• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 17:33
CEST 23:33
KST 06:33
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL21] Ro4 Preview: On Course12Code S Season 1 - RO8 Preview7[ASL21] Ro8 Preview Pt2: Progenitors8Code S Season 1 - RO12 Group A: Rogue, Percival, Solar, Zoun13[ASL21] Ro8 Preview Pt1: Inheritors16
Community News
Code S Season 1 (2026) - RO8 Results1Weekly Cups (May 4-10): Clem, MaxPax, herO win1Maestros of The Game 2 announcement and schedule !11Weekly Cups (April 27-May 4): Clem takes triple0RSL Revival: Season 5 - Qualifiers and Main Event12
StarCraft 2
General
Team Liquid Map Contest #22 - The Finalists Code S Season 1 (2026) - RO8 Results MaNa leaves Team Liquid Weekly Cups (May 4-10): Clem, MaxPax, herO win Code S Season 1 - RO8 Preview
Tourneys
2026 GSL Season 2 Qualifiers Maestros of The Game 2 announcement and schedule ! $5,000 WardiTV Spring Championship 2026 SC2 INu's Battles#16 <BO.9> Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2)
Strategy
Custom Maps
[D]RTS in all its shapes and glory <3 [A] Nemrods 1/4 players
External Content
Mutation # 525 Wheel of Misfortune The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 524 Death and Taxes Mutation # 523 Firewall
Brood War
General
vespene.gg — BW replays in browser Pros React to: TvT Masterclass in FlaSh vs Light BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ ASL21 Strategy, Pimpest Plays Discussions Flashes ASL S21 Ro8 Review
Tourneys
[ASL21] Semifinals B [Megathread] Daily Proleagues Escore Tournament StarCraft Season 2 [ASL21] Semifinals A
Strategy
Fighting Spirit mining rates [G] Hydra ZvZ: An Introduction Simple Questions, Simple Answers Muta micro map competition
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne Starcraft Tabletop Miniature Game PC Games Sales Thread
Dota 2
The Story of Wings Gaming
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
Vanilla Mini Mafia Mafia Game Mode Feedback/Ideas TL Mafia Community Thread Five o'clock TL Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread UK Politics Mega-thread YouTube Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
The herO Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread [Req][Books] Good Fantasy/SciFi books
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread McBoner: A hockey love story Formula 1 Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
streaming software Strange computer issues (software) [G] How to Block Livestream Ads
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
How EEG Data Can Predict Gam…
TrAiDoS
ramps on octagon
StaticNine
Funny Nicknames
LUCKY_NOOB
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1779 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 809

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 807 808 809 810 811 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
January 22 2014 18:47 GMT
#16161
On January 23 2014 03:44 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 03:38 oneofthem wrote:
a flood is more efficient at putting water across land but that doesn't mean you prefer a flood over a field of rice.

mmkay

That's a pretty bad definition of more efficient.

point is, the economy is an ecosystem and you need enough circulation to fuel the whole thing. walmart is like burning down the rainforest to plant corn. it does not invest in the community at all
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
January 22 2014 18:47 GMT
#16162
On January 23 2014 03:46 Nyxisto wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 03:42 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 03:38 farvacola wrote:
Considering that Wal-Mart employees are the single largest employer specific group recipient of Medicaid and food stamps, I'd say you're wrong.

At the end of 2012, there were 3,216 Wal-Mart employees who were enrolled in Wisconsin public health care programs, more than any other employer. Add in the dependents of Wal-Mart workers and the total jumps up to 9,207.

Factoring in what taxpayers contribute for public programs, the report estimated that one Wal-Mart supercenter employing 300 workers could cost taxpayers at least $904,000 annually.


Wal-Mart's low wages cost taxpayers

Relevance?

Lots of small retailers with employees on benefits is better than a big retailer with employees on benefits because...


The thing is that small retailers are struggling to stay afloat while Walmart swims in a see of money.

So? Owners of small retailers don't have some special right to profit.
Nyxisto
Profile Joined August 2010
Germany6287 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-01-22 18:56:30
January 22 2014 18:54 GMT
#16163
On January 23 2014 03:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 03:46 Nyxisto wrote:
On January 23 2014 03:42 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 03:38 farvacola wrote:
Considering that Wal-Mart employees are the single largest employer specific group recipient of Medicaid and food stamps, I'd say you're wrong.

At the end of 2012, there were 3,216 Wal-Mart employees who were enrolled in Wisconsin public health care programs, more than any other employer. Add in the dependents of Wal-Mart workers and the total jumps up to 9,207.

Factoring in what taxpayers contribute for public programs, the report estimated that one Wal-Mart supercenter employing 300 workers could cost taxpayers at least $904,000 annually.


Wal-Mart's low wages cost taxpayers

Relevance?

Lots of small retailers with employees on benefits is better than a big retailer with employees on benefits because...


The thing is that small retailers are struggling to stay afloat while Walmart swims in a see of money.

So? Owners of small retailers don't have some special right to profit.


My point is that decent human beings have to close their businesses because they can't compete with assholes who own billions of dollars but don't pay their employees enough to support themselves or their families.

