The epitome of what’s wrong with America - Wal Mart now worth a TRILLION dollars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you are delusional.
Do you think it was some kind of utopia before Walmart, where small town independent store groceries were affordable and cashiers made enough money to support a family of 4?
That world never existed.
The fact that many Walmart employees use welfare benefits speaks more to the growing availability of welfare benefits, and perhaps people having kids they can’t afford, than it does to Walmart’s wages. The fact is that not every job’s productivity is worth $40 an hour. Not Walmart’s fault.

I thought we wanted women to have children?! Oh did you mean only rich white Christian women married to appropriate white men? Also he better earn a lot of money because she will have to stop working once the baby is born. There aren’t enough rich white men in the U.S. for a sustainable population. Too many broke dumb white guys.

Well, people who have children they can't afford deserve the lifestyle and financial security consequences they brought on themselves. Nobody is "owed" children, nor should anyone else have to pay to support them. You need not be wealthy to have children, obviously, but don't have them and then complain you have expenses you forgot to plan for and now feel you cannot deal with unless the government helps you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Walmart has surpassed a TRILLION dollars in valuation.

We are a nation of mouthbreathers. Literally the WORST company on earth, with the worst customers on earth, is now the most valuable company on earth.


I hate this country and the people in it so much I think my head is going explode one day.

I sometimes shop at Walmart and I am a very nice person. Prices on some items that I use are $2/$3 cheaper at Walmart than at local grocery stores.

Well, as long as you save $2 anything goes!

DP. Do you not understand that people are struggling to pay their basic bills? You mock someone trying to save $2, but an awful lot of people literally can’t afford their groceries if they don’t save $2 here, and 40 cents there, and $1 there.

That whole process of eggs thing has become a joke, but it’s not merely a joke. Things are really, really hard for a lot of people.

You want to criticize Walmart’s anti-union, anti-competitive practices? Have at it. But to dismiss anyone who is trying to save money in 2026 —- when more than half of American families are struggling to afford groceries, 4 out of 5 food assistance programs are stretched beyond capacity — is wild. You really sound clueless.

Sure, I’m clueless.

1. The DCUM sweetie who posted that absolutely does not NEED to save $2 on groceries.

2. If you can’t afford eggs or ground beef, you buy something else. You’re not entitled to eggs and ground beef. Try rice and beans you spoiled child.

3. These fools VOTE FOR THE PARTY who kills regulations that drive out competition and INCREASE prices. Not to mention slash benefits to the bone.

4. The majority of these people are now helpless victims because that’s what they CHOSE. White knighting for these morons doesn’t make you virtuous, it makes you disingenuous.

I have no idea who the DCUM sweetie was, but they are pointing out that Walmart had lower prices, and whether or not it matters to them personally, those cumulative $2 savings do matter to many.

Do you really think that the affordability crisis and the food bank shortages are manufactured, simply a matter of “eat better, spoiled children”?

Do you really think only republicans shop at Walmart?

The POINT, you moron, is that Americans make their choices without a single f—king thought for the future, or for anyone else. Americans CHOOSE to buy the cheapest crap possible, or demand that expensive stuff be cheaper because they simply WANT IT and can’t possibly fathom the idea of just going without. And that’s why we are ALL where we are today.

America is a nation of selfish, spoiled children. I hope that clears it up for you

Many also choose to have kids they can't afford, to limit their educational efforts and achievements, to fail to take steps to be competitive for remunerative employment, marry badly, and to spend more than they take in. None of which is WM's fault. WM offers employment which people are free to take or not. If an entry-level hourly wage job there is all someone is qualified for, then that's what they will be offered. They're free to go elsewhere if they think their market value is higher. If their market value is higher, WM will compensate them accordingly - their store managers are well paid, with total compensation over $400K/yr possible when including bonuses, stock grants, and other benefits. Their corporate executives are compensated like other S&P 500 Top 50 index employers compensate their executives.

The fact that you seem to think the choices are minimum wage (with added welfare paid for by the rest of us while walmart is valued at a trillion dollars - the subject of this post) or $400k per year shows what an illogical, corporate bootlicker you are. Seriously, you couldn’t think your way out of a paper bag.

