Progressive Wednesday: Downsize Wal-Mart

why not downsize all the other retailers?picking at straws again.folks.typical govt and union bullshit with no merit in thi article.other comapnies have violated child labor laws.funny we dont hear shit from all you wm haters on that.big deal if wm got govt subsidies.a lot of your favorite storesany many other comapnies across america and other big boxes have gotten govt subsidies in the past.how come so quiet and no bitching on that folks?contractors and owners of expensive condo complexes get govt subsidies all the time and so do strip malls and govts pet projects.why dont we ever hear shit from you wm haters on that?

Matthew how old are you? You’re comments make you seem to be about 12.

If Debbie Shanks was a friend or relative of yours, would you still support WM?

If one of the ladies filing the sexual discrimination lawsuits against WM was a friend or relative of yours would you still support WM?

Do you actually believe WM does nothing unethical?

Do you actually believe that you know everything there is to know about WM, K-Mart, Target, Costco, unions, grocery stores, government, and everything in between?

Matthew please answer these questions because I’m really tired of asking them and you not answering. You just post more nonsense and stupid questions. I’ve answered every question you have asked me, now please answer m

Matthew you called us WM haters which means by your own admission that you know we hate WM. Now since this Wal-Mart Watch why can’t you understand thats why we are here bitching about WM? Why would we come here and bitch about all the other places you mention in EVERY single comment. This is WMW, a place to bitch about WAL-MART. Get a clue Matthew, figure it out.

Sick of, Matthew is 37 yrs old.  But he isn’t exactly right in the head from what I’ve observed in my encounters with him so I could see why you would think he is only 12 and that is being rather generous!

He should be locked up, it can’t be safe to let that idiot walk the streets. I’m glad I don’t live in Gresham.

Ok I call for all anti WM posters on WMW to boycott Matthew. I say we also boycott WMW unless they boot Matthew from the site. Strength in numbers, lets get this done. Nobody acknowledge the existence of Matthew Vantress and everyone refuse to post unless Matthew is banned from WMW. We can do this people.

Sick of WM - “I say we also boycott WMW unless they boot Matthew from the site.”

I say “go for it”, why don’t you start the ball rolling and hope the others will follow suit.

just do not answer him back

Jerry in : “I say “go for it,” why don’t you start the ball rolling...” After you,Jerry!

Lets boycott Jerry too.

Message boards/blogs with more sophisticated software have an IGNORE capability.  By simply ignoring a poster by name all their posts seem to disappear. They can still post but no one sees them.

Perhaps the Media Team doesn’t care about increasing the readership of this blog. Who knows?

Ken V in Texas: Well,wouldn’t increased readership perhaps stimulate increased donations and participation by attracting other groups and foundations interested in being part of a solution,instead of part of a problem?

Ken - I already use my own IGNORE system, when I see a post by Matt, I IGNORE it by passing over it, without reading or commenting on it.

i ignore what most of you say on here too.i dont fully read every comment and i dont have time to.i dont have time for and have no respect for brainwashed liberals who cant give a straight answer on why its ok for others to sell china stuff but not wm

Perhaps you have enough time, Matthew, to show me one instance where anyone has posted that “its ok for others to sell china stuff”.

Just one.

You get your answers. You just keep changing the questions.

Very nice Ken V, you hit the nail on the head with that last comment.

i ask them that and they dont answer.actions speak louder than words.their silence tells me that they think its ok for the others to sell china stuff.

Ken,

Since I came aboard, I have seen in your posts you are a man of “facts” and require the occassional hard reference.

What Matthew implied by “its ok for others to sell china stuff”, is that people like SanDiegoView can take pot shots at Wal-Mart in one paragraph, and sing Costco’s praises in the other.

I’ve seen that no less than 5 times over the past few weeks.

For those of you who are otherwise socially inept and do either all their shopping online (or have someone else in the household go out), Costco does carry just as much Chinese-manufactured stuff, as any other chain store.