If you don't think that's a little unfair and unreasonable I don't know what's wrong with you.
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18857 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-01-22 19:19:27
January 22 2014 19:06 GMT
#16164
Walmart’s entry into a new market has a strongly negative effect on existing retailers.[4] Supermarkets and discount variety stores are the most adversely affected, suffering sales declines of 10 to 40% after Walmart opens.[5]

The value of Walmart to the economy will likely be less than the value of the jobs and businesses it replaces. A study estimating the future impact of Walmart on the grocery industry in California found that “the full economic impact of those lost wages and benefits throughout southern California could approach $2.8 billion per year.”[6]

A study of Chicago in 2009 shows that businesses within one mile of a Walmart Supercenter have a 25% chance of shuttering in the first year, and a 40% chance of shuttering by the second year, when compared with stores farther than one mile from the Supercenter.[7]

Local businesses keep more money in the community. A 2009 study of the differential impact of locally-owned businesses and big-box stores in New Orleans shows that while big-box stores only recirculate 16% of revenues into the community, locally-owned businesses recirculate twice as much.[8]

A 2011 study of the St. Louis region found that as public tax dollars were diverted to big box retailers and shopping malls – more than $5.8 billion over 20 years – small business suffered. Over 600 small businesses (10 employees or less) closed during this time while retail sales have not increased in years.[9]

A 2009 study from the Center for Economic Studies at the U.S. Census Bureau found that the entry and growth of big-box stores has a strong negative impact on the growth and survival of nearby independent and small-chain stores selling the same types of goods.[10]




[5] Kenneth E. Stone, Georgeanne Artz, and Albery Myles. “The Economic Impact of Wal-Mart Supercenters on Existing Businesses in Mississippi.” Mississippi University Extension Service. 2002. http://Wal-Mart.3cdn.net/6e5ad841f247a909d7_bcm6b9fdo.pdf ; O. Capps, and J.M, Griffin. “Effect of a Mass Merchandiser on Traditional Food Retailers.” Journal of Food Distribution 29 (February 1998): 1-7; Vishal P. Singh, Karsten T. Hansen, and Robert C. Blattberg. “Impact of a Wal-Mart Supercenter on a Traditional Supermarket: An Empirical Investigation.” February 2004.

http://chicagobooth.edu/research/workshops/marketing/archive/WorkshopPapers/hansen.pdf; Kusum L. Ailawadi, Jie Zhang, Aradhna Krishna, and Michael W. Kruger. “When Wal-Mart Enters: How Incumbent Retailers React and How This Affects Their Sales Outcomes.” Journal of Marketing Research 47.4 (August 2010).

[6] Martin Boarnet, and Randall Crane. “The Impact of Big Box Grocers on Southern California: Jobs, Wages, and Municipal Finances.” Orange County Business Council. September 2009.

[7] Julie Davis, David Merriman, Lucia Samayoa, Brian Flanagan,Ron Baiman, and Joe Persky. “The Impact of an Urban Wal-Mart Store on Area Businesses: An Evaluation of One Chicago Neighborhood’s Experience”, Center for Urban Research and Learning, Loyola University. December 2009, pg 17.

[8] Thinking Outside the Box: A report on independent merchants and the New Orleans econo­my, September, 2009. The Urban Conservancy in partnership with Civic Economics.

[9] “An Assessment of the Effectiveness and Fiscal Impacts of the Use of Local Development Incentives in the St. Louis Region” East-West Gateway Council of Governments; Jan 2011

[10] “Mom-and-Pop Meet Big Box: Complements or Substitutes?” U.S. Census Bureau – Center for Economic Studies. 9/1/09.


Counties and parishes with a greater concentration of small, locally-owned businesses have healthier populations — with lower rates of mortality, obesity and diabetes — than do those that rely on large companies with “absentee” owners, according to a national study by sociologists at LSU and Baylor University.


“What stands out about this research is that we often think of the economic benefits and job growth that small business generates, but we don’t think of the social benefits to small communities,” said Troy C. Blanchard, Ph.D., lead author and associate professor of sociology at LSU. “This study highlights not only the economic benefits of small business, but its contributions to health and well-being.”


The study of 3,060 counties and parishes in the contiguous United States, published online in the Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society and forthcoming in its March print issue, brings new evidence to a body of research literature and a debate among sociologists, who traditionally have advanced two competing hypotheses about how small business impacts public health.


Some sociologists argue that small businesses — unlike chain retail “big box” stores and large manufacturing plants — have a greater investment in the community and thus have more at stake when it comes to employee health. The LSU and Baylor researchers, who analyzed national population, health, business and housing data, found that the greater the proportion of small businesses, the healthier the population.


“It appears there is an entrepreneurial culture that promotes public health through a can-do climate, a practical problem-solving approach that takes control of its own community,” said co-author Charles M. Tolbert, Ph.D., chair of the sociology department at Baylor. “The alternative is the attitude that ‘Things are out of our control.’”


Communities may become dependent on outside investment to solve problems, the researchers wrote.
Their findings are a departure from the traditional conclusion that “bigger is better.”