And you want compensation which has no relationship to your individual value to an employer. If you want to earn more, be worth more to an employer. Nobody is owed more than they are worth. If you think you're worth more, become self-employed or find a different employer who agrees with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all goes to show we
1.) need to bolster worker protections back up and pay living wages, and
2.) we need to tax big corporations and the billionaires enriched by them a bit more.
That much is crystal clear.

Everybody loves to say we need to “pay living wages” but what does that MEAN?

How is the amount of “living wage” determined?
There are teenage employees still living with parents, or single people living with roommates. They don’t need as much to live on as a single mom with three kids who needs an apartment or house. Does that mean the minimum wage should be set according to what the highest need is? Walmart should pay everyone as if they are feeding a family of four?

What if someone just isn’t ever going to be highly efficient or productive? Would you be happier if those individuals are unemployed and receive welfare? Because that is what happens when wage floors are set.

What do you mean when you say productive?

And are you aware that employed Walmart workers already receive welfare?

By productive, I mean as an example I can scan 5 carts of groceries in 15 minutes vs 2 carts of groceries in 15 minutes. Or I can lift 10 crates in 2 minutes vs 5 crates. Or in addition to scanning groceries I also know how to provide customer service. Some people are naturally better workers than others. They usually grow their skills and obtain higher wages. But for those who don’t, and are just scanning the groceries, it is better for them to be employed than not.

And yes, of course I am aware that Walmart employees already receive benefits. But it’s not Walmart’s fault that there’s a single mom with a deadbeat ex who needs benefits in order to make ends meet. It’s not Walmart’s fault that some of its employees have kids they can’t afford. It’s not Walmart’s fault that some of their employees never progress beyond the most menial of tasks. And it isn’t Walmart’s fault that things like housing and healthcare, both of which receive large government subsidies, have become so unaffordable that even middle class salaries have a hard time affording them.

Do you think walmart cashiers are paid according to how quickly they scan groceries?

You’re so f—king stupid you’re not worth talking to. Although I’m curious what “skills” you have and how “productive” you are. Please share with the class, we could all use a good laugh.

What an awesome, smart person you must be. What a genius way to win hearts and minds!!

Truth is, I started out as many do. My parents didn’t go to college. My dad worked as a mailman and then had varying success as a small businessman while my mom worked in a factory. My first jobs were in grocery stores and retail. I took student loans and went to college, first gen, blah blah blah. Got a low level call center job, then figured out Microsoft Excel, picked up some accounting skills, eventually went on to build databases, went to on SQL, Python, data analysis with some legal stuff thrown in. Nothing irreplaceable, and I am not that special, but there is a reason I make 150k and not $15 an hour.

I know that grocery stores generally don’t pay some people more than others based on how fast you can scan a cart. I also know that if you have some hustle and are efficient, you can make much more than minimum wage while working at Aldi. Not everyone is cut out for that though… some cannot handle the pace. For those, there is Giant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's an example of what makes this a great country. Give people what they want, do it better than your competitors, and be rewarded for your initiative and hard work. Not incidentally, provide employment for 2.1M people, for all your suppliers, and pay taxes wherever you operate.

Anyone who fails to see how this is anything but a staggeringly emphatic success story needs to take a break from reading Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto and instead have a look at The Wealth of Nations and Capitalism and Freedom.

And where does the public subsidizing their employees fit into your grand scheme for capitalism. Let me guess, same place as NFL owners who hate paying taxes but want to have the citizenry pay for their stadiums. Love me that capitalism!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all goes to show we
1.) need to bolster worker protections back up and pay living wages, and
2.) we need to tax big corporations and the billionaires enriched by them a bit more.
That much is crystal clear.

Everybody loves to say we need to “pay living wages” but what does that MEAN?

How is the amount of “living wage” determined?
There are teenage employees still living with parents, or single people living with roommates. They don’t need as much to live on as a single mom with three kids who needs an apartment or house. Does that mean the minimum wage should be set according to what the highest need is? Walmart should pay everyone as if they are feeding a family of four?

What if someone just isn’t ever going to be highly efficient or productive? Would you be happier if those individuals are unemployed and receive welfare? Because that is what happens when wage floors are set.

