Posted on 05/26/2005 6:27:37 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Because of Wal-Mart's inadequate wages and benefits, Wal-Mart employees are eligible for $2.5 billion in Federal assistance, which comes from your tax dollars.
(Excerpt) Read more at wakeupwalmart.com ...
Tell that to the islamic radicals who want to destroy our way of life. Maybe, if we all hold hands and sing, things will be okay. Yeah, right.
I'm a champion for free-enterprise but I have to admit that Wal-Mart seems to really want to help the socialist unions.
Big surprise... you don't want to talk to anyone who calls you on your anti-capitalistic, pro-socialist BS.
For someone that "doesn't want to talk to (fill in the blank of a growing list)" it sure never shuts the crap up.
Until Aliska hit the [ABUSE] button in response to replies to her posts, I had thought that was the entire purpose of FreeRepublic.com. Boy, is my face red.
I am still waiting for an answer for my question. I was first.
Do you think that choice should be made by the government?
Where there is justice and kindness there is no need for laws and government.
Maybe on Fantasy Island, where it seems you wish to live.
Yes. Here and now the less justice and kindness we have the more government we will get. As it should be!
"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law."
(Rom 13)
Freemarketeers induce more government. And if they do not self-restrain themselves the socialist government will restrain them.
It's ironic. None of any of this affects me now peronally. I just think of people throughout my life who were barely making it and the ones I see every day now who are sucking it up except for the mailman (another government employee with, you know, a living wage and perks).
And I don't agree with JPII, be not afraid. I'm very afraid. Now somebody wants to know why we don't attack teachers. They are paid an above-living wage, have adequate benefits, have a safe pension plan, have a union, are government employees, and the schools are a total mess.
And the people are supposed to pull ourselves up by the bootstraps to get a better job by enrolling in the socialist-run colleges, some of the expensive eastern ones being among the worst.
The drive-thru line at McDonald's was terrible last night. They didn't have enough help and are "now hiring". I had to wait and wait and wait, and when the lady finally brought my food out to my car and apologized, I assured her that it was ok. I understood. This in the new mall with the Home Depot, the new grocery store that is not locally owned, and Starbucks (a novelty in my area) in one of the most affluent parts of our large, multi-city urban area where it is one of the safest places to work. I asked a nice-looking young man when I paid "not enough help?" He said "just stupidity". One can only guess.
Is resisting a corrupt government policies and monopolistic corporate powers anti-God?
I am thinking I'm probably going to have to seek a job at the local Walmart. Anyone have any other ideas for me? I have worked for my husband's business for over 25 yrs. with no salary except my living. That seems to be winding down, and I can almost see the handwriting on the wall for me needing to find some sort of a job that a 59 yr. old woman won't collapse working at. What is the old joke? Watch out that your man doesn't trade you in for two 30 yr. olds when you turn 60. Mine hasn't - so far. I think younger women who have already been divorced a time or two are ready for security and want to find a fat old man, with a fat life insurance policy, a fat salary, a fat savings account, fat stocks and bonds, fat property holdings, and a fat head that truly believes the little dear loves him because he is so irresistible! These poor old guys don't stand a chance if a real gold digging conniver who doesn't give a rip how hard the first (old) wife worked to help accumulate what they have starts laying groundwork. I'm afraid one of these gals would be VERY disappointed when she finally did get a load of our financial portfolio. Ha.
One woman I knew from the old hometown married a very prominent man. She hid the fact that he beat her black and blue on a regular basis. When he beat her, she would just hide in the bedroom of the old mansion until her bruises and scrapes healed. Then he finally filed for a divorce, and no one would believe her about the beatings. Actually, a lot of their money came from HER family inheritance; however, her husband had so much clout in that little town that the court awarded him everything (according to her story) and she was left with nothing. That sounded pretty wild to me, but maybe I'm just naive.
It depends. How do you interpret this passage from Saint Paul? Why the Jews did not recognise Jesus as Christ? Was it not because they expected Messiah to liberate them from the corrupt, idolatrous, foreign occupation and unjust exploatation while Jesus ordered them to submit and told them that Kingdom of God is not from this world?
When Christians should or have right to resist the unjust government? A good question.
I don't have the answer, which will surprise some. Given the grace, I could possibly die for my faith in Christ, or lay down my life for another person, but I wouldn't meekly submit to death by an unjust government, corrupt corporation, or Islamic or any other fanatic, some Christian sects included, without fighting back.
Jesus did die for religion, but betrayal from one of his own and political expediency were what condemned him, the primary cause of death being crucifixion (as we know). Like you said, the people wanted an earthly Messiah who would deliver them from Roman occupation and oppression which would have involved violently overthrowing them.
I wonder if my ancestors will be judged for taking up arms against the British king who wanted a piece of the pie. Those who live by the sword will die by the sword and all that.
I guess the bottom line is that there will always be problems in society that have to do with employment, low pay, and people having to move. I don't think anyone can deny those problems exist, it's just when the government tries to intervene that things get worse.
A prime example was the migration of the Okies during the 30s, the result of the depression and the dust bowl. As tough as it was for most of them, by the end of the 1930s they had all settled in California and eventually moved into the middle class. Who knows what would have happened had the government come up with some "program" to keep them from moving west.
Very reasonable, rational and polite post. It actually makes good sense in that particular example. Overall, the people got through it and lived to prosper. However, they did tend to migrate in one-generational family units, probably took grandma and/or grandpa along; some may have been left behind. Historically, there has always been the adventurous male and sometimes female who left the nest and ventured far away to make a life for himself/herself, usually for economic reasons but sometimes not. Frequently, for one reason or another, they never saw their families again. Sometimes the government should intervene for the good of all, and people will never agree on it. Some might argue that it was too much intervention when the government called out the National Guard to prevent looting after the 1906 earthquake in San Francisco. I never heard that anybody did.
Doing a quick fact check, it seems the National Guard turned around and did some looting link
"Colonel Maus informed me that within the last three days between fifteen and twenty members of the National Guard of California had been arrested by the sentries of his regiment for looting in the burned district, principally in Chinatown; that some had been turned loose and others had been sent back to their commanding officers in custody."
"I am still waiting for an answer for my question. I was first."
Fine, I'll give you an answer. Should I feel guilty about living a lifestyle that I earned as a business owner? If I recall the question correctly, well my answer would be no. Where were the employees when I started the business and worked for little to no pay while getting it off the ground? Where were the employees when I was working 16 hour days 7 days a week? No, I wouldn't feel guilty for creating a successful business that sustained jobs for other people. Jobs that they find acceptable at the agreed upon compensation.
Only those that are envious of my position would expect me to feel guilty for being in that postition. Of course, that scenario is imagined as I am but a lowly employee of an employer that can enjoy the lifestyle you describe. I don't mind tho', because if I felt I was being treated unfairly, I would find another employer or start my own business.
If their is a general expectation that successful entrepaneours feel guilty for their success, do you think we will have many people willing to take those risks? Where will those jobs come from?
Let assume that the truly "free market" is possible (it never was and never will). Then it depends what you mean the "government controlled markets". If the Soviet style central planned economy then probably the imaginary "free market" economy could be a little "better".
But if you mean by the "government controlled markets" the system where the tariffs regulate imports like it was in USA until recently and other regulations (like that you cannot release the toxins into the air and water) then "government controlled markets" are better.
Certainly it is my business how ANY business operates. Business don't operate in a vacuum. When a company operates in a manner that causes harm to my community, legal or not, or even has an appearance of causing harm, legal or not, it is my business.
Your response is nonsense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.