U.S. Counties with Thriving Small Businesses Have Healthier Residents

In this study, Civic Economics analyzed data from fifteen independent retailers and seven independent restaurants, all located in Salt Lake City, and compared their local economic impact with four national retail chains (Barnes & Noble, Home Depot, Office Max, and Target) and three national restaurant chains (Darden, McDonald’s, and P.F. Chang’s). The study found that the local retailers return a total of 52 percent of their revenue to the local economy, compared to just 14 percent for the national chain retailers. Similarly, the local restaurants recirculate an average of 79 percent of their revenue locally, compared to 30 percent for the chain eateries. What accounts for the difference? In a handy graphic, Civic Economics shows the breakdown. Independent businesses spend more on local labor, goods procured locally for resale, and services from local providers. This means a much larger share of the money you spend at a locally owned store stays in your local economy, supporting a variety of other businesses and jobs.


Key Studies on Big-Box Retail & Independent Business

Sometimes, and I know this is utter heresy, it's better if capital can't move quite so far or as easily.
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
January 22 2014 19:30 GMT
#16165
On January 23 2014 03:54 Nyxisto wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 03:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 03:46 Nyxisto wrote:
On January 23 2014 03:42 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 03:38 farvacola wrote:
Considering that Wal-Mart employees are the single largest employer specific group recipient of Medicaid and food stamps, I'd say you're wrong.

At the end of 2012, there were 3,216 Wal-Mart employees who were enrolled in Wisconsin public health care programs, more than any other employer. Add in the dependents of Wal-Mart workers and the total jumps up to 9,207.

Factoring in what taxpayers contribute for public programs, the report estimated that one Wal-Mart supercenter employing 300 workers could cost taxpayers at least $904,000 annually.


Wal-Mart's low wages cost taxpayers

Relevance?

Lots of small retailers with employees on benefits is better than a big retailer with employees on benefits because...


The thing is that small retailers are struggling to stay afloat while Walmart swims in a see of money.

So? Owners of small retailers don't have some special right to profit.


My point is that decent human beings have to close their businesses because they can't compete with assholes who own billions of dollars but don't pay their employees enough to support themselves or their families.

If you don't think that's a little unfair and unreasonable I don't know what's wrong with you.

You're advocating public policy that's counter productive to your goal. You should be advocating greater redistribution rather than encouraging small retailers to extract rent from consumers.
aksfjh
Profile Joined November 2010
United States4853 Posts
January 22 2014 21:24 GMT
#16166
It'd be one thing if Wal-Mart was running out small businesses and then employing a better hierarchical approach that offered those old managers/owners comparable positions and better wages, but that isn't the case. Those that are profiting from the higher efficiency are high up the chain, while those on the ground are pushed to live on reduced wages that is only made possible by the aforementioned efficiency (and government assistance).
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
January 22 2014 21:49 GMT
#16167
On January 23 2014 06:24 aksfjh wrote:
It'd be one thing if Wal-Mart was running out small businesses and then employing a better hierarchical approach that offered those old managers/owners comparable positions and better wages, but that isn't the case. Those that are profiting from the higher efficiency are high up the chain, while those on the ground are pushed to live on reduced wages that is only made possible by the aforementioned efficiency (and government assistance).

Those on the ground have lower nominal wages and lower prices. The benefits of those lower prices are distributed more so to low income people than high income people.

The government assistance would exist with or without Wal-Mart - low end retail work just doesn't pay well. It's a red herring.
DeepElemBlues
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States5079 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-01-22 22:01:52
January 22 2014 21:56 GMT
#16168
On January 23 2014 04:06 farvacola wrote:
Show nested quote +
Walmart’s entry into a new market has a strongly negative effect on existing retailers.[4] Supermarkets and discount variety stores are the most adversely affected, suffering sales declines of 10 to 40% after Walmart opens.[5]

The value of Walmart to the economy will likely be less than the value of the jobs and businesses it replaces. A study estimating the future impact of Walmart on the grocery industry in California found that “the full economic impact of those lost wages and benefits throughout southern California could approach $2.8 billion per year.”[6]

A study of Chicago in 2009 shows that businesses within one mile of a Walmart Supercenter have a 25% chance of shuttering in the first year, and a 40% chance of shuttering by the second year, when compared with stores farther than one mile from the Supercenter.[7]

Local businesses keep more money in the community. A 2009 study of the differential impact of locally-owned businesses and big-box stores in New Orleans shows that while big-box stores only recirculate 16% of revenues into the community, locally-owned businesses recirculate twice as much.[8]

A 2011 study of the St. Louis region found that as public tax dollars were diverted to big box retailers and shopping malls – more than $5.8 billion over 20 years – small business suffered. Over 600 small businesses (10 employees or less) closed during this time while retail sales have not increased in years.[9]

A 2009 study from the Center for Economic Studies at the U.S. Census Bureau found that the entry and growth of big-box stores has a strong negative impact on the growth and survival of nearby independent and small-chain stores selling the same types of goods.[10]




[5] Kenneth E. Stone, Georgeanne Artz, and Albery Myles. “The Economic Impact of Wal-Mart Supercenters on Existing Businesses in Mississippi.” Mississippi University Extension Service. 2002. http://Wal-Mart.3cdn.net/6e5ad841f247a909d7_bcm6b9fdo.pdf ; O. Capps, and J.M, Griffin. “Effect of a Mass Merchandiser on Traditional Food Retailers.” Journal of Food Distribution 29 (February 1998): 1-7; Vishal P. Singh, Karsten T. Hansen, and Robert C. Blattberg. “Impact of a Wal-Mart Supercenter on a Traditional Supermarket: An Empirical Investigation.” February 2004.

http://chicagobooth.edu/research/workshops/marketing/archive/WorkshopPapers/hansen.pdf; Kusum L. Ailawadi, Jie Zhang, Aradhna Krishna, and Michael W. Kruger. “When Wal-Mart Enters: How Incumbent Retailers React and How This Affects Their Sales Outcomes.” Journal of Marketing Research 47.4 (August 2010).

