Cingular cell phone service - Re: Nayas Admits Errors, Promises to Be Honest Going Forward, Switches to Verizon

Author

Re: Nayas Admits Errors, Promises to Be Honest Going Forward, Switches to Verizon

GomJabbar

2006-04-20, 5:48 pm

John Navas wrote:
> It's patently obvious that WalMart is competitive, better than the available
> alternatives, given that so many people *choose* to work at WalMart.

> What WalMart actually does is offer competitive jobs in all areas in which it
> operates. One example (out of many) is the WalMart in Pleasanton, which is
> anything buy "an employment-depressed area". At least get your "facts"
> straight.

Pleasanton does not have any poverty or unemployment? Come on.

http://www.infoplease.com/us/census...n/economic.html

> It's attractive simply because if creates a lot of attractive jobs.

> Well duh. In other words, it offers a large number of attractive jobs. If
> those people had better options, then those jobs wouldn't be attractive. The
> point is that they obviously don't have better options.

It's not that WalMart is competitive or the best available alternative.
What it is, it's that people are basically lazy. They don't want to
spend the time and pound the pavement to find a good job. A WalMart
opens up, and a person has a good chance of getting a low skilled job
with little effort.

This is also one of the reasons stores like WalMart are attractive
shopping places for many. One doesn't have to go to multiple locations
to fill the shopping list. They even sell groceries and gasoline now.
A person could theoretically go to WalMart for everything they need -
shopping wise. Great for lazy people and great for WalMart. Not so
great for all the other retailers in the area and their employee's job
security. The other smaller retailer's can never compete on price or
the convenience of one-stop shopping. Unfortunately, that's all that
many people care about these days.

> By soaking up the least skilled labor, that otherwisewould be unemployed,
> WalMart actually tightens the labor market and *lifts* the average wage.

Even if this was true, it would be short-lived because of the other
retailers they drove out of business.

It also would be short-lived until WalMart had to start paying local
taxes and decides to move out. See Cathedral City's experience.

[color=darkred]
> Whether that particular number is true or not, the compensation has clearly
> been worth it, as measured by the huge success of WalMart.

Been worth it? No one in retail is worth that kind of salary! Either
the underlings are deprived or the consumer is ripped off. Even the
President of the United States makes a fraction of that. $143,000 per
day is pure greed when you consider the income and benefits of the
other workers! I'm not surprised you find this acceptable! "Trickle
down effect" indeed. Cold asphalt trickles faster.

LinkBot