Same stuff - Costco’s is just prettier and more pricey.

bbrd in: Your narrow ,presumptive parameter(,i.e.socially inept,online shoppers, proxy shopping) fails to mention those who do NOT have Costco in their community or region, and as such would be expected to accept YOUR opinions as fact, re: the prices and/or the types of merchandise selections.

bbrd

When I read SDV’s posts what they say to me is; Wal-Mart treats their employees poorly and pays them even worse. SDV uses Costco as an example HOW wm SHOULD treat their employees. Costco is used in this instance because they are the only direct comparison to SAM’s a WM subsidiary. The fact is I have never read a post in which SDV “praises Costco for selling Chinese Junk (pun intended).

But when you say “Same stuff - Costco’s is just prettier and more pricey”. That is an out and out LIE!

The fact is Costco maintains a 10% (correct me if I’m wrong) mark up, where as WM marks their items as high as they can get away with. The truth is that the same item price comparison between WM (including Sam’s) is cheaper at Costco. Yes Costco does carry luxury items but they also carry many of the same items as Sam’s at a lower price.

You should compare apples to apples, not apples to ROAD APPLES.

Yes Costco does carry luxury items...

Let’s not forget the $500 bottles of wine and fake wood floors Wal-Mart tried. (Plano store, for one).

Apparently Costco and Wal-Mart both carry some “luxury items”, the only difference is Costoc sells what theirs.

“I am so damn tired of you people coming in here with other Wal Mart’s garbage”. ~ Stella (on returns)

ddrb,

Pardon my being presumptious, but the vast majority of the people who post here avoid all large format stores like the plague.

That’s why they either shop online, or get their mother or significant other to do the dirty work…

Hey, Big D(ouchebag),

Best watch how you say the word “LIE” - it may come back and snap you in the ass......

bbrd

What would you call a deliberate attempt to deceive? Maybe; story time, by bbrd.......Snap!....... Ooooooo, did that hurt?

bbrd: How do you KNOW that the shopping habits of the vast majority of the posters here avoid all large format stores like the plague? That indicates certainty,not assumption or presumption. Do you have private info on our personal shopping habits?I remember “Bill” who eventually admitted to doing marketing demographics,while posting here a while back...mmmh...Bill begins with B.....

P.S.in: It is interesting to me that you would refer to shopping as “dirty” work ,when defending retail in general ,and THE biggest retailer,WalMart, in particular. Millions of shoppers doing the dirty work of shopping at Wal Mart!!

Hey Big D… When Are You Going to Get It?

ddrb finally gets it… look at the posts under the “Hey kids! Looking for a tasty treat...” thread.

If you want to have a running “pissing match” with bbrd, just know who you are really dealing with!

Now what were you saying about the word “LIE,” RDS/"Donald"?

bbrd,

Don’t you know that everybody except ScrewedbyWal-Mart and Ken, are this Donald character?  Big D = Big Donald, ddrb = Duh Donald Robert Bob, but, I’m not sure where mary and wallstreet, fit in here, guess he is just trying to fool them.  We all know, that a person needs to use a bunch of screen names, if they are pro Wal-Mart, right?

Tommy in: Maybe a person (or persons) use several screen names to give the “"illusion that there are more pro-WalMart bloggers than there actually are. Kind of like padding the votes!

“We all know, that a person needs to use a bunch of screen names, if they are pro Wal-Mart, right?”

“Tommy” in
Monday, December 10 at 12:53 AM

That is correct “Tommy”. You finally got something right about Walmart and their internet trolls, shills, frauds and fakes. Now maybe you can figure out why they come and post here.

‘calculus’

This is Getting Funnier By The Minute, “Tommy Gun Bob”!

Do you write your own material Bob?  I think you’d have to go back to the days of Archie Bunker to find a character that’s funnier than you!  Professional writers would have a hard time coming up with the crap you do.

Now we have your newest fake blogger, “Tommy” defending another one of your fake bloggers, “bbrd.” That’s priceless!  You’re looking more and more like the desperate little man you are, RDS!

I bet you have some good conversations with yourself, don’t you?

Gee, Wal-Mart’s stock is UP again today, also, sales are UP for the quarter as well, you guys are having QUITE an impact with all your ramblings.  Keep up the good work.