[6] Martin Boarnet, and Randall Crane. “The Impact of Big Box Grocers on Southern California: Jobs, Wages, and Municipal Finances.” Orange County Business Council. September 2009.

[7] Julie Davis, David Merriman, Lucia Samayoa, Brian Flanagan,Ron Baiman, and Joe Persky. “The Impact of an Urban Wal-Mart Store on Area Businesses: An Evaluation of One Chicago Neighborhood’s Experience”, Center for Urban Research and Learning, Loyola University. December 2009, pg 17.

[8] Thinking Outside the Box: A report on independent merchants and the New Orleans econo­my, September, 2009. The Urban Conservancy in partnership with Civic Economics.

[9] “An Assessment of the Effectiveness and Fiscal Impacts of the Use of Local Development Incentives in the St. Louis Region” East-West Gateway Council of Governments; Jan 2011

[10] “Mom-and-Pop Meet Big Box: Complements or Substitutes?” U.S. Census Bureau – Center for Economic Studies. 9/1/09.

Show nested quote +

Counties and parishes with a greater concentration of small, locally-owned businesses have healthier populations — with lower rates of mortality, obesity and diabetes — than do those that rely on large companies with “absentee” owners, according to a national study by sociologists at LSU and Baylor University.


“What stands out about this research is that we often think of the economic benefits and job growth that small business generates, but we don’t think of the social benefits to small communities,” said Troy C. Blanchard, Ph.D., lead author and associate professor of sociology at LSU. “This study highlights not only the economic benefits of small business, but its contributions to health and well-being.”


The study of 3,060 counties and parishes in the contiguous United States, published online in the Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society and forthcoming in its March print issue, brings new evidence to a body of research literature and a debate among sociologists, who traditionally have advanced two competing hypotheses about how small business impacts public health.


Some sociologists argue that small businesses — unlike chain retail “big box” stores and large manufacturing plants — have a greater investment in the community and thus have more at stake when it comes to employee health. The LSU and Baylor researchers, who analyzed national population, health, business and housing data, found that the greater the proportion of small businesses, the healthier the population.


“It appears there is an entrepreneurial culture that promotes public health through a can-do climate, a practical problem-solving approach that takes control of its own community,” said co-author Charles M. Tolbert, Ph.D., chair of the sociology department at Baylor. “The alternative is the attitude that ‘Things are out of our control.’”


Communities may become dependent on outside investment to solve problems, the researchers wrote.
Their findings are a departure from the traditional conclusion that “bigger is better.”


U.S. Counties with Thriving Small Businesses Have Healthier Residents

Show nested quote +
In this study, Civic Economics analyzed data from fifteen independent retailers and seven independent restaurants, all located in Salt Lake City, and compared their local economic impact with four national retail chains (Barnes & Noble, Home Depot, Office Max, and Target) and three national restaurant chains (Darden, McDonald’s, and P.F. Chang’s). The study found that the local retailers return a total of 52 percent of their revenue to the local economy, compared to just 14 percent for the national chain retailers. Similarly, the local restaurants recirculate an average of 79 percent of their revenue locally, compared to 30 percent for the chain eateries. What accounts for the difference? In a handy graphic, Civic Economics shows the breakdown. Independent businesses spend more on local labor, goods procured locally for resale, and services from local providers. This means a much larger share of the money you spend at a locally owned store stays in your local economy, supporting a variety of other businesses and jobs.


Key Studies on Big-Box Retail & Independent Business

Sometimes, and I know this is utter heresy, it's better if capital can't move quite so far or as easily.


The horse and buggy industry has existed for thousands of years and shouldn't go down the drain it would be a crime to all those hard horse and buggy industry workers, your neighbors and friends.

Preserving expensive and outdated industries doesn't help their workers and the petty burgeois (some not so petty) who own them it just keeps them standing still longer and your area gets left farther behind. The five years of lukewarm progressivism hasn't delivered the direction or much of anything needed for the new and better jobs that have always come along to do enough of that.

And I could just as well blame television. Those greasy jerks at Marconi. The Italians ruined America, those racist greasy guys run by Daniel Day-Lewis were right!

Why don't you leave capital alone and use some of that 3.6 trillion budget to pay people something every month if they're in normal BMI. Or give them a free something. Make a reality show, people can win no more taxes for life if they meet some crazy health standards and win a contest. America would be the healthiest nation on the planet faster than it takes my diabetic ass to eat a cake.
no place i'd rather be than the satellite of love
WhiteDog
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
France8650 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-01-22 22:16:42
January 22 2014 22:01 GMT
#16169
On January 23 2014 06:49 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 06:24 aksfjh wrote:
It'd be one thing if Wal-Mart was running out small businesses and then employing a better hierarchical approach that offered those old managers/owners comparable positions and better wages, but that isn't the case. Those that are profiting from the higher efficiency are high up the chain, while those on the ground are pushed to live on reduced wages that is only made possible by the aforementioned efficiency (and government assistance).