A good start is: you are paying a living wage when you do not hand out food stamp application to your employees. (Walmart does this!)

No way. Do you have a link for this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you are delusional.
Do you think it was some kind of utopia before Walmart, where small town independent store groceries were affordable and cashiers made enough money to support a family of 4?
That world never existed.
The fact that many Walmart employees use welfare benefits speaks more to the growing availability of welfare benefits, and perhaps people having kids they can’t afford, than it does to Walmart’s wages. The fact is that not every job’s productivity is worth $40 an hour. Not Walmart’s fault.

I thought we wanted women to have children?! Oh did you mean only rich white Christian women married to appropriate white men? Also he better earn a lot of money because she will have to stop working once the baby is born. There aren’t enough rich white men in the U.S. for a sustainable population. Too many broke dumb white guys.

Well, people who have children they can't afford deserve the lifestyle and financial security consequences they brought on themselves. Nobody is "owed" children, nor should anyone else have to pay to support them. You need not be wealthy to have children, obviously, but don't have them and then complain you have expenses you forgot to plan for and now feel you cannot deal with unless the government helps you.

This post is a perfect example of "socialism for the rich, rugged capitalism for the poor". If Walmart is so profitable, why can't it pay its workers a living wage that doesn't require them to go on food stamps? Are people with children supposed to starve just to save some profits?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Walmart has surpassed a TRILLION dollars in valuation.

We are a nation of mouthbreathers. Literally the WORST company on earth, with the worst customers on earth, is now the most valuable company on earth.


I hate this country and the people in it so much I think my head is going explode one day.

I sometimes shop at Walmart and I am a very nice person. Prices on some items that I use are $2/$3 cheaper at Walmart than at local grocery stores.

Well, as long as you save $2 anything goes!

DP. Do you not understand that people are struggling to pay their basic bills? You mock someone trying to save $2, but an awful lot of people literally can’t afford their groceries if they don’t save $2 here, and 40 cents there, and $1 there.

That whole process of eggs thing has become a joke, but it’s not merely a joke. Things are really, really hard for a lot of people.

You want to criticize Walmart’s anti-union, anti-competitive practices? Have at it. But to dismiss anyone who is trying to save money in 2026 —- when more than half of American families are struggling to afford groceries, 4 out of 5 food assistance programs are stretched beyond capacity — is wild. You really sound clueless.

Sure, I’m clueless.

1. The DCUM sweetie who posted that absolutely does not NEED to save $2 on groceries.

2. If you can’t afford eggs or ground beef, you buy something else. You’re not entitled to eggs and ground beef. Try rice and beans you spoiled child.

3. These fools VOTE FOR THE PARTY who kills regulations that drive out competition and INCREASE prices. Not to mention slash benefits to the bone.

4. The majority of these people are now helpless victims because that’s what they CHOSE. White knighting for these morons doesn’t make you virtuous, it makes you disingenuous.

I have no idea who the DCUM sweetie was, but they are pointing out that Walmart had lower prices, and whether or not it matters to them personally, those cumulative $2 savings do matter to many.

Do you really think that the affordability crisis and the food bank shortages are manufactured, simply a matter of “eat better, spoiled children”?

Do you really think only republicans shop at Walmart?

The POINT, you moron, is that Americans make their choices without a single f—king thought for the future, or for anyone else. Americans CHOOSE to buy the cheapest crap possible, or demand that expensive stuff be cheaper because they simply WANT IT and can’t possibly fathom the idea of just going without. And that’s why we are ALL where we are today.

America is a nation of selfish, spoiled children. I hope that clears it up for you

Many also choose to have kids they can't afford, to limit their educational efforts and achievements, to fail to take steps to be competitive for remunerative employment, marry badly, and to spend more than they take in. None of which is WM's fault. WM offers employment which people are free to take or not. If an entry-level hourly wage job there is all someone is qualified for, then that's what they will be offered. They're free to go elsewhere if they think their market value is higher. If their market value is higher, WM will compensate them accordingly - their store managers are well paid, with total compensation over $400K/yr possible when including bonuses, stock grants, and other benefits. Their corporate executives are compensated like other S&P 500 Top 50 index employers compensate their executives.

