Wal-Mart Not Giving Up On D.C

This has nothing to do with the above article, but does have to do with how much money the Waltons give to charity, compared to someone else!!  It is an example of what some liberals give:

Obama Stingy with Charities
Wednesday, March 26, 2008 12:28 PM
By: Newsmax Staff

Tax returns released by the Barack Obama presidential campaign show that Obama and his wife Michelle gave less than 1 percent of their total $1.2 million income to charity from 2000 through 2004.

The Obamas reported that they gave $2,350 to charity in 2000 — 1 percent of their $240,505 adjusted gross income — $1,470 (.5 percent) in 2001, $1,050 (.4 percent) in 2002, $3,400 (1.4 percent) in 2003, and $2,500 (1.2 percent) in 2004.

The total for the four years was $10,770, “a lowball figure compared to other politicians,” the New York Post reported in a story headlined “Those Stingy Obamas.”

The Obamas increased their charitable contributions to $77,315 in 2005, when their adjusted gross income was $1.65 million — including $1.2 million from Barack Obama’s book royalties.

And in 2006, the Obamas contributed $60,307 — 6.1 percent of their $983,826 AGI — including $22,500 to controversial pastor Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ and $13,107 to the Congressional Black Caucus.

Looks like Obama cares a lot about charities and the people they help!!

This has nothing to do with the above article...

You should have quit when you were ahead.

The No. 1 givers Bill and Melinda Gates, the world’s largest international donors, who made history (in 2005) by giving their estimated $3 billion Microsoft Corp. dividend to their foundation. It’s one of the largest donations in history by a living donor. To put it into perspective, that ONE gift is THREE TIMES BIGGER than the amount that America’s RICHEST Family, the descendants of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. founder Sam Walton, has given during their ENTIRE lifetimes, according to our ranking. ~ Business Week

And up until a few years ago there was no Bill and Melinda Gates foundation and the world was crying foul because Bill was not donating any of his money.  Add to that list Warren Buffet.  The protests still continue with Larry Ellison because he hasn’t opened up his coffers.  What about Larry Page and Sergey Brin, I don’t see them donating billions of dollars from their fortune.  The list can go on.

Timing Ken… can you truthfully say that anytime in the future that any of the Walmart family members will NOT donate a huge portion of their billions?

...Walmart family members will NOT donate a huge portion of their billions?

Based on past performance I’d say the chances are somewhere between slim and none.

Let’s not forget there is a whole new generation of greedy, little Bentonvillians. If the Walton clan planned to give away vast sums of their money, why would they be fighting so hard against the inheritance tax?

Ken V,

“why would they be fighting so hard against the inheritance tax?”

Huge charitable contributions can offset the inheritance tax!!  Notice how Warren Buffett decided that he wasn’t going to pass on his wealth to his kids and then all of a sudden decided to pledge most of it to the Bill and Melinds Gates Foundation, rather than have the government (taxpayers)get it?

Besides, I was talking about Obama, not the Gates or Warren Buffett!!  Even YOU probably give more than 1% a year to charity!!

RDS Why do you talk at all?

"Based on past performance I’d say the chances are somewhere between slim and none. “

Now take us back 10 years.... And based on past performance I’d say the chances are somwhere between slim and none that Bill Gates or Warren buffet would be donating Billions of dollars to charity. 

You may be right Ken V.  They may not donate alot of money..... but you’re way off base by make a statement like “based on past performance”.  I’ve just proven that.

AA,

“RDS Why do you talk at all?”

And, why is it that when you shine a flashlight in your left ear, a beam of light comes out of your right ear?

I’d hate to see any descendants of mine fall into the category of what I call “idle rich”...I hope they’ll feel compelled to do something productive and useful and challenging...working on cures for cancer, or figuring out ways to bring culture and education to the underprivileged, or becoming missionaries for free enterprise in the Third World. Or maybe - and this is strictly my idea - there’s another Walton merchant lurking in the wings somewhere down the line. ~ Sam Walton

Hmm, seems to me someone has some sour grapes about how well a certain someone has been doing in the election.  Seriously, get over yourself RDS.  Comparing Obama to Walmart, are you kidding?

Is Obama going around docking people’s OT hours on purpose and providing really shitty health insurance to millions of employees?  And what and how much he wants to give to this charity or his church is a rather personal matter even though he is a presidential candidate.  Walmart and the Waltons are a corporation my dear man.  Shoot, you need us to really point this out to you.

Well, I was in a bad mood but now I just have to laugh my ass off as I leave for the gym.  You are passionate in your arguments RDS but as usual I just have to shake my head.

corgishepmom,

“Is Obama going around docking people’s OT hours on purpose and providing really shitty health insurance to millions of employees?”