Those on the ground have lower nominal wages and lower prices. The benefits of those lower prices are distributed more so to low income people than high income people.

The government assistance would exist with or without Wal-Mart - low end retail work just doesn't pay well. It's a red herring.

How do you think they can make that much of a higher margin than they smaller competition ? Because the reduction in wages is more important than the reduction in prices... The simple fact that they buy in quantity doesn't entirely explain their success, nor does it explain how the Walton familly has become the richest familly in the US.

It's an industry that never innovate, never need to invest (except in building more store I guess). Not the kind of industry really useful for economic growth. Just like banks basically lol.
"every time WhiteDog overuses the word "seriously" in a comment I can make an observation on his fragile emotional state." MoltkeWarding
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
January 22 2014 22:08 GMT
#16170
Some 6.3 million people have enrolled in Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program since Oct. 1, when HealthCare.gov and its state counterparts went live, according to a new report from the Obama administration. The report covers Medicaid enrollments through the end of December.

That figures includes people who are newly eligible for Medicaid because their state expanded the program under the health care reform law, people who were already eligible but not enrolled and, in some states, people who were renewing their eligibility.

Thirteen states included renewals in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services report, though their exact number out of the 6.3 million could not be determined.


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
January 22 2014 22:11 GMT
#16171
On January 23 2014 03:33 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
The only time when I've seen that remotely happen is in small towns where the small retailers were terrible.

What does this mean? Walmart basically wipes out every other retailer in the lower end market. The only retailers that coexist (other than thrift stores) are those that are targeting "higher" (NOT "high") income brackets. Most small towns don't have a sufficient population of people in those "higher" brackets to support such a retail store, much less many of them.
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
January 22 2014 22:16 GMT
#16172
On January 23 2014 07:01 WhiteDog wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 06:49 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 06:24 aksfjh wrote:
It'd be one thing if Wal-Mart was running out small businesses and then employing a better hierarchical approach that offered those old managers/owners comparable positions and better wages, but that isn't the case. Those that are profiting from the higher efficiency are high up the chain, while those on the ground are pushed to live on reduced wages that is only made possible by the aforementioned efficiency (and government assistance).

Those on the ground have lower nominal wages and lower prices. The benefits of those lower prices are distributed more so to low income people than high income people.

The government assistance would exist with or without Wal-Mart - low end retail work just doesn't pay well. It's a red herring.

How do you think they can make that much of a higher margin than they smaller competition ? Because the reduction in wages is more important than the reduction in prices... The simple fact that they buy in quantity doesn't entirely explain their success, nor the fact that the Walton familly is the richest familly in the US.

It's an industry that never innovate, never need to invest (except in building more store I guess). Not the kind of industry really useful for the community. Just like banks basically lol.

Wal-Mart has a highly innovative and technologically advanced supply chain. If you aren't familiar with the company, you probably shouldn't be stating why they're profitable!
WhiteDog
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
France8650 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-01-22 22:21:15
January 22 2014 22:19 GMT
#16173
On January 23 2014 07:16 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 07:01 WhiteDog wrote:
On January 23 2014 06:49 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 06:24 aksfjh wrote:
It'd be one thing if Wal-Mart was running out small businesses and then employing a better hierarchical approach that offered those old managers/owners comparable positions and better wages, but that isn't the case. Those that are profiting from the higher efficiency are high up the chain, while those on the ground are pushed to live on reduced wages that is only made possible by the aforementioned efficiency (and government assistance).

Those on the ground have lower nominal wages and lower prices. The benefits of those lower prices are distributed more so to low income people than high income people.

The government assistance would exist with or without Wal-Mart - low end retail work just doesn't pay well. It's a red herring.

How do you think they can make that much of a higher margin than they smaller competition ? Because the reduction in wages is more important than the reduction in prices... The simple fact that they buy in quantity doesn't entirely explain their success, nor the fact that the Walton familly is the richest familly in the US.

It's an industry that never innovate, never need to invest (except in building more store I guess). Not the kind of industry really useful for the community. Just like banks basically lol.

Wal-Mart has a highly innovative and technologically advanced supply chain. If you aren't familiar with the company, you probably shouldn't be stating why they're profitable!

Supply chain. Innovation is a little more than that you know, like research in health, or technologies, etc. I guess making sure you have your product quickly and in the most efficient manner can be seen as an improvement in a society that has completly lost any optimism towards "progress".
Just like giving you the opportunity to buy 110 % of your revenu, like american banks did prior to 2007, can be seen as progress... I guess.
"every time WhiteDog overuses the word "seriously" in a comment I can make an observation on his fragile emotional state." MoltkeWarding
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
January 22 2014 22:21 GMT
#16174
On January 23 2014 07:11 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 03:33 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
The only time when I've seen that remotely happen is in small towns where the small retailers were terrible.

What does this mean? Walmart basically wipes out every other retailer in the lower end market. The only retailers that coexist (other than thrift stores) are those that are targeting "higher" (NOT "high") income brackets. Most small towns don't have a sufficient population of people in those "higher" brackets to support such a retail store, much less many of them.