...stock is UP again

Gee, Tommy, do you think it will claw it’s way back to $50?

..sales are UP...

Let’s talk profits. In 2006 Wal-Mart increased sales by $50 billion but only increased profits by $50 million. This is the most ‘efficient’ corporation on the planet?

In 2006 Wal-Mart increased sales by $50 billion but only increased profits by $50 million.

We’ll see how that statement of yours holds-up when Wal-Mart presents their $100 billion fourth quarter, Kenbo…

You know, that’s an awful LOT of zeros. 

In fact, 100 billion has more zeros than you, Screwed, ddrb, and all the rest...combined!

bbrd in: “and all the rest.... combined!” I am so pleased that you didn’t forget to include your “multiselves “ in the long line of zeros.

Ken,

“In 2006 Wal-Mart increased sales by $50 billion but only increased profits by $50 million.”

Unless I’m mistaken, ‘Increased’ means more, not less, therefore your efforts have had little impact on Wal-Mart’s ‘Bottom Line’.  And, don’t you wish YOU had “only increased profits by $50 million”, last year?

Think again Tommy. $50 million may sound great but is only a very small fraction of $50 billion in revenue increase, one tenth of one percent (.1) against an inflation rate Bush clocked at far less than the actual rate of 9-12 percent. No wonder WalMart had to scale back plans for opening stores in the U.S. this year and the stock is in the toilet. If you owned WaMart stock over the past five years, you would have lost at least 40-50 percent in value compared to maintaining equivalent dollar value and the dividend does not make up for what could have been made in owning other stocks that have gained rather than being stagnant like the WalMart 5 year chart. Increased revenue but the stockholders are losing value even under the ruthless employee exploitation model that comes out of Bentonville inclusive of the government public subsidies sponge that WalMart exercises. Under the current leadership- WalMart business philosophy will have another banner year in 2008 screwing over employees and taxpayers while shareholders take another loss. You can forget about any kind of relative financial gain in holding onto WalMart stock.

“Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example”
Mark Twain

And, don’t you wish YOU had “only increased profits by $50 million”, last year?

<a href="http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/research/wizards/SRWFund.asp?Symbol=wmt
“>Wal-Mart one-year net profit margin: 3.6%</i>

I know I’m wasting my time trying to explain business fundamentals to you, Tommy, so instead I’ll put it this way. Take a business plan to a bank for financing that only promises a 3.6% profit margin and see how much money they’re willing to lend you.

It costs Bentonville an <b>enormous</i> amount of money to generate a pitiful amount of profit. I don’t care how many zeros are involved. If you took away all the subsidies, tax breaks, and other non-retail accomodations, Wal-Mart would be running at a loss. Not to mention the cost to the environment, lowering of the standard of living wherever Wal-Mart “strip mines”, and a host of other costs of keeping the Wal-Mart model going.

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that the loudest advocates for Wal-Mart don’t understand the basics of business.

BTW, Tommy, just how much WMT do you own?

<a >Wal-Mart one-year net profit margin: 3.6%</a>

Another link that won’t work…

This time I’m going to keep trying…

<a >Wal-Mart one-year net profit margin: 3.6%</i>

<a >Wal-Mart one-year net profit margin: 3.6%</i>

<a>Wal-Mart one-year net profit margin: 3.6%</i>

<a >Wal-Mart one-year net profit margin: 3.6%</i>

If WMW doesn’t care about cleaning up this blog, why should I?

<a >Wal-Mart one-year net profit margin: 3.6%</i>

I think it’s time to move on.

One more try....

<a >Wal-Mart one-year net profit margin: 3.6%</a>

<a >Wal-Mart one-year net profit margin: 3.6%</a>

:o)

Doh!  Doh!  Doh!  Doh!

Wal-Mart one-year net profit margin: 3.6%

I think it was the </i> tag at the end that was messing it up Ken.

Ken,

“It costs Bentonville an <b>enormous</i> amount of money to generate a pitiful amount of profit.”