Some how, you people still don’t get the fact that the WALTON’S DON’T OWN WAL-MART ANYMORE, it’s a ‘public’ company, owned by the stockholders!!  The Walton’s don’t dock people’s OT or provide shitty insurance at Wal-Mart, because Wal-Mart’s employees are not the Walton’s employees!!  I own 50 shares of Wal-Mart stock, does that mean when I go to the store, I can tell employees how many hours they can work or tell the insurance dept. to change the insurance?  And, how do you know, maybe Barack Obama might be a Wal-Mart stockholder, would that mean that HE docks people’s OT and provides them with shitty insurance?

“And what and how much he wants to give to this charity or his church is a rather personal matter even though he is a presidential candidate.”

OH, I see, when it’s Barack Obama, giving to CHARITY, it’s a “personal matter”, but, with the Waltons, it’s “A moral outrage”!!

“the Waltons are a corporation my dear man”

So, you are saying, that the Walton’s “personal wealth” is a ‘corporation’, right?

I just shake my head most of the time too, at what people “THINK” they know and how “LITTLE” they actually know!!

Some of On the Edge Marketinga s most popular accessories are custom folding chairs. Small Appliance

...how do you know, maybe Barack Obama might be a Wal-Mart stockholder...

RDS, while I am not sure about Sen. Obama, according to an interview Wal-Mart Watch alum Nu Wexler gave, WMW doesown (token) shares of WMT (I’m guessing only so that they can gain access to the annual shareholders meeting).

Does that mean WMW can tell employees how many hours they can work or tell the insurance dept. to change the insurance?

bbrd;

I have heard that before, that unions buy some stock in the companies whose employees they represent or want to represent, so they get the annual stockholders report, so they know how much they can ‘hit the company up for’, in wage increases and increased benefits.

Ken V in Texas: In reference to your earlier posts re: inheritance taxes and philanthropy in Walton family,here’s an excerpt from the Nation,2005------------------------------------------We are supposed to applaud philanthropy--the very word connotes altruism and “giving back"--but Walton and Wal-Mart giving serves as a reminder that philanthropy provides an alternative to taxation, a way for rich people and corporations to decide what to do with their extra money, as opposed to letting the rest of us decide through our elected governments. Since charitable donations are a tax write-off, as Krehely points out, “they are supposed to benefit the public good.” He thinks it is reasonable to ask whether a family’s--or a company’s--philanthropy serves the common good, or at least enough good “to make up for the public revenue that we’re losing.”

Funny he should mention taxes: Wal-Mart and the Waltons have, after all, been notably reluctant to pay them. Not only has the company lobbied for tax breaks in communities all over the nation, the Waltons--the family that former Wal-Mart board member Hillary Clinton has called “the best America has to offer"--have campaigned vigorously against the estate tax. They have donated money to its opponents, Republicans like John Thune of South Dakota and David Vitter of Louisiana, and enlisted one of Washington’s top lobbying firms, Patton Boggs--a leading anti-estate tax lobbyist--to represent their interests.

Chuck Collins of Responsible Wealth, a group of well-off people who strongly favor the estate tax, observes that the Waltons sometimes say the estate tax is not a priority for the family. “That may be true from their perspective,” he says, “but it’s a bit like an elephant saying it’s really not interested in stepping on anthills. When you’re America’s wealthiest family, you are a philanthropic and lobbying heavyweight even on your minor interests.” For instance, Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, one of a handful of Democrats who draw checks from the Waltons, supports estate-tax repeal (or crippling “reform"). “Senator Lincoln will wax eloquent about the small farmers of Arkansas,” Collins says, “but what’s really on her mind is Walton.”

In addition to campaigning specifically against the estate tax, the Waltons also give money to groups that generally favor tax giveaways to the rich, like Americans for Tax Reform. And the Waltons have already reaped the benefits of tax policies enacted by the conservatives they helped put in office: This year Bush’s dividend tax cut will save the family $51 million, according to Lee Farris, an estate-tax expert with the Boston-based United for a Fair Economy.

The Waltons’ philanthropy--and their hostility to paying their fair share of taxes--also needs to be viewed in the context of tax subsidies Wal-Mart has received for building new stores, which Good Jobs First places at more than $1 billion, an estimate that does not include the many other ways taxpayers subsidize Wal-Mart stores, for instance, through numerous forms of public assistance--Medicaid, Food Stamps, public housing--that often allow workers to subsist on Wal-Mart’s low wages. A report by the House Education and Workforce Committee conservatively places the latter at $420,750 per store; the Wal-Mart Foundation’s per-store charitable giving is just 11 percent of that amount ($47,222).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

"One item in the Walton Family Foundation’s most recent IRS filing shows how uninterested this family is in true social responsibility: a measly $6,000 to something called the Wal-Mart Associates in Need Fund. Contrast that with the millions the family spends promoting right-wing causes, and it becomes painfully clear that the Waltons value conservative ideology far more than they value the human beings who have made them the richest family on earth. Told about these figures, Kathleen MacDonald, a Wal-Mart candy department clerk in Aiken, South Carolina, responded bluntly, “All I have to say about that is, it doesn’t surprise me. Like Bush, they don’t have a clue what working families go through.” MacDonald would like to see The Simple Life do a show about working at Wal-Mart. “I could see Paris Hilton on a register at Christmastime, or stocking shelves,” she says. Or perhaps Alice Walton as a greeter, on her feet all day, thanking us for shopping at Wal-Mart.” ---------------------------------

ddrb,

“have campaigned vigorously against the estate tax.”