That's a bit more accurate than what you said before.
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
January 22 2014 22:23 GMT
#16175
On January 23 2014 07:19 WhiteDog wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 07:16 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:01 WhiteDog wrote:
On January 23 2014 06:49 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 06:24 aksfjh wrote:
It'd be one thing if Wal-Mart was running out small businesses and then employing a better hierarchical approach that offered those old managers/owners comparable positions and better wages, but that isn't the case. Those that are profiting from the higher efficiency are high up the chain, while those on the ground are pushed to live on reduced wages that is only made possible by the aforementioned efficiency (and government assistance).

Those on the ground have lower nominal wages and lower prices. The benefits of those lower prices are distributed more so to low income people than high income people.

The government assistance would exist with or without Wal-Mart - low end retail work just doesn't pay well. It's a red herring.

How do you think they can make that much of a higher margin than they smaller competition ? Because the reduction in wages is more important than the reduction in prices... The simple fact that they buy in quantity doesn't entirely explain their success, nor the fact that the Walton familly is the richest familly in the US.

It's an industry that never innovate, never need to invest (except in building more store I guess). Not the kind of industry really useful for the community. Just like banks basically lol.

Wal-Mart has a highly innovative and technologically advanced supply chain. If you aren't familiar with the company, you probably shouldn't be stating why they're profitable!

Supply chain. Innovation is a little more than that you know, like research in health, or technologies, etc. I guess making sure you have your product quickly and in the most efficient manner can be seen as an improvement in a society that has completly lost any optimism towards "progress".
Just like giving you the opportunity to buy 110 % of your revenu, like american banks did prior to 2007, can be seen as progress... I guess.

Lol, what?
WhiteDog
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
France8650 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-01-22 22:34:46
January 22 2014 22:33 GMT
#16176
On January 23 2014 07:23 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 07:19 WhiteDog wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:16 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:01 WhiteDog wrote:
On January 23 2014 06:49 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 06:24 aksfjh wrote:
It'd be one thing if Wal-Mart was running out small businesses and then employing a better hierarchical approach that offered those old managers/owners comparable positions and better wages, but that isn't the case. Those that are profiting from the higher efficiency are high up the chain, while those on the ground are pushed to live on reduced wages that is only made possible by the aforementioned efficiency (and government assistance).

Those on the ground have lower nominal wages and lower prices. The benefits of those lower prices are distributed more so to low income people than high income people.

The government assistance would exist with or without Wal-Mart - low end retail work just doesn't pay well. It's a red herring.

How do you think they can make that much of a higher margin than they smaller competition ? Because the reduction in wages is more important than the reduction in prices... The simple fact that they buy in quantity doesn't entirely explain their success, nor the fact that the Walton familly is the richest familly in the US.

It's an industry that never innovate, never need to invest (except in building more store I guess). Not the kind of industry really useful for the community. Just like banks basically lol.

Wal-Mart has a highly innovative and technologically advanced supply chain. If you aren't familiar with the company, you probably shouldn't be stating why they're profitable!

Supply chain. Innovation is a little more than that you know, like research in health, or technologies, etc. I guess making sure you have your product quickly and in the most efficient manner can be seen as an improvement in a society that has completly lost any optimism towards "progress".
Just like giving you the opportunity to buy 110 % of your revenu, like american banks did prior to 2007, can be seen as progress... I guess.

Lol, what?

Don't you understand there is a difference of value in finding out a new way to product, a new material, or a new product by opposition to a simple improvement in the efficiency of the supply chain ? Is it too hard for you to understand that a company like Wal-Mart will never invest in research like some producers do ?
"every time WhiteDog overuses the word "seriously" in a comment I can make an observation on his fragile emotional state." MoltkeWarding
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-01-22 22:51:04
January 22 2014 22:46 GMT
#16177
On January 23 2014 07:33 WhiteDog wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 07:23 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:19 WhiteDog wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:16 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:01 WhiteDog wrote:
On January 23 2014 06:49 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 06:24 aksfjh wrote:
It'd be one thing if Wal-Mart was running out small businesses and then employing a better hierarchical approach that offered those old managers/owners comparable positions and better wages, but that isn't the case. Those that are profiting from the higher efficiency are high up the chain, while those on the ground are pushed to live on reduced wages that is only made possible by the aforementioned efficiency (and government assistance).

Those on the ground have lower nominal wages and lower prices. The benefits of those lower prices are distributed more so to low income people than high income people.

The government assistance would exist with or without Wal-Mart - low end retail work just doesn't pay well. It's a red herring.

How do you think they can make that much of a higher margin than they smaller competition ? Because the reduction in wages is more important than the reduction in prices... The simple fact that they buy in quantity doesn't entirely explain their success, nor the fact that the Walton familly is the richest familly in the US.

It's an industry that never innovate, never need to invest (except in building more store I guess). Not the kind of industry really useful for the community. Just like banks basically lol.

Wal-Mart has a highly innovative and technologically advanced supply chain. If you aren't familiar with the company, you probably shouldn't be stating why they're profitable!

Supply chain. Innovation is a little more than that you know, like research in health, or technologies, etc. I guess making sure you have your product quickly and in the most efficient manner can be seen as an improvement in a society that has completly lost any optimism towards "progress".
Just like giving you the opportunity to buy 110 % of your revenu, like american banks did prior to 2007, can be seen as progress... I guess.

