Bernie: "Today the Walton family of Walmart own more wealth than the bottom 40 percent of America."

[paulitician]

Don't wanna hire and pay workers a decent wage? STFU and do the work yourself. Problem solved.

Asshats don't get to determine what is a "decent wage" unless they own the company. See how that works?

Then do the work yourself. Otherwise, STFU and pay up. You can't have your slaves. Deal with it.

I never employed slaves and as I am retired, I have no need even for them. Sorry.

Ha, can't wait to see what all you Republican Walmart-Worshippers say when you're forced to hand some of that Corporate Welfare to the Waltons. Gonna be fun.

because there are no Walmart shoppers that aren't republican.

are you retarded??

Yeah, but it's you greedy Republican Walmart-Worshippers who are all for paying American Workers shite wages. So it's gonna be funny watching y'all be forced to bail the Waltons out with your tax dollars. Poetic Justice.

You like poetic justice?

On the advice of a now deceased friend I started buying Walmart stock in the early 1990s for my retirement fund at an average price of under $12/sh.
As part of my retirement strategy I sold it over the course of the past year at an average price over $78/sh.

My 5 adult children are now enjoying the fruit of my capitalist ways and smartly building their own houses of stone and brick.

Meanwhile you sit here banging out your frustrations at USMB as a world of opportunity passes you by.

Now that's my idea of poetic justice.

Don't worry, you'll bail the Waltons out at some point. Walmart is dying a slow painful death. The Waltons will demand their Taxpayer Bailout. You can bet on it. And we'll see what y'all worshippers say then.

But my guess is, you'll justify it somehow. Because we know y'all greedy white Republicans love Corporate Welfare. You only hate welfare that helps Americans who actually need the help.

It's funny how they claim to want small government, but then support all that corporate welfare. As if you could have both...

Most Republicans are not for small government. They're just greedy white dudes who wanna continue fucking over the less fortunate in our country. They have no problem supporting Businesses begging and demanding their government freebies. They only have a problem with helping Americans who need the help most.

Wait til the Waltons come begging. It's gonna be interesting. We'll see what the worshippers have to say. My guess is, they'll fall right in line and give em their welfare.

 

[paulitician]

Then do the work yourself. Otherwise, STFU and pay up. You can't have your slaves. Deal with it.

I never employed slaves and as I am retired, I have no need even for them. Sorry.

Yeah, but it's you greedy Republican Walmart-Worshippers who are all for paying American Workers shite wages. So it's gonna be funny watching y'all be forced to bail the Waltons out with your tax dollars. Poetic Justice.

You like poetic justice?

On the advice of a now deceased friend I started buying Walmart stock in the early 1990s for my retirement fund at an average price of under $12/sh.
As part of my retirement strategy I sold it over the course of the past year at an average price over $78/sh.

My 5 adult children are now enjoying the fruit of my capitalist ways and smartly building their own houses of stone and brick.

Meanwhile you sit here banging out your frustrations at USMB as a world of opportunity passes you by.

Now that's my idea of poetic justice.

Don't worry, you'll bail the Waltons out at some point. Walmart is dying a slow painful death. The Waltons will demand their Taxpayer Bailout. You can bet on it. And we'll see what y'all worshippers say then.

But my guess is, you'll justify it somehow. Because we know y'all greedy white Republicans love Corporate Welfare. You only hate welfare that helps Americans who actually need the help.

It's funny how they claim to want small government, but then support all that corporate welfare. As if you could have both...

FUNNY HOW LEFT-WING LOSERS RANT ABOUT CORPORATE WELFARE, as if they even TRIED to end any of it in the four years Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress and the 2 of those years with the White House too.

idiots and hypocrites

As if either side ever does anything. Repubs can't control congress and debt limit grows.

George Bush and his Republican Congress were 'Small Government' folks too. How'd that work out?

 

[bedowin62]

I never employed slaves and as I am retired, I have no need even for them. Sorry.

You like poetic justice?

On the advice of a now deceased friend I started buying Walmart stock in the early 1990s for my retirement fund at an average price of under $12/sh.
As part of my retirement strategy I sold it over the course of the past year at an average price over $78/sh.

My 5 adult children are now enjoying the fruit of my capitalist ways and smartly building their own houses of stone and brick.

Meanwhile you sit here banging out your frustrations at USMB as a world of opportunity passes you by.

Now that's my idea of poetic justice.

Don't worry, you'll bail the Waltons out at some point. Walmart is dying a slow painful death. The Waltons will demand their Taxpayer Bailout. You can bet on it. And we'll see what y'all worshippers say then.

But my guess is, you'll justify it somehow. Because we know y'all greedy white Republicans love Corporate Welfare. You only hate welfare that helps Americans who actually need the help.

It's funny how they claim to want small government, but then support all that corporate welfare. As if you could have both...

FUNNY HOW LEFT-WING LOSERS RANT ABOUT CORPORATE WELFARE, as if they even TRIED to end any of it in the four years Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress and the 2 of those years with the White House too.

idiots and hypocrites

As if either side ever does anything. Repubs can't control congress and debt limit grows.

George Bush and his Republican Congress were 'Small Government' folks too. How'd that work out?

oh oh oh i know pick me!!

i know how that turned out!! the Tea Party was formed, they decided their values were closer to Republican than Democrat, and the Democrat President saw the biggest gains for Republicans in the House in SEVENTY YEARS!

how'd that work out for Democrats??

 

[kaz]

Who is he? I own the company, Holmes, they are my employees. I am letting them stay, I pay a market rate, they accept it.

The question is what you would do. I'm not paying them more, they aren't worth more. But you say I'm taking welfare from government, so should I fire them? What is your counsel?

Do whatever you want, what do I care? Fire them and take the time to hire and train new people who might not be better. Why do you need my councel?

As for why I need your "counsel," I don't, stop being an idiot. I said that repeatedly, I want to know what your values are, I am not going to do it. I said that what, five times?

Yes you keep repeating yourself like a moron. I don't buy the scare tactics and neither do economists.

Sorry, your kool-aid was gurgling too loudly, what did you say?

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs.

Not true: In a letter to President Obama and congressional leaders urging a minimum wage increase, more than 600 economists, including 7 Nobel Prize winners wrote, "In recent years there have been important developments in the academic literature on the effect of increases in the minimum wage on employment, with the weight of evidence now showing that increases in the minimum wage have had little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum-wage workers, even during times of weakness in the labor market. Research suggests that a minimum-wage increase could have a small stimulative effect on the economy as low-wage workers spend their additional earnings, raising demand and job growth, and providing some help on the jobs front."

You're wrong about the rates, like you're wrong about everything else. But let's say overall they don't change. Again, people not worth your arbitrary hurdle will lose their jobs., Your answer to that was "why do I care?" That's a liberal, it's all about you. Even when you're helping people

 

[HenryBHough]

There is an element about Walmart and about The Brothers Koch that causes me to question the sanity of those in charge.

Why in Hell would either of them contribute to ANY organization dedicated to destroying their ability to contribute? Imagine PBS, for example, without Koch support for programming. But, hey, you liberals ARE into Sesame Street reruns so maybe it would not matter all that much.

 

[Brain357]

Do whatever you want, what do I care? Fire them and take the time to hire and train new people who might not be better. Why do you need my councel?

As for why I need your "counsel," I don't, stop being an idiot. I said that repeatedly, I want to know what your values are, I am not going to do it. I said that what, five times?

Yes you keep repeating yourself like a moron. I don't buy the scare tactics and neither do economists.

Sorry, your kool-aid was gurgling too loudly, what did you say?

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs.

Not true: In a letter to President Obama and congressional leaders urging a minimum wage increase, more than 600 economists, including 7 Nobel Prize winners wrote, "In recent years there have been important developments in the academic literature on the effect of increases in the minimum wage on employment, with the weight of evidence now showing that increases in the minimum wage have had little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum-wage workers, even during times of weakness in the labor market. Research suggests that a minimum-wage increase could have a small stimulative effect on the economy as low-wage workers spend their additional earnings, raising demand and job growth, and providing some help on the jobs front."

You're wrong about the rates, like you're wrong about everything else. But let's say overall they don't change. Again, people not worth your arbitrary hurdle will lose their jobs., Your answer to that was "why do I care?" That's a liberal, it's all about you. Even when you're helping people

Based on what economists say it does not effect unemployment and may boost the economy.

 

[BluesLegend]

Don't worry, you'll bail the Waltons out at some point. Walmart is dying a slow painful death. The Waltons will demand their Taxpayer Bailout. You can bet on it. And we'll see what y'all worshippers say then.