As I have little knowledge of how a business works, can you explain to me, how, if a company already has a ‘pitiful amount of profit’, adding to expenses for pay raises and benefit additions, will increase profits?  Besides, isn’t it a fact, that that small 3.6% profit margin is how Wal-Mart is able to keep prices low and got them to be #1, in the first place?  Isn’t higher profit margins, what caused K-Mart and others, to fall behind Wal-Mart?  Isn’t that the crux of Sam Walton’s idea, volume over profit margin?  Higher profit margins are ‘old school’ thinking.

Move Over, “Machine Gun Kelly!”

“Tommy Gun” Bob is spreading his kind of “old school thinking” again!

Once upon a time, the “crux” of Sam Walton’s thinking was to “Buy American.”

ScrewedbyWal-Mart,

“Once upon a time, the “crux” of Sam Walton’s thinking was to “Buy American.””

Didn’t you forget the part about as long as the price was within 10% of foreign vendors.

...adding to expenses for pay raises and benefit additions, will increase profits?

You need to understand something when replying to my* posts, Tommy. I’m not interested in making Wal-Mart better. I’m interested in making it gone! Anything that eats into that pitiful 3.6% profit margin (including unionization) is OK by me.

*I speak only for myself.

good luck ken walmart is not going away whether you like it or not buddy.you area pile of you know what.tommy and i have more brains and know our stuff unlike you who only buys govt and tired old union propaganda and bs.

...walmart is not going away...

Wal-Mart can’t go away from Gresham, huh, matthew, since it’s never been there?

vantress-

Wanted to thank you personally for being the Oregon taxpayer sucker of the year 2007-

Oregon
2005 - Total # of Wal-Mart Employees in State: 11,035
2005 - Estimated # of Wal-Mart Workers on Medicaid: 1,457
2005 - Estimated # of Wal-Mart Dependents on State Health Programs: 889
2005 - 2005 - Estimated Total Cost; Federal & State:$8,037,702

For all the years before and since, we want to thank vantress for willingly subsidizing WalMart at the corporate hog trough of public largess.

Thanks vantress for being the WalMart meat popsicle choirboy with the ‘dead conscience’ sucker you are! Kudos from Bentonville and the multi-billionaire Waltons.

Perhaps a candlelight vigil at 182nd and Powell ( where the Gresham WalMart supercenter was sopposed to go) with ghost dancing by yourself will make you feel better.

SDV in : Meat popsicle? SDV,you’ve outdone yourself-meatsicle----"Matt the meatsicle”...priceless!  But seriously,I would have difficulty believing Matt has ever paid any or very much in taxes. I would have no difficulty at all believing that he avails himself of any and all public services available.

P.S. : in all fairness,irrespective of how annoying I, (IMHO),personally may,or may not , find Matt incredibly annoying and irrelevant in this venue, I would never feel justified that he should not be entitled to the basic necessities or dignities of life---and, to me, that is one of the basic tenents of a civilized society.

well ddrb i have already paid in federal income taxes 3200.00 1300.00 in social security taxes and 1600.00 for income taxes to the state of oregon so enough of your bs that i dont pay very much taxes.hey moron ddrb i dont use welfare or any govt asst programs and never have.you are one arrogant annoying s.o.b. on here ddrb.

I agree ddrb. vantress is most likely a tax evader and has fallen onto welfare when his personal economy was not panning out for him. His hatred for government would reflect a resentment for previous welfare dependency and the arrogant claims about taxes paid are bravado and falsehood to make pretense of contributing to society. Most people would never make such defensive claims and would just ignore the matter. Clearly he thinks only in terms of ‘take’ and cannot fathom even a social conscience for Deborah Shank. This is typical of the ‘love of money’ psychopath mentality that vantress so easily portrays here like a dog taking a dump on your front lawn.

WalMart/Edelman/SBC- Our propaganda and menticide for American obsessive-complusive capitalism worship of WalMart has had some obvious success.

i could care less about shank cause you know if any one else sdv treated shank the way wm was accused of we wouldnt hear shit from you and thats a fact.im on welfare huh?hey moron obviously you didnt totally read my posting.you are a disgrace to society sdv and the rea lpeople dont buy one piece of your constant edelmann bs and propaganda on wm.

mvin : You know,Matt, a person just can’t win for losing,with you.