The fact that you seem to think the choices are minimum wage (with added welfare paid for by the rest of us while walmart is valued at a trillion dollars - the subject of this post) or $400k per year shows what an illogical, corporate bootlicker you are. Seriously, you couldn’t think your way out of a paper bag.

And you want compensation which has no relationship to your individual value to an employer. If you want to earn more, be worth more to an employer. Nobody is owed more than they are worth. If you think you're worth more, become self-employed or find a different employer who agrees with you.

You are incapable of engaging in a serious discussion in this topic. Find some new talking points to regurgitate, or better yet, STFU and let the adults talk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all goes to show we
1.) need to bolster worker protections back up and pay living wages, and
2.) we need to tax big corporations and the billionaires enriched by them a bit more.
That much is crystal clear.

Everybody loves to say we need to “pay living wages” but what does that MEAN?

How is the amount of “living wage” determined?
There are teenage employees still living with parents, or single people living with roommates. They don’t need as much to live on as a single mom with three kids who needs an apartment or house. Does that mean the minimum wage should be set according to what the highest need is? Walmart should pay everyone as if they are feeding a family of four?

What if someone just isn’t ever going to be highly efficient or productive? Would you be happier if those individuals are unemployed and receive welfare? Because that is what happens when wage floors are set.

What do you mean when you say productive?

And are you aware that employed Walmart workers already receive welfare?

By productive, I mean as an example I can scan 5 carts of groceries in 15 minutes vs 2 carts of groceries in 15 minutes. Or I can lift 10 crates in 2 minutes vs 5 crates. Or in addition to scanning groceries I also know how to provide customer service. Some people are naturally better workers than others. They usually grow their skills and obtain higher wages. But for those who don’t, and are just scanning the groceries, it is better for them to be employed than not.

And yes, of course I am aware that Walmart employees already receive benefits. But it’s not Walmart’s fault that there’s a single mom with a deadbeat ex who needs benefits in order to make ends meet. It’s not Walmart’s fault that some of its employees have kids they can’t afford. It’s not Walmart’s fault that some of their employees never progress beyond the most menial of tasks. And it isn’t Walmart’s fault that things like housing and healthcare, both of which receive large government subsidies, have become so unaffordable that even middle class salaries have a hard time affording them.

Do you think walmart cashiers are paid according to how quickly they scan groceries?

You’re so f—king stupid you’re not worth talking to. Although I’m curious what “skills” you have and how “productive” you are. Please share with the class, we could all use a good laugh.

What an awesome, smart person you must be. What a genius way to win hearts and minds!!

Truth is, I started out as many do. My parents didn’t go to college. My dad worked as a mailman and then had varying success as a small businessman while my mom worked in a factory. My first jobs were in grocery stores and retail. I took student loans and went to college, first gen, blah blah blah. Got a low level call center job, then figured out Microsoft Excel, picked up some accounting skills, eventually went on to build databases, went to on SQL, Python, data analysis with some legal stuff thrown in. Nothing irreplaceable, and I am not that special, but there is a reason I make 150k and not $15 an hour.

I know that grocery stores generally don’t pay some people more than others based on how fast you can scan a cart. I also know that if you have some hustle and are efficient, you can make much more than minimum wage while working at Aldi. Not everyone is cut out for that though… some cannot handle the pace. For those, there is Giant.

Oh, honey. You are suffering under tge delusion that your heart and mind are worth winning. I assure you, they are not. You are a garbage person to your core.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think OPs statement about the customers is the same mentality that MAGA uses about immigrants. She's got the same attitude that somehow they're "less than" and deserve bad things. It's not okay. There's a big wide world out there that depends on Walmart and stores like Dollar General.

Walmart customers are scum. Filth. They elected Trump. They are trash. And yes, they deserve whatever bad things happen to them. Every tornado that hits their trailer park, every gram of meth they snort, every OD, every job lost. Rural America can eff off and die.

Respectfully, this just shows that you don’t know what you don’t know. There are many, many democrats who shop at Walmart. There are many people of color who shop at Walmart. There are gay people and trans people who shop at Walmart. There are nurses and food bank staffers and social workers and teachers who shop at Walmart. The primary thing that unites people who shop at Walmart is living on a budget in an America that is increasingly unaffordable for regular people.