Lol, what?

Don't you understand there is a difference of value in finding out a new way to product, a new material, or a new product by opposition to a simple improvement in the efficiency of the supply chain ? Is it too hard for you to understand that a company like Wal-Mart will never invest in research like some producers do ?

no... no no no... the "supply chains are too plebeian for me" line of argument is just... ignorant.

Edit: what are you going to claim next? That lean manufacturing isn't a "real" innovation?
WhiteDog
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
France8650 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-01-22 23:03:39
January 22 2014 22:56 GMT
#16178
On January 23 2014 07:46 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 07:33 WhiteDog wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:23 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:19 WhiteDog wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:16 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:01 WhiteDog wrote:
On January 23 2014 06:49 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 06:24 aksfjh wrote:
It'd be one thing if Wal-Mart was running out small businesses and then employing a better hierarchical approach that offered those old managers/owners comparable positions and better wages, but that isn't the case. Those that are profiting from the higher efficiency are high up the chain, while those on the ground are pushed to live on reduced wages that is only made possible by the aforementioned efficiency (and government assistance).

Those on the ground have lower nominal wages and lower prices. The benefits of those lower prices are distributed more so to low income people than high income people.

The government assistance would exist with or without Wal-Mart - low end retail work just doesn't pay well. It's a red herring.

How do you think they can make that much of a higher margin than they smaller competition ? Because the reduction in wages is more important than the reduction in prices... The simple fact that they buy in quantity doesn't entirely explain their success, nor the fact that the Walton familly is the richest familly in the US.

It's an industry that never innovate, never need to invest (except in building more store I guess). Not the kind of industry really useful for the community. Just like banks basically lol.

Wal-Mart has a highly innovative and technologically advanced supply chain. If you aren't familiar with the company, you probably shouldn't be stating why they're profitable!

Supply chain. Innovation is a little more than that you know, like research in health, or technologies, etc. I guess making sure you have your product quickly and in the most efficient manner can be seen as an improvement in a society that has completly lost any optimism towards "progress".
Just like giving you the opportunity to buy 110 % of your revenu, like american banks did prior to 2007, can be seen as progress... I guess.

Lol, what?

Don't you understand there is a difference of value in finding out a new way to product, a new material, or a new product by opposition to a simple improvement in the efficiency of the supply chain ? Is it too hard for you to understand that a company like Wal-Mart will never invest in research like some producers do ?

no... no no no... the "supply chains are too plebeian for me" line of argument is just... ignorant.

Edit: what are you going to claim next? That lean manufacturing isn't a "real" innovation?

I guess I'm ignorant then. I guess it's my ignorance that prevents me from witnessing the net increase in economic growth that Walmart great supply innovations permitted, or the real improvement of americans average conditions of living.

Please man, you can do better.

Lean manufacturing permits firms to reallocate their ressources. It is not the case for Walmart : what they gain in productivity just becomes more profit for the Walton familly - a money that does not trickle down. I guess young people like you will do everything they can to continue believe in their tales. You see no differences in having to invest in research for more energy efficient engine - like toyota have to right now - and thus invest every available ressource into that, and just investing in the supply chain with no outlet for excess ressources ?
"every time WhiteDog overuses the word "seriously" in a comment I can make an observation on his fragile emotional state." MoltkeWarding
aksfjh
Profile Joined November 2010
United States4853 Posts
January 22 2014 23:18 GMT
#16179
On January 23 2014 06:49 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 06:24 aksfjh wrote:
It'd be one thing if Wal-Mart was running out small businesses and then employing a better hierarchical approach that offered those old managers/owners comparable positions and better wages, but that isn't the case. Those that are profiting from the higher efficiency are high up the chain, while those on the ground are pushed to live on reduced wages that is only made possible by the aforementioned efficiency (and government assistance).

Those on the ground have lower nominal wages and lower prices. The benefits of those lower prices are distributed more so to low income people than high income people.

The government assistance would exist with or without Wal-Mart - low end retail work just doesn't pay well. It's a red herring.

Entry level retail work doesn't pay much, that is very true, but where is the opportunity to make a decent wage in the Wal-Mart pay structure? At what commitment/experience level, or managerial level, is one able to move to a comfortable middle-class lifestyle while working at Wal-Mart? Better yet, at what level are they able to come off of government assistance? The "efficiency" they command over the smaller retailers that runs those out of business certainly can afford to provide a middle class life-style to more people than a disjointed small retailer system, right?
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
January 22 2014 23:19 GMT
#16180
On January 23 2014 07:56 WhiteDog wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 23 2014 07:46 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:33 WhiteDog wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:23 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:19 WhiteDog wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:16 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 07:01 WhiteDog wrote:
On January 23 2014 06:49 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 23 2014 06:24 aksfjh wrote:
It'd be one thing if Wal-Mart was running out small businesses and then employing a better hierarchical approach that offered those old managers/owners comparable positions and better wages, but that isn't the case. Those that are profiting from the higher efficiency are high up the chain, while those on the ground are pushed to live on reduced wages that is only made possible by the aforementioned efficiency (and government assistance).

Those on the ground have lower nominal wages and lower prices. The benefits of those lower prices are distributed more so to low income people than high income people.

