On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Harry Pollard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Sally, > >Yet another strike at Wal-Mart, when the attack should >really be on the politicians that give a myriad companies >special deals. This has been going on for decades (maybe for >centuries). At the moment, in Los Angeles, there is a huge >effort to attract a football team, with all kinds of >"incentives" being offered by the Democratic Council.
I dunno, harry. It read to me as an indictment of the politicians who offered the subsidies, at least as much as Walmart for fishing for them. You could make a case that if the subsidies are being offered, it is just good business for the company to ask for them. Of course, a more virtuous company wouldn't do that, but what is virtue in commerce? >Don't blame a company that brings cheaper prices and better >quality to the people - blame those bloody politicians who >make the deals. > >As is to be expected, the "meager" wages paid by Wal-Mart is >brought up - an indication that this is not exactly an >impartial view of the goodies that Wal-Mart gets. > >I will ask again - if the wages are so poor, why do people >work there? Umm. Because living in your country with even a modest amount of comfort and security requires an income, and income requires employment, and employment is in shorter supply than potential employees. Isn't this true everywhere in the third world? -Pete >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: [Futurework] Send to a Friend: Article from TomPaine.com > >I thought you'd find the following item >interesting: > >http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20051109/walmarts_tax_on_us.php> > >Wonder how widely this is known? _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
