and my apologies for getting distracted and not responding sooner.

    It was a tough question -- that's why I asked it. On the one hand, I'm like you and would rather the market decide without government involvement. On the other hand, the government is already involved and necessarily so, I would argue. But let's come back to that point in a moment...

    Quote Originally Posted by MelbourneMark View Post
    I am against govt intervention in any voluntary employment, etc..

    Overall I'd like to see a reversal in the federal govt role in our lives. I'd rather each local/state govt deal with their own issues. So...if the fed govt backed off their "subsidies" for walmarts workers, the local/state would be forced to make changes.

    I'm not sure how well this would play out. But, overall I think each local/state govt can better control their own issues than someone in DC.

    As for tax incentives: I'm ok with local/state govts using them to lure companies into their area. It's competition, and the local tax payers can voice their opinion about it.
    This happened when I lived in Melbourne; numerous large defense contractors/engineers were expanding into the area... Lots of high-paying jobs moved into the area.
    *obviously corruption can and does happen when any incentive occurs, and all of these deals should be closely inspected.
    I used to think that way as well. Just get the federal government out of the way. Get the states to take the issue up. Keep Washington out of it. On many issues -- for instance freshwater/inshore fishing regulations -- I think the answer should be just that.

    The reality is corruption is much easier at the local level, the mantra of state's rights is only marched out when it suits the issue at hand, and many of these issues have been mishandled by the states as well (K-12 education, for instance). Other issues (health care or social security, for instance, or immigration law) are far too large/complex and gain the benefit of pooling resources.

    Now you might just double down with that line of thinking -- let the market decide, and get the government out of the way -- and many do. Nothing wrong with that I suppose. Until you take a look around the world, where governments are doing a much better job than our own at solving these issues. They aren't solving them by passing the buck to the state/province level -- a concept introduced at a time when people rode horses and a letter took weeks to be delivered -- that's for sure.

    I also find it curious that on the one hand you point to Melbourne's economic success, yet fail to connect the dots even though you mention the federal government as funding those same high-paying jobs. I get your drift in the underlying point, but surely you recognize the irony in your comments.

    Listen, the federal government is NOT the answer to many of the problems we face. However, smaller government with fewer regulations isn't the answer either. We have to find a balance, and the first step should be campaign finance reform, in my opinion. Until and unless that problem is solved, the rest is simply well-scripted noise (i.e. the politics of divisiveness).

    Your thoughts on the above would be appreciated.

    Take care....Mike

  9. #49
    Senior Member mustang190's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Panama City Fla.
    Posts
    8,245
    I want someone to show how Walmart gets federal subsidies?
    It’s sad that so many supposedly “educated “ do not know the definition of the word “subsidy “, “subsidize”.

  10. #50
    Senior Member Gardawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Islamorada
    Posts
    6,723
    Quote Originally Posted by mustang190 View Post
    I want someone to show how Walmart gets federal subsidies?
    It’s sad that so many supposedly “educated “ do not know the definition of the word “subsidy “, “subsidize”.
    without welfare many low wage employees would not be able to live on what they are paid.
    tax dollars may not go directly to Walmart but they supplement an inadequate wage without which they could not retain employees . unless they paid them more.



    call it what ever name you want to .
    “Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves.

    Heres Tom with the Weather.”

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •