Shocker! A Liberal Attack On Success

[Disir]

um no; it doesnt stand. when Walmart finds a way to replace them; or do with a smaller staff; they will be subsidized 100% by the government; not just receiving a partial supplement of government aid.

you libs just dont get it

No, you rethuglicans don't get it (like that? Two can play.) These folks have you so afraid that you will just eat what they give you.

why do i need to be afraid of them?
i swear you losers get your talking points spoon-fed to you by a gazillionaire hedge-fund guru named george soros; and you swallow whatever he puts in your face

Because you refuse to demand that they pay their employees enough to not need state aid in case they wind up laying off workers and you have to pay more.

Say that out loud.

Because um......Soros is not an answer. I don't like twaddle from the left or the right.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So your point is that these people's stupendous wealth is a boon to mankind?

So noted.

No, silly.....my point is that anyone who supports the Liberal perspective is a dunce.


And, the OP so indicates.

Two days ago the internet was flooded with articles on how the GOP intends to use privatization of education as it's platform. Now, we see a plethora of nonthinking right wing posts that are in support of Wal-Mart. Note that Wal-Mart employees are reliant on state aid to survive because Wal-Mart refuses to pay them. We subsidize them. Understand?

Yet, you think they are totally awesome because they drop lot o' cash in this industry.

You call this success. You, obviously, have not thought this through.

",,,,right wing posts that are in support of Wal-Mart...."



I sure do....as do most American folks.



1. The diverse group of self-identified liberals are better educated than the country as a whole, less religious, more urban, less married and wealthier. They support abortion and gay rights, are unconcerned about pornography, and rarely own guns.
Edsall, “ Building Red America,” p. 18.


2. The group frequently finds themselves in disagreement with white, working-class voters, as outlined in the Pew survey of 2007, “Trends in Political Values.” One example: two-thirds of working-class Democrats have a favorable view of Wal-Mart, while a majority of professional-class Democrats consider it to be something akin to evil incarnate. Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007 | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

 

[Mac1958]

.

Yeah, the worst part is the way people are forced to work at Wal Mart or McDonalds.

How mean.



.

 

[PoliticalChic]

um; the Left's next presidential sits, or sat; on the board of WalMart

understand?
oh and the loony Left would rather see people unemployed than working at WalMart; thats why they actually refuse to let WalMart build stores in some very blue areas. why should libs care?
they have hundreds of billions of other people's money to dole out in the form of welfare and food stamps

do you thing the RECORD welfare and food stamps on Progressive's watch is a coincidence?

I'm sorry does this interrupt your delusions? Wal-Mart doesn't pay their people enough money to not live off of state aid. How do you not know this?

Possibly you are unfamiliar with the Republican-passed 13th amendment to the Constitution.

Based on said amendment, you must believe that you know better than Wal-Mart's employees what is best for them.


Said attitude is what makes one a Liberal.

 

[boedicca]

Elite Dems consider people with different tastes from their own as Evil. Liking NASCAR and WalMart is a moral failing. Hence, their fervent campaign to control the fallen.

 

[PoliticalChic]

um; the Left's next presidential sits, or sat; on the board of WalMart

understand?
oh and the loony Left would rather see people unemployed than working at WalMart; thats why they actually refuse to let WalMart build stores in some very blue areas. why should libs care?
they have hundreds of billions of other people's money to dole out in the form of welfare and food stamps

do you thing the RECORD welfare and food stamps on Progressive's watch is a coincidence?

How McDonald's and Wal-Mart Became Welfare Queens

Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest private sector employer, is also the biggest consumer of taxpayer supported aid. According to Florida Congressman Alan Grayson, in many states, Wal-Mart employees are the largest group of Medicaid recipients. They are also the single biggest group of food stamp recipients. Wal-mart’s "associates" are paid so little, according to Grayson, that they receive $1,000 on average in public assistance. These amount to massive taxpayer subsidies for private companies.

How McDonald's and Wal-Mart Became Welfare Queens - Bloomberg

C'mon....you're not still sulking because they wouldn't hire you as a 'greeter'?

 

[bedowin62]

No, you rethuglicans don't get it (like that? Two can play.) These folks have you so afraid that you will just eat what they give you.

why do i need to be afraid of them?
i swear you losers get your talking points spoon-fed to you by a gazillionaire hedge-fund guru named george soros; and you swallow whatever he puts in your face

Because you refuse to demand that they pay their employees enough to not need state aid in case they wind up laying off workers and you have to pay more.

Say that out loud.

Because um......Soros is not an answer. I don't like twaddle from the left or the right.

YAWN

once again you refuse to address the main point. what happens when they are laid off?
how much of their needs will be subsidized by the government then?

 

[Disir]

No, silly.....my point is that anyone who supports the Liberal perspective is a dunce.


And, the OP so indicates.

Two days ago the internet was flooded with articles on how the GOP intends to use privatization of education as it's platform. Now, we see a plethora of nonthinking right wing posts that are in support of Wal-Mart. Note that Wal-Mart employees are reliant on state aid to survive because Wal-Mart refuses to pay them. We subsidize them. Understand?

Yet, you think they are totally awesome because they drop lot o' cash in this industry.

You call this success. You, obviously, have not thought this through.

",,,,right wing posts that are in support of Wal-Mart...."



I sure do....as do most American folks.



1. The diverse group of self-identified liberals are better educated than the country as a whole, less religious, more urban, less married and wealthier. They support abortion and gay rights, are unconcerned about pornography, and rarely own guns.
Edsall, “ Building Red America,” p. 18.


2. The group frequently finds themselves in disagreement with white, working-class voters, as outlined in the Pew survey of 2007, “Trends in Political Values.” One example: two-thirds of working-class Democrats have a favorable view of Wal-Mart, while a majority of professional-class Democrats consider it to be something akin to evil incarnate. Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007 | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

T he public expresses highly favorable views of many leading corporations. Johnson & Johnson and Google have the most positive images of 23 corporations tested. At the bottom of the list: Halliburton, which is viewed favorably by fewer than half of those familiar enough with the company to give it a rating.
Views of many corporations vary significantly among Democrats along class lines. Two-thirds of working-class Democrats have a favorable view of Wal-Mart compared with 45% of professional-class Democrats.
Americans are worried more that businesses rather than government are snooping into their lives. About three-in-four (74%) say they are concerned that business corporations are collecting too much personal information while 58% express the same concern about the government.
The public is losing confidence in itself. A dwindling majority (57%) say they have a good deal of confidence in the wisdom of the American people when it comes to making political decisions. Similarly, the proportion who agrees that Americans “can always find a way to solve our problems” has dropped 16 points in the past five years.
Americans feel increasingly estranged from their government. Barely a third (34%) agree with the statement, “most elected officials care what people like me think,” nearly matching the 20-year low of 33% recorded in 1994 and a 10-point drop since 2002.
Young people continue to hold a more favorable view of government than do other Americans. At the same time, young adults express the least interest in voting and other forms of political participation.
Interpersonal racial attitudes continue to moderate. More than eight-in-ten (83%) agree that “it’s all right for blacks and whites to date,” up six percentage points since 2003 and 13 points from a Pew survey conducted 10 years ago.
Republicans are increasingly divided over the cultural impact of immigrants. Nearly seven-in-ten (68%) conservative Republicans say immigrants threaten American customs, compared with 43% of GOP moderates and liberals. Democrats have long been divided along ideological lines, but the GOP previously had not been.

Roadmap to the Report

Section 1, which begins on p. 7, describes the striking shift in party identification over the past five years, the public’s views of both parties, and the ideological profile of the early presidential primary states. Section 2, which details the public’s views of the government safety net, success and empowerment, and personal finances, begins on p. 12. Section 3 (p. 19) covers public attitudes toward foreign policy and national security. Section 4 (p. 30) covers opinions about religion and social issues. Section 5 (p. 39) describes changing attitudes toward race and race relations. Section 6 (p. 45) discusses the public’s complex views about government and political participation. Opinions about business, and ratings for individual corporations, are covered in Section 7, which begins on p. 52. Section 8 covers public views about civil liberties, the environment, and science.
Report Materials

Complete Report
Topline Questionnaire
1987-2007 Values Surveys (combined dataset)
2007 Values Update

Table of Contents

Summary of Findings
Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007 | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

It might be better to read the original.

 

[bedowin62]

it's hilarious

the same left-wing morons that insist corporations are ruthless and savage are out of the other side of their mouths at least implying that a hike in the minimum wage wont result in layoffs


libs are clowns

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'm sorry does this interrupt your delusions? Wal-Mart doesn't pay their people enough money to not live off of state aid. How do you not know this?

um; i already knew this moron; now i asked a question. who will subsidize them; and at what level; when WalMart lays them off?

Did you, twit? So, we subsidize them now or we really pay for them later...........
Then we can throw a party for the success of Wal-Mart?

They were successful in making it our problem. It is not. Thanks for helping to screw the tax payers.

I understand that this is a Liberal meme, and, as such, you are required to repeat it ad infinitum....

...but it is so bereft of logic that it gives one pause.....I mean, one with cognitive abilities, not you.



If it is correct that Wal-Mart is guilty of paying below what you Liberals decide they should,.....

...how is that a fault for Wal-Mart, and not the prerogative of those who applied for the positions?



Is that query beyond you?
Or do you fear that the correct answer would impact your Liberal creds?




Now....be honest and simply admit that it is Wal-Mart's success that you hate.

 

[Disir]

why do i need to be afraid of them?
i swear you losers get your talking points spoon-fed to you by a gazillionaire hedge-fund guru named george soros; and you swallow whatever he puts in your face

Because you refuse to demand that they pay their employees enough to not need state aid in case they wind up laying off workers and you have to pay more.

Say that out loud.

Because um......Soros is not an answer. I don't like twaddle from the left or the right.

YAWN

once again you refuse to address the main point. what happens when they are laid off?
how much of their needs will be subsidized by the government then?

I have addressed your fear repeatedly.

 

[bedowin62]

in the weak obamaconomy it is WalMart subsidizing the government; not the other way around

libs are losers who lie to themselves

 

[bedowin62]

Because you refuse to demand that they pay their employees enough to not need state aid in case they wind up laying off workers and you have to pay more.

Say that out loud.

Because um......Soros is not an answer. I don't like twaddle from the left or the right.

YAWN

once again you refuse to address the main point. what happens when they are laid off?
how much of their needs will be subsidized by the government then?

I have addressed your fear repeatedly.

lol; you havent even backed up your own talking points; let alone my "fear"

 

[Disir]

um; i already knew this moron; now i asked a question. who will subsidize them; and at what level; when WalMart lays them off?

Did you, twit? So, we subsidize them now or we really pay for them later...........
Then we can throw a party for the success of Wal-Mart?

They were successful in making it our problem. It is not. Thanks for helping to screw the tax payers.

I understand that this is a Liberal meme, and, as such, you are required to repeat it ad infinitum....

...but it is so bereft of logic that it gives one pause.....I mean, one with cognitive abilities, not you.



If it is correct that Wal-Mart is guilty of paying below what you Liberals decide they should,.....

...how is that a fault for Wal-Mart, and not the prerogative of those who applied for the positions?



Is that query beyond you?
Or do you fear that the correct answer would impact your Liberal creds?




Now....be honest and simply admit that it is Wal-Mart's success that you hate.

Here, let me repeat this for you. Because we as tax payers pick up the tab. It isn't a question of hating success. It is exploiting the tax payers for their success that is a real bummer.

Now, be honest........is it by the word or the entire post?

 

[bedowin62]

jobs like Walmart were meant to be temporary; and workers would better themselves and go on to better jobs

but in a weak world of Progressive failure; where record food stamps and welfare are actually re-branded as "forward progress' there arent any better jobs.

who would stay at Walmart if better jobs were available?

libs are losers who lie to themselves

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'm sorry does this interrupt your delusions? Wal-Mart doesn't pay their people enough money to not live off of state aid. How do you not know this?

um; i already knew this moron; now i asked a question. who will subsidize them; and at what level; when WalMart lays them off?

Walmart never stops trying to cut labor costs

....and prices to consumers.

“Love ya back, Rose, but no thanks. You offer up a false and dangerous choice. The world is bigger than “Workers vs. Bosses,” and so is this campaign. Remember, Walmart thrives because a majority of Americans like to shop there.

Like Apple, Discovery, Ford, and Facebook, Walmart does not exist for the purpose of employing people. No successful company does. Walmart’s first order of business is to serve their customer.

Ultimately, the customer calls the shots. Not management. Not labor. Jobs are just a happy consequence of that success.”
Mike Rowe defends his involvement in Walmart manufacturing commercial | Rare



We need more successes like Wal-Mart, and fewer Liberal failures like Obama!

 

[bedowin62]

Did you, twit? So, we subsidize them now or we really pay for them later...........
Then we can throw a party for the success of Wal-Mart?

They were successful in making it our problem. It is not. Thanks for helping to screw the tax payers.

I understand that this is a Liberal meme, and, as such, you are required to repeat it ad infinitum....

...but it is so bereft of logic that it gives one pause.....I mean, one with cognitive abilities, not you.



If it is correct that Wal-Mart is guilty of paying below what you Liberals decide they should,.....

...how is that a fault for Wal-Mart, and not the prerogative of those who applied for the positions?



Is that query beyond you?
Or do you fear that the correct answer would impact your Liberal creds?




Now....be honest and simply admit that it is Wal-Mart's success that you hate.

Here, let me repeat this for you. Because we as tax payers pick up the tab. It isn't a question of hating success. It is exploiting the tax payers for their success that is a real bummer.

Now, be honest........is it by the word or the entire post?

yawn

one more time; who will pick up the tab when they are laid off?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Do you get paid by the entire post or by the word?

I would expect her 'employer' would hire someone with the ability to write a comprehensive essay, of course the choir to which she preaches likely can't understand anything beyond a simple sentence, and only then when it appeals to their already held biases.

As an agent provocateur, PC is a step below failure, her body of work is as convincing as a three dollar bill, as such she must be an embarrassment to all self respecting trolls.

They don't have to think. It's a Pavlovian response to the word liberal.

"....response to the word liberal."

Based on their proven, constant, epidemic failures.

 

[bedowin62]

it's simply hilarious to witness a left-winger pretending to care about the taxpayer. these are the same pandering for votes fools that scream at the top of their lungs when the level of food stamps and other aid is questioned; all while insisting how much better things are now.

idiots and hypocrites

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'm sorry does this interrupt your delusions? Wal-Mart doesn't pay their people enough money to not live off of state aid. How do you not know this?

um; i already knew this moron; now i asked a question. who will subsidize them; and at what level; when WalMart lays them off?

False choice, no one would need government aid if Wal-Mart paid a living wage. If the Congress raised the minim wage and worked to fix any problems - real or ideological based - with the PPACA, everyone would benefit.

BTW, it doesn't trickle down. That is obvious to all but the liars and fools.

"BTW, it doesn't trickle down. That is obvious to all but the liars and fools."


I assume that that is a reference to the great Ronald Reagan's economic program?


Let's show everyone that you are the poster child for "liars and fools."


1. Under Reagan, the debt went up $1.7 trillion, from $900 billion to $2.6 trillion.
2. But….the national wealth went up $ 17 trillion
3. Reagan's near-trillion-dollar bulge in defense spending transformed the global balance of power in favor of capitalism. Spurring a stock-market, energy, venture-capital, real-estate and employment boom, the Reagan tax-rate cuts and other pro-enterprise policies added some $17 trillion to America's private-sector assets, dwarfing the trillion-dollar rise in public-sector deficits and creating 45 million net new jobs at rising wages and salaries.

George Gilder: The Real Reagan Lesson for Romney-Ryan - WSJ.com

Reaganomics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




Wow, you are a dunce.