But my guess is, you'll justify it somehow. Because we know y'all greedy white Republicans love Corporate Welfare. You only hate welfare that helps Americans who actually need the help.

It's funny how they claim to want small government, but then support all that corporate welfare. As if you could have both...

FUNNY HOW LEFT-WING LOSERS RANT ABOUT CORPORATE WELFARE, as if they even TRIED to end any of it in the four years Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress and the 2 of those years with the White House too.

idiots and hypocrites

As if either side ever does anything. Repubs can't control congress and debt limit grows.

George Bush and his Republican Congress were 'Small Government' folks too. How'd that work out?

oh oh oh i know pick me!!

i know how that turned out!! the Tea Party was formed, they decided their values were closer to Republican than Democrat, and the Democrat President saw the biggest gains for Republicans in the House in SEVENTY YEARS!

how'd that work out for Democrats??

Ouch!

 

[Arianrhod]

FUNNY HOW LEFT-WING LOSERS RANT ABOUT CORPORATE WELFARE, as if they even TRIED to end any of it in the four years Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress and the 2 of those years with the White House too.

bedowin62 will now tell the class everything he knows about Citizens United.

 

[bedowin62]

FUNNY HOW LEFT-WING LOSERS RANT ABOUT CORPORATE WELFARE, as if they even TRIED to end any of it in the four years Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress and the 2 of those years with the White House too.

bedowin62 will now tell the class everything he knows about Citizens United.

leftardz cry that corporations are "people" while democrats outspend republicans in campaigns???

 

[Arianrhod]

FUNNY HOW LEFT-WING LOSERS RANT ABOUT CORPORATE WELFARE, as if they even TRIED to end any of it in the four years Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress and the 2 of those years with the White House too.

bedowin62 will now tell the class everything he knows about Citizens United.

leftardz cry that corporations are "people" while democrats outspend republicans in campaigns???

So you've never heard of Citizens United. Not surprising.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Notice how the very mention of the prospect of "cutting welfare" is spoken-of, by your ilk, with such horror.



Yes, I think the time has come to address the many significant problems this country has with 'welfare." Corrections are needed. Means testing seems appropriate. CUTTING the amounts doled out --while inducing horror in you -- is another in a laundry list of possible options which should be up for discussion.

The workers at Walmart, for the most part, are not exactly the highest skilled employees in our economy. One might imagine that lots of people having jobs BECAUSE of Walmart would be viewed as being a GOOD thing. But no. To you forever whining libbies, instead we hear endless carping about the low wages.

What part of low skilled work equates in your feeble mind with a right to higher wages, generally?

Have any of you economic illiterates managed yet to grasp that if "Walmart" were to suddenly (and very artificially) elevate the wages of its MANY employees, then the cost of the goods Walmart provides to the public (i.e., the consumers) would have to also go up? Demand would be expected to then drop. With the lower demand, to remain competitive, Walmart might have to send many of its employees to the unemployment line.

This is a predictable outcome, but its okay with you and your fellow economic illiterate liberal sheep pals as long as Walmart employees derive a temporary benefit of higher wages. [It might not be AS good for the Walmart employees who then lose their jobs BECAUSE YOU imagine YOU have some right to have a say in what THEY make with THEIR employer.]

So cut welfare in our current economy. That will quickly tank the economy as people have less to spend. Great plan. I want to cut welfare by creating good jobs where employees provide for the employees, not the government. Your plan would tank the economy and be political suicide. Not gonna happen. Get out of fantasy land.

Stupid, mindless liberal pooh spewed as a "thought" simply won't fly, there, pinky.

You are wrong in a multitude of ways.

Let's start with the fact that if we don't get a handle on the fucking SPENDING we shall go bankrupt. Is there anything in your putrid political joke of a philosophy that might assist the "poor" people once the money is ALL gone and the government collapses and society does too?

Of course not.

A plan to reduce the amounts we dole out (which is not the same thing, exactly, as cutting it out entirely, you alarmist nitwit) MIGHT just have the benefit of SAVING us from bankruptcy and thereby enable the government to keep spending our tax dollars on unearned handouts to a lot of people who won't even attempt to get work.

Whew. That was close. They ALMOST had to work just because they are able to do so and jobs might be available.

Doing what YOU propose WILL inevitably "tank" our economy. It is your proposal which is ultimately quite heartless and foolish.

But you cannot see that and would never admit it anyway because you are a tool, a fool a liberal and you are neither bright nor honest. But I already noted that you are a liberal.

I want small government, but live in reality. You can't just cut welfare in an economy wih stagnant wages. You have no viable plan. To get small government we need employers to provide for employees. There is no other option.

First of all, pinky, I haven't said anything ABOUT a "plan." So you have exactly and precisely zero factual basis to complain about any alleged lack of a viable plan on my part. I realize that having to have a factual basis to make your idiotic musings gets in the way of your monotonous ranting, but still, you should consider honesty for a refreshing change of pace.

And, stagnant economy or not (the President might not agree with your assessment, but then again, Obumbler is less credible than even you, if that's possible, and sadly it is) -- you also leave unsupported your contention that you can't cut welfare in a stagnant economy. .

And no. To get small government it is NOT necessary that we "get' employers to do anything in particular. That might help, but it is NOT (as you baselessly claim) a necessity or a precondition. It's just you asserting shit without feeling the slightest need to support your claims -- again. I can tell you what IS crucial to get smaller government. Have them (stay with me on this "new" concept) COMPLY with the Constitutional limitations on their power and authority!

There are MANY other options. At a minimum, once again you have simply made a grandiose sounding claim (as though you are merely recapitulating a previously proved law of economics -- which you are not) and failing entirely to provide support for your mere claim.

You talk a lot without saying anything of value, you should be a politician. You have said you would cut welfare. That would be a disaster in our current economy.

Wrong. What I have said is that one of the possible fixes might include cutting welfare (which is not the same as eliminating it).

YOUR mindless reiteration of your unsupported contention does nothing to support what you say. Again.

And FIXING what's obviously wrong with our budgetary process (and economy) could save us all, including those on the dole.

By very stark contrast, refusing to even consider such a fix is a fast route to bankruptcy which serves to save -- nobody.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

FUNNY HOW LEFT-WING LOSERS RANT ABOUT CORPORATE WELFARE, as if they even TRIED to end any of it in the four years Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress and the 2 of those years with the White House too.

bedowin62 will now tell the class everything he knows about Citizens United.

leftardz cry that corporations are "people" while democrats outspend republicans in campaigns???

So you've never heard of Citizens United. Not surprising.

He said you left wing assholes cry about it. He didn't say that WE don't recognize that (for limited purposes) corporations ARE treated as "persons."

I heard of citizens United.

A GREAT SCOTUS decision.

It makes your butthurt feel worse each and every time it is mentioned. Proof positive of just how correct that decision was.

 

[Cecilie1200]

While it is theirs certainly, the earned part is questionable. Everyone is born.

What's questionable is why you leftists have latched onto the word "earned", and think you can demand that people prove to you that they "deserve" their own property through meeting some arbitrary definition of "earned".

They built and maintained a relationship with their father, such that he chose to give them his property. YOU, on the other hand, didn't even do that much. So I think we can safely say the Walton children did more to "earn" what they have than YOU did. Or the government did. Or anyone who doesn't actually own the money did.

No actually I do far more than the Waltons, none of them even have a position with the company. They don't work at all. I work quite a lot.

I've already pointed out that Rob Walton is CEO of the company.

In the interests of not letting them digress and natter over details, I will point out that Rob Walton was the Chairman of the Board of Directors, not CEO. Doug McMillon is the CEO.

According to CNN Money, Sam and Helen Walton had four children. John, their son, died in a plane crash, so possibly we can dispense with the liver-eating envy in regards to him. Their son, Rob, graduated college and took a job with the law firm representing WalMart until the early 90s, when he went to work directly for WalMart as their general counsel and one of their vice-presidents. And, of course, Chairman of the Board. Their third son, Jim, manages Walton Enterprises, the parent company of the family's businesses, which handles the family's stock in WalMart as well as other investments. Their daughter, Alice, worked for WalMart as a buyer, then left to become a broker and start her own investment company.

All four living Waltons - Helen, Rob, Jim, and Alice, are active in charity work on behalf of the Walton Family Foundation, and donate millions of dollars of their own money to same.

How much did YOU donate to charity last year, Brain?

The Walton heirs - Jun. 28, 2005

Who We Are

The actual point is that the idiot OP claims that the Waltons did nothing to "earn" their money but be born a Walton. He is clearly wrong.