Who gets hurt worse by the estate taxes?  Is it the ultra-wealthy?  Or, is it the family farmer, the small business owner, or the ‘grandma’ who has managed to build up a ‘big’ retirement package?  If a multi-billionaire passes on his wealth to say 3 children, after taxes, they will still all be billionaires or at least multi-millionaires!!  But, if a farmer or a small businessman passes on his wealth to say three children, they could end up having to sell the farm or business, just to be able to pay the taxes!!  Also, a couple could work hard together, to build up wealth and when one dies, the other has to give up much of that wealth in estate taxes!!

You have brought up many times, the “Dead Peasant” insurance policies, how are Estate Taxes any different, other than the fact that the government is supposed to WORK for us, so in essence, the employee (government) gets to collect on the death of one of their bosses (a taxpayer)!!

Have you never met a TAX that you didn’t like?  You seem to continue to talk about how much MORE taxes you would like to see people pay!!  Remember: it’s people who pay taxes, even if they are part of a corporation!!

No RDS, since you don’t see the obvious let me tell it to you like you are a 3 yr old.  The Waltons may not be a corporation but the billions they have are off the blood, sweat and tears that is the Walmart machine.  DUH!

And highly doubtful that Obama is a Walmart stockholder as both he and Edwards have helped with the grassroots campaign against the company:

http://blog.wakeupwalmart.com/ufcw/2006/11/obama_and_edwar.html

I have seen no mention of John McCain’s contributions.Here is an excerpt from Harper’s Magazine: Barack Obama- and Hillary Clinton have received a fair amount of press scrutiny. The same is not true of John McCain, which is somewhat surprising since he is essentially the sole donor to the John and Cindy McCain Foundation, and his wife is its chairman and president.

Between 2001 and 2006, McCain contributed roughly $950,000 to the foundation. That accounted for all of its listed income other than for $100 that came from an anonymous donor. During that same period, the McCain foundation made contributions of roughly $1.6 million. More than $500,000 went to his kids’ private schools, most of which was donated when his children were attending those institutions. So McCain apparently received major tax deductions for supporting elite schools attended by his children.

McCain has net assets of between $20 million and $32 million, making him the seventh wealthiest member of the Senate. His wealth is tied to Cindy Hensley McCain, his second wife and heiress to Hensley & Co., a major Anheuser-Busch distributor.

Collectively, McCain’s kids’ private schools rank as the largest recipient of his foundation’s money. The largest individual recipient is the U.S. Naval Academy Foundation, which received $210,000 in both 2001 and 2002. That money was earmarked for conferences that “bring together key military officers and civilian academics responsible for ethics education and character developments.”

The McCain Foundation also has given large amounts to medical causes of various kinds, with a focus on craniofacial research, and the Halo Trust, a landmine-clearing organization. Small amounts have gone to the Valley Youth Theatre ($200) in Phoenix; Cool our Troops ($500), which provides Misty Mates to troops in Iraq; the Child Crisis Center in Phoenix ($250), which provides emergency shelter and programs for abused kids; and the American Cancer Society’s Neighborhood Cancer Program ($50)..

I contacted McCain’s campaign to ask about the foundation’s contributions. A campaign spokesman, who asked to speak anonymously, said the foundation is funded nearly entirely by proceeds from McCain’s book sales.

It’s impossible to know how much McCain has saved in taxes through his foundation’s donations since he has thus far refused to release his tax returns (and won’t commit to releasing them after formally becoming the nominee either). There’s nothing illegal or improper about the foundation’s contributions, but it’s not exactly the pattern of giving you’d expect from someone who has cultivated an anti-elitist image.

* * *
This story was reported with help from Taimur Khan.(Feb.2008)

P.S.-The author of above excerpt is Ken Silverstein,with assisstance from Taimur Khan.

Corgi: Here are some fresh stats----------------------------------------March 30, 2008
Gallup Daily: Obama Now at 52% to Clinton’s 42&#xMc;Cain still has slight advantage over both Democratic opponentsUSA Election 2008 Gallup Daily Americas Northern America PRINCETON, NJ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Barack Obama has extended his lead over Hillary Clinton among Democrats nationally to 52% to 42%, the third consecutive Gallup Poll Daily tracking report in which he has held a statistically significant lead, and Obama’s largest lead of the year so The latest results are based on Gallup Poll Daily tracking conducted March 27-29. Obama did particularly well in interviewing conducted on March 29.

This marks the first time either candidate has held a double-digit lead over the other since Feb. 4-6, at which point Clinton led Obama by 11 percentage points.

According to tracking interviews from March 25-29, Survey Methods

Gallup is interviewing no fewer than 1,000 U.S. adults nationwide each day during 2008.

The general election results are based on combined data from March 25-29, 2008. For results based on this sample of 4,407 registered voters, the maximum margin of sampling error is ±2 percentage points.

The Democratic nomination results are based on combined data from March 27-29, 2008. For results based on this sample of 1,228 Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters, the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.

(Gallup,Thousand Reasons)

Here is a new article from the Huffington Post (The commentaries on the Huffington Post are excellent,for those interested in a trip to HuffPo)---------------------------------------------------------------------Hillary Clinton and Wal-Mart: What About Debbie Shank?  Joseph A. Palermo
Posted March 27, 2008 | 12:10 AM (EST)

---------------------------------------------------------------------

There is no story in recent memory that better illustrates the tattered social contract between workers and corporations in this country than the story of Debbie Shank and Wal-Mart. Ms. Shank recently became a “Gold Star” mother when her 18-year-old son, Jeremy, was killed in Iraq.

Years ago while she was working for miserable wages as a shelf stocker at Wal-Mart, Ms. Shank was the innocent victim of a terrible automobile accident when a big rig slammed into her on a Missouri freeway. She suffered severe neurological damage that has permanently impaired her memory and motor skills and has made it impossible for her to function outside of the constant care of a nursing home.

Shank and her husband, Jim (who is recovering from prostate cancer and works two jobs), were awarded about $750,000 in a lawsuit against the trucking company. After the Shanks paid their legal fees, $417,000 was placed in a trust to pay for Debbie’s long-term care. Wal-Mart sued the Shanks for $470,000 in medical expenses.

The behemoth corporation that made $11 billion in profits last year claimed the Shanks owed it the money because of a fine-print clause in her employee health benefits package that stipulates that Wal-Mart would recoup all medical costs if any court settlement had been reached. A Republican judge ruled in favor of Wal-Mart and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case. The ruling will completely clean out (and then some) the trust that was set aside for Debbie Shank’s long-term care. Wal-Mart issued a terse statement worthy of an Adolf Eichmann defending their actions saying the corporation was only following “very specific rules.” In other words, the Shanks could f--k themselves.

Hillary Clinton was on the Board of Directors of Wal-Mart for 6 years. Wal-Mart paid her $18,000 each year she was on the board and $1,500 for every meeting she attended. She accumulated at least $100,000 in Wal-Mart stock. This might be the reason she refuses to release her tax records even though Barack Obama has done so. Maybe it’s time we demand that she give back this blood money? Moreover, when Hillary Clinton was with the Rose Law firm in Little Rock she defended Wal-Mart against workers who tried to organize unions making the firm, in the words of labor leader Jonathan Tasini, “one of the most active anti-union law firms in the country.”

Clinton’s shameless posturing about the Michigan and Florida Democratic delegations is just more of the same from this Wal-Mart-loving corporate shill. She pretends to be standing for “democratic” principles while she attempts a legal trick to strip the nomination from Obama. I saw Hillary Clinton tonight on Fox News talking up her Michigan-Florida demands with Greta Van Susteran. Howard Dean and the DNC Rules Committee should simply divide the delegates proportionately between the candidates based on the over-all delegate count nationally each candidate has won after all of the primaries are over. Michigan and Florida will have a seat at the table in Denver and Hillary Clinton will not be allowed to screw the base of the Democratic Party, which seems to be her specialty nowadays. Maybe she can talk to her lawyer friends over at Wal-Mart for help in this dispute.

Maybe Hillary Clinton should visit Debbie and Jim Shank in Missouri and tell them how sorry she is for what her lovely Arkansas corporate campaign donor has done to them. Maybe she can bring along a Fox News camera crew.

corgishepmom,

“The Waltons may not be a corporation but the billions they have are off the blood, sweat and tears that is the Walmart machine.  DUH!”

One question, do you own any stocks, mutual funds, a 401K, or IRA?  If you do, then you have made money off the blood, sweat, and tears of the workers of any company held in those investment vehicles!!  So, where are you any different then the Waltons, except for the fact that their father started Wal-Mart and your father didn’t start ANY of the companies you are invested in!!

“And highly doubtful that Obama is a Walmart stockholder”

Unless he keeps daily watch on all of his ‘blind trust’ investments, it is very likely that one or more of those investments could hold Wal-Mart stock on any given day!!