Respectfully, you don’t know anything about me. But I can assure you, I know hundreds of people, all Democrats, and *not one* of them would be caught dead in a Walmart. I haven’t been in a Walmart since I was a high schooler, having been dragged there by the trashy mother of a friend of our family to get stuff for a picnic, and even then, I recognized it was a place that catered to the worst people in our society. You could tell because the store was festooned with “support our troops” and other jingoistic menagerie all over the place (this was in 2003). It was obvious this store courted the exact type of people I despised, even as a young person. I seriously doubt any actual Democrats shop there. It’s totally antithetical to everything the Democratic Party cares about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://thehill.com/newsletters/whole-hog-politics/5725160-gop-republican-education-shift/amp/

There’s a shift happening, and Dems need to change their ideas and their language on NCW (non college whites). Dems can welcome these people, or continue to malign them, but only one of those options makes them more likely to vote with you.

I’m sorry, but are NOT better-served as a movement by recruiting people who will only dilute our message and cause internal chaos and infighting. We would essentially be dumbing down the party and inviting racists into our midst. How is that a “win” for us?

We should be building the party with immigrants and new Americans, not troublemakers . And in 2029, when whatever Dem goes to White House, they will sign legislation that will make an expedited path to citizenship for the millions of immigrants who will come into the country. This is how we build the party. Not with trash who has to persuaded not to be MAGAs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were just discussing buying more from Walmart as an alternative to Amazon.

This is a joke, yes?

Well, where do you suggest? At this point, it seems like Target>Walmart>Amazon, though they all suck. Amazon is doing all the awful things Walmart is but then a whole lot of other stuff too.

Mom’s Organic
Costco
Trader Joe’s
Aldi’s
Giant
CVS
Grove Collective
Thrive Market
ACE Hardware
Wegmans
Etsy
Container Store
Macy’s
Best Buy
iHerb
Dollar General
Thrift store
Sephora
IKEA
Directly at company website

…off the top of my head

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is filled with Walmart psysops.

I have been here defending the individuals who are struggling to make ends meet, not Walmart the corporation.

If you are reading “don’t call poor people mouth breathers and scum” as a Walmart psyops, I don’t know how to help you.

I’m not OP. And you keep missing the point that Walmart created massively to this nation’s poverty dilemma. We all have power of the purse. Yes, people are hurting. That’s the EXACT time they need to remember their agency. It sounds like you’re infantilizing a subset of Americans. When people are educated about the billionaires ruining their lives (Walmart has been doing this for decades, as opposed to Amazon) they can make choices that align with their values. I’m not saying ALL people can, but certainly more than have done so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all goes to show we
1.) need to bolster worker protections back up and pay living wages, and
2.) we need to tax big corporations and the billionaires enriched by them a bit more.
That much is crystal clear.

Everybody loves to say we need to “pay living wages” but what does that MEAN?

How is the amount of “living wage” determined?
There are teenage employees still living with parents, or single people living with roommates. They don’t need as much to live on as a single mom with three kids who needs an apartment or house. Does that mean the minimum wage should be set according to what the highest need is? Walmart should pay everyone as if they are feeding a family of four?

What if someone just isn’t ever going to be highly efficient or productive? Would you be happier if those individuals are unemployed and receive welfare? Because that is what happens when wage floors are set.

What do you mean when you say productive?

And are you aware that employed Walmart workers already receive welfare?

By productive, I mean as an example I can scan 5 carts of groceries in 15 minutes vs 2 carts of groceries in 15 minutes. Or I can lift 10 crates in 2 minutes vs 5 crates. Or in addition to scanning groceries I also know how to provide customer service. Some people are naturally better workers than others. They usually grow their skills and obtain higher wages. But for those who don’t, and are just scanning the groceries, it is better for them to be employed than not.

And yes, of course I am aware that Walmart employees already receive benefits. But it’s not Walmart’s fault that there’s a single mom with a deadbeat ex who needs benefits in order to make ends meet. It’s not Walmart’s fault that some of its employees have kids they can’t afford. It’s not Walmart’s fault that some of their employees never progress beyond the most menial of tasks. And it isn’t Walmart’s fault that things like housing and healthcare, both of which receive large government subsidies, have become so unaffordable that even middle class salaries have a hard time affording them.