Yes, I know. And to the extent that I concern myself with whether or not people "earn" or "deserve" what belongs to them, I'd say setting up charitable foundations with one's personal money and helping underprivileged children get educated counts as "earning" and "deserving".

I don't really think much about "earning" and "deserving", though, because I'm not arrogant enough to think other people need to get my approval for how they live their lives and what they do and don't own. Did they break the law? No? My interest has ended.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Ya know, at one time, the Rockefellers owned more than anyone else in the nation. I'm sure if you went back into the 1800's, you'd find families like Vanderbilt that owned a lot more than anyone else.

It really makes you wonder why envying those that have materially more than you is so en vogue. It would just depress me.

Having a Presidential Candidate repeat it ad nauseum probably wouldn't endear me to vote for her/him either.

Stupid bitch.....

The conservative war on women knows no limits; never ends, shows no signs of stopping or waning....

Good. Women will cast 6 out of every 10 ballots next November. They will remember comments like yours. Can't wait!

At what point did you become enough of a woman to speak for the entire gender?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Didn't you hear the school bell? It's time to come in from the playground

Not until two or three of you start whispering about me behind your hands like a couple of third-graders. Go on, now. You know you want to.

Or, since this is a (you know it, you love it) MESSAGE Board, we can go right ahead and "say" it to your e-face:

You are a putz.

Thank you for a wonderfully insightful, on-topic post. Do another.

It was concise and responsive to the bleating whining blather YOU had just offered.

So, feel obligated to stop your butt hurt whining, try to man up for the first time EVER and say something of some at least marginal merit.

We'll be the ones waiting patiently.

For the rest of time.

Hurry back, and prove what a bitch you are. Go!

Since I like you, Ilar, I'll advise you not to hold your breath while waiting for him to grow a pair. Or a brain.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Let's see if it's even POSSIBLE to drag aryanhood back to the actual topic of this thread.

To recap: Waltons have much wealth. Wealth BAD. Waltons bad.

Yes and while they make billions each year we subsidize their workers with welfare. Perfect formula for big government.

Whose idea was it to subsidize people and enable them to sit around in deadend jobs their whole lives, whining, instead of aspiring to better themselves?

I'm just glad WalMart employs them at all.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Let's see if it's even POSSIBLE to drag aryanhood back to the actual topic of this thread.

To recap: Waltons have much wealth. Wealth BAD. Waltons bad.

Yes and while they make billions each year we subsidize their workers with welfare. Perfect formula for big government.

So what would you say then, genius? Are you MORE jealous of the Walton wealth or more resentful that they employ lots of people at wages you think is carp worthy?

I'm not jealous. I'm irritated my taxes go to their workers. Those workers make the Waltons billions, while not making me anything. The Waltons should be providing for them. All they are doing is increasing the size of government. Why do you worship that?

You're irritated that your taxes go to their workers? Then why do you keep voting for more and more taxes to be redistributed to people?

You blame everyone except yourself and your leftist butt-buddies.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What type of a fucked up individual like BS can hate the Waltons?

It's amazing that no one came up with this earlier. However:

The Bill and Melinda gates Foundation owns more wealth than the bottom, er, idk, 20%?!

Kill the Kulaks!!

Bad example. There's a discussion of the Gates Foundation here: Then Why Don't You Start - | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

that you might find interesting.

I'm sure devotees of the Waltons can produce a similar record of their contributions to something other than their own offshore accounts.

Already did, shitforbrains. Try to keep up.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So like I said, no country has had a strong middle class without unions. Between that and our stagnant wages it is confirmed. We need unions for a strong middle class. The claims we don't have been proven false by stagnant wages. Stop ignoring history.

Really? Then why did you stupidly throw out a claim you can't back up?

I just did.

Repeating an unsupported assertion isn't supporting it, Holmes

You show me a country with no unions and a strong middle class. Till then I am right.

Dubai, Singapore, Hong Kong, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Korea.

Furthermore, you've committed the post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy. All dogs have fleas. That doesn't mean fleas are good for the dog.

All men wear pants in nations with strong middle classes. Ergo, wearing pants makes for a strong middle class.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And yet y'all can't stop talking about him.

Bernie is fun to talk about, a crazy old Bolshevik. Plus he forced Hilliary to show her Marxist roots.

And Hillary isn't exactly far to the right of ol' Bernie. Politically, she's so close to him, they're holding hands.