The government assistance would exist with or without Wal-Mart - low end retail work just doesn't pay well. It's a red herring.

How do you think they can make that much of a higher margin than they smaller competition ? Because the reduction in wages is more important than the reduction in prices... The simple fact that they buy in quantity doesn't entirely explain their success, nor the fact that the Walton familly is the richest familly in the US.

It's an industry that never innovate, never need to invest (except in building more store I guess). Not the kind of industry really useful for the community. Just like banks basically lol.

Wal-Mart has a highly innovative and technologically advanced supply chain. If you aren't familiar with the company, you probably shouldn't be stating why they're profitable!

Supply chain. Innovation is a little more than that you know, like research in health, or technologies, etc. I guess making sure you have your product quickly and in the most efficient manner can be seen as an improvement in a society that has completly lost any optimism towards "progress".
Just like giving you the opportunity to buy 110 % of your revenu, like american banks did prior to 2007, can be seen as progress... I guess.

Lol, what?

Don't you understand there is a difference of value in finding out a new way to product, a new material, or a new product by opposition to a simple improvement in the efficiency of the supply chain ? Is it too hard for you to understand that a company like Wal-Mart will never invest in research like some producers do ?

no... no no no... the "supply chains are too plebeian for me" line of argument is just... ignorant.

Edit: what are you going to claim next? That lean manufacturing isn't a "real" innovation?

I guess I'm ignorant then. I guess it's my ignorance that prevents me from witnessing the net increase in economic growth that Walmart great supply innovations permitted, or the real improvement of americans average conditions of living.

Please man, you can do better.

Lean manufacturing permits firms to reallocate their ressources. It is not the case for Walmart : what they gain in productivity just becomes more profit for the Walton familly - a money that does not trickle down. I guess young people like you will do everything they can to continue believe in their tales. You see no differences in having to invest in research for more energy efficient engine - like toyota have to right now - and thus invest every available ressource into that, and just investing in the supply chain with no outlet for excess ressources ?

You probably shouldn't write so much about companies you don't know. Just sayin'
Prev 1 807 808 809 810 811 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
The PiG Daily
21:30
Best Games
Maru vs Rogue
ByuN vs herO
Maru vs Classic
SHIN vs Zoun
Clem vs MaxPax
SHIN vs ByuN
PiGStarcraft2
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
ByuN 358
ProTech148
Railgan 74
JuggernautJason72
NeuroSwarm 53
Livibee 52
ViBE44
mouzStarbuck 17
PiGStarcraft2
StarCraft: Brood War
Calm 2975
Soulkey 135
firebathero 105
Noble 48
Dota 2
monkeys_forever372
League of Legends
Reynor66
Counter-Strike
fl0m6755
Super Smash Bros
Mew2King60
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu372
Other Games
Grubby12040
gofns11255
summit1g8291
tarik_tv7211
FrodaN1597
C9.Mang0250
RotterdaM165
XaKoH 129
elazer54
Trikslyr39
ZombieGrub33
sas.Sziky6
Organizations
Other Games
BasetradeTV90
StarCraft 2
angryscii 26
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
[ Show 20 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• mYiSmile130
• Adnapsc2 27
• Response 1
• Reevou 1
• IndyKCrew
• Migwel
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• LaughNgamezSOOP
StarCraft: Brood War
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota2791
Other Games
• imaqtpie1359
• Scarra605
• Shiphtur285
• WagamamaTV257
• tFFMrPink 14
Upcoming Events
Korean StarCraft League
5h 27m
RSL Revival
12h 27m
Clem vs Rogue
Bunny vs Lambo
IPSL
18h 27m
Dewalt vs nOmaD
Ret vs Cross
BSL
21h 27m
Bonyth vs Doodle
Dewalt vs TerrOr
GSL
1d 10h
Cure vs herO
SHIN vs Maru
IPSL
1d 18h
Bonyth vs Napoleon
G5 vs JDConan
BSL
1d 21h
OyAji vs JDConan
DragOn vs TBD
Replay Cast
2 days
Monday Night Weeklies
2 days
Replay Cast
3 days
[ Show More ]
The PondCast
3 days
GSL
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
GSL
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2026-05-14
WardiTV TLMC #16
Nations Cup 2026

Ongoing

BSL Season 22
ASL Season 21
IPSL Spring 2026
KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 2
Acropolis #4
KK 2v2 League Season 1
BSL 22 Non-Korean Championship
SCTL 2026 Spring
RSL Revival: Season 5
2026 GSL S1
Heroes Pulsing #1
Asian Champions League 2026
IEM Atlanta 2026
PGL Astana 2026
BLAST Rivals Spring 2026
IEM Rio 2026
PGL Bucharest 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 1
BLAST Open Spring 2026
ESL Pro League S23 Finals
ESL Pro League S23 Stage 1&2

Upcoming

YSL S3
Escore Tournament S2: W8
CSLAN 4
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
HSC XXIX
uThermal 2v2 2026 Main Event
Maestros of the Game 2
WardiTV Spring 2026
2026 GSL S2
BLAST Bounty Summer Qual
Stake Ranked Episode 3
XSE Pro League 2026
IEM Cologne Major 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 2
CS Asia Championships 2026
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.