Do you think walmart cashiers are paid according to how quickly they scan groceries?

You’re so f—king stupid you’re not worth talking to. Although I’m curious what “skills” you have and how “productive” you are. Please share with the class, we could all use a good laugh.

What an awesome, smart person you must be. What a genius way to win hearts and minds!!

Truth is, I started out as many do. My parents didn’t go to college. My dad worked as a mailman and then had varying success as a small businessman while my mom worked in a factory. My first jobs were in grocery stores and retail. I took student loans and went to college, first gen, blah blah blah. Got a low level call center job, then figured out Microsoft Excel, picked up some accounting skills, eventually went on to build databases, went to on SQL, Python, data analysis with some legal stuff thrown in. Nothing irreplaceable, and I am not that special, but there is a reason I make 150k and not $15 an hour.

I know that grocery stores generally don’t pay some people more than others based on how fast you can scan a cart. I also know that if you have some hustle and are efficient, you can make much more than minimum wage while working at Aldi. Not everyone is cut out for that though… some cannot handle the pace. For those, there is Giant.

Oh, honey. You are suffering under tge delusion that your heart and mind are worth winning. I assure you, they are not. You are a garbage person to your core.

WtAF

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all goes to show we
1.) need to bolster worker protections back up and pay living wages, and
2.) we need to tax big corporations and the billionaires enriched by them a bit more.
That much is crystal clear.

Everybody loves to say we need to “pay living wages” but what does that MEAN?

How is the amount of “living wage” determined?
There are teenage employees still living with parents, or single people living with roommates. They don’t need as much to live on as a single mom with three kids who needs an apartment or house. Does that mean the minimum wage should be set according to what the highest need is? Walmart should pay everyone as if they are feeding a family of four?

What if someone just isn’t ever going to be highly efficient or productive? Would you be happier if those individuals are unemployed and receive welfare? Because that is what happens when wage floors are set.

What do you mean when you say productive?

And are you aware that employed Walmart workers already receive welfare?

By productive, I mean as an example I can scan 5 carts of groceries in 15 minutes vs 2 carts of groceries in 15 minutes. Or I can lift 10 crates in 2 minutes vs 5 crates. Or in addition to scanning groceries I also know how to provide customer service. Some people are naturally better workers than others. They usually grow their skills and obtain higher wages. But for those who don’t, and are just scanning the groceries, it is better for them to be employed than not.

And yes, of course I am aware that Walmart employees already receive benefits. But it’s not Walmart’s fault that there’s a single mom with a deadbeat ex who needs benefits in order to make ends meet. It’s not Walmart’s fault that some of its employees have kids they can’t afford. It’s not Walmart’s fault that some of their employees never progress beyond the most menial of tasks. And it isn’t Walmart’s fault that things like housing and healthcare, both of which receive large government subsidies, have become so unaffordable that even middle class salaries have a hard time affording them.

Do you think walmart cashiers are paid according to how quickly they scan groceries?

You’re so f—king stupid you’re not worth talking to. Although I’m curious what “skills” you have and how “productive” you are. Please share with the class, we could all use a good laugh.

What an awesome, smart person you must be. What a genius way to win hearts and minds!!

Truth is, I started out as many do. My parents didn’t go to college. My dad worked as a mailman and then had varying success as a small businessman while my mom worked in a factory. My first jobs were in grocery stores and retail. I took student loans and went to college, first gen, blah blah blah. Got a low level call center job, then figured out Microsoft Excel, picked up some accounting skills, eventually went on to build databases, went to on SQL, Python, data analysis with some legal stuff thrown in. Nothing irreplaceable, and I am not that special, but there is a reason I make 150k and not $15 an hour.

I know that grocery stores generally don’t pay some people more than others based on how fast you can scan a cart. I also know that if you have some hustle and are efficient, you can make much more than minimum wage while working at Aldi. Not everyone is cut out for that though… some cannot handle the pace. For those, there is Giant.

Oh, honey. You are suffering under tge delusion that your heart and mind are worth winning. I assure you, they are not. You are a garbage person to your core.

You will never make the world a better place with that attitude.

Did I say Walmart is great?
Did I say they shouldn’t be paying more in taxes?

Would you answer PPs question - is it an employers responsibility to provide a wage that meets an employee’s needs, whatever they are, regardless of the work being performed?

Why won’t you answer this?

Oh right, because it is better to call people garbage and try and shut down any meaningful conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all goes to show we
1.) need to bolster worker protections back up and pay living wages, and
2.) we need to tax big corporations and the billionaires enriched by them a bit more.
That much is crystal clear.

Everybody loves to say we need to “pay living wages” but what does that MEAN?

How is the amount of “living wage” determined?
There are teenage employees still living with parents, or single people living with roommates. They don’t need as much to live on as a single mom with three kids who needs an apartment or house. Does that mean the minimum wage should be set according to what the highest need is? Walmart should pay everyone as if they are feeding a family of four?

What if someone just isn’t ever going to be highly efficient or productive? Would you be happier if those individuals are unemployed and receive welfare? Because that is what happens when wage floors are set.

What do you mean when you say productive?

And are you aware that employed Walmart workers already receive welfare?

By productive, I mean as an example I can scan 5 carts of groceries in 15 minutes vs 2 carts of groceries in 15 minutes. Or I can lift 10 crates in 2 minutes vs 5 crates. Or in addition to scanning groceries I also know how to provide customer service. Some people are naturally better workers than others. They usually grow their skills and obtain higher wages. But for those who don’t, and are just scanning the groceries, it is better for them to be employed than not.

And yes, of course I am aware that Walmart employees already receive benefits. But it’s not Walmart’s fault that there’s a single mom with a deadbeat ex who needs benefits in order to make ends meet. It’s not Walmart’s fault that some of its employees have kids they can’t afford. It’s not Walmart’s fault that some of their employees never progress beyond the most menial of tasks. And it isn’t Walmart’s fault that things like housing and healthcare, both of which receive large government subsidies, have become so unaffordable that even middle class salaries have a hard time affording them.

Do you think walmart cashiers are paid according to how quickly they scan groceries?

You’re so f—king stupid you’re not worth talking to. Although I’m curious what “skills” you have and how “productive” you are. Please share with the class, we could all use a good laugh.

What an awesome, smart person you must be. What a genius way to win hearts and minds!!

Truth is, I started out as many do. My parents didn’t go to college. My dad worked as a mailman and then had varying success as a small businessman while my mom worked in a factory. My first jobs were in grocery stores and retail. I took student loans and went to college, first gen, blah blah blah. Got a low level call center job, then figured out Microsoft Excel, picked up some accounting skills, eventually went on to build databases, went to on SQL, Python, data analysis with some legal stuff thrown in. Nothing irreplaceable, and I am not that special, but there is a reason I make 150k and not $15 an hour.

I know that grocery stores generally don’t pay some people more than others based on how fast you can scan a cart. I also know that if you have some hustle and are efficient, you can make much more than minimum wage while working at Aldi. Not everyone is cut out for that though… some cannot handle the pace. For those, there is Giant.

Oh, honey. You are suffering under tge delusion that your heart and mind are worth winning. I assure you, they are not. You are a garbage person to your core.

You will never make the world a better place with that attitude.

Did I say Walmart is great?
Did I say they shouldn’t be paying more in taxes?

Would you answer PPs question - is it an employers responsibility to provide a wage that meets an employee’s needs, whatever they are, regardless of the work being performed?

Why won’t you answer this?

Oh right, because it is better to call people garbage and try and shut down any meaningful conversation.

DP. You literally blamed the people who work at Walmart, rather than Waltons who are all billionaires (not just one, all !). You said they should all work at ALDI like that’s the simplest thing in the world. Problem solved.

Do you shop at Walmart with your $150k salary that you earn for nothing special?

You really should read up on how Walmart’s policies put hundreds of thousands out of work, were the biggest drivers of sending manufacturing jobs to China, how they disproportionately their employees use taxpayer-funded social services, and how their low prices contributed to overconsumption and the destruction of the planet.