06.30.09

Wal-Mart is hoping the alligator will eat it last

Posted in Banking, Islam, Law dhimmitude at 9:34 pm by Administrator

The retail giant gets behind TCM’s socialist health-care plan.

  • Share/Bookmark

21 Comments »

  1. Mr. Dings said,

    June 30, 2009 at 11:20 pm

    Wal-Mart is the biggest employer in 25 states, including Indiana. They set the standard for wages and labor practices. They fear having to fork out for health ins for their serfs, so, they want to socialize it. Just what you want, if you are a freedom lover: privitized profit, socialized risk. You should be happy, but all you do is bi ii itch…

  2. Mr. Dings said,

    June 30, 2009 at 11:24 pm

    Another amazing fact: In 1970, the country’s largest employer was General Motors, with 350,000 workers. Overwhelmingly union, they earned $17.50 an hour plus health, pension and vacation benefits and cost-of-living increases. Today, the country’s largest employer is Wal-Mart, with over 1 million US workers. They earn an average hourly wage of $8.00, with no defined benefit pension, and inadequate health care.

  3. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    July 1, 2009 at 2:36 am

    And you are saying exactly what is wrong with that and what caused it?

    And regarding some kind of “just what I want” crud that’s not true: I don’t care whether Wal-Mart offers its employees insureance or not. What I do disapprove of is the government providing it.
    You are completely misreading the gist of my post if you think I think Wal-Mart’s stance is a good one.

  4. Mr.Dings said,

    July 1, 2009 at 3:00 am

    I am saying that freedom’s just another word for winners who never lose. Wal Mart is as responsible as any for the depredation of America. They championed China as a provider of consumer goods for America. They got us over a barrel. I thought you said we just emerged from a long period of prosperity. Sure wouldn’t know it from the downgrading of the wages and salaries provided by this nation’s largest employer. I know you don’t think Wal-Mart’s stance is a good one. I presume you just like it that they don’t provide health insurance to their workers. Viva freedom (to f___ over) the workers. Now you’ll call me a commie.

  5. Mr. Dings said,

    July 1, 2009 at 11:52 am

    Just google walmart transfer of wealth
    First up, you’ll get this oldie but goodie

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/12699486/paul_krugman_on_the_great_wealth_transfer/print

    The Great Wealth Transfer
    It’s the biggest untold economic story of our time: more of the nation’s bounty held in fewer and fewer hands. And Bush’s tax cuts are only making the problem worse

    by PAUL KRUGMAN

    Posted Nov 30, 2006 1:59 PM

    Under Bush, the economy has been growing at a reasonable pace for the past three years. But most Americans have failed to benefit from that growth. All indicators of the economic status of ordinary Americans — poverty rates, family incomes, the number of people without health insurance — show that most of us were worse off in 2005 than we were in 2000, and there’s little reason to think that 2006 was much better.

    So where did all the economic growth go? It went to a relative handful of people at the top. The earnings of the typical full-time worker, adjusted for inflation, have actually fallen since Bush took office. Pay for CEOs, meanwhile, has soared — from 185 times that of average workers in 2003 to 279 times in 2005. And after-tax corporate profits have also skyrocketed, more than doubling since Bush took office. Those profits will eventually be reflected in dividends and capital gains, which accrue mainly to the very well-off: More than three-quarters of all stocks are owned by the richest ten percent of the population.

    I hear the sound of America voting in ‘06 and ‘08. And we all know Gore got more votes that Bush in ‘00. I also predict you will damn the rag that printed this, still call those “not with you, against you” and of course, call us freedom haters. Or you will just dismiss it as a bunch of hooey, as you often have before.

  6. Mr. Dings said,

    July 1, 2009 at 12:08 pm

    If our economy of freedom fails to distribute wealth as ably as it has created it, the road to dictatorship will be open to any man who can persuasively promise security to all. -Will Durant

  7. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    July 1, 2009 at 12:20 pm

    Oh, come on, you don’t really mean to assert that Paul Krugman is a credible source on anything in this universe, do you? Did you hear what he said yesterday? He said anybody who opposes Waxman-Markey is a traitor to the planet.
    Pay for CEOs has soared because that’s what the market will bear.
    It is none of the government’s business how any organization is compensating anyone on its staff. People work for these organizations of their own volition. Haven’t you ever left a job because the cons of being there outweighed the pros? It’s called exercising your rights as a free American.
    As I say, I don’t care whether Wal-Mart or any other business enterprise provides health insurance to its employees or doesn’t. That’s not why these enterprises exist.
    Wal-Mart has some good corporate policies and some shaky ones. I would like to see them scale back on involvement with China. On the other hand, I like that they try to keep CDs containing dirty lyrics out of their stores.

    The point of this post was that it’s disgusting to see successful private business genuflect before the totalitarian machine, hoping tha it will soften the impact of being taken over.

  8. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    July 1, 2009 at 12:29 pm

    With due respect to Mr. Durant, an economy can’t “distribute” wealth without some kind of command mechanism. An immediate non-starter if you love freedom.

  9. Mr. Dings said,

    July 1, 2009 at 1:57 pm

    Just as you like some things about WalMart and some things not so much, so it is with me and Krugman. Nothing’s black and white though we like to try to make it so, to fit into our zeitgeists. WalMart wants the workers off their backs and onto ours. Privitize profits, socialize risks. Who is taking over Wal Mart? What a shot in the arm the faltering economy gave to them. So you want Wal Mart to pre-select the software we choose to purchase? Do they have some humanities people on staff? I’m sure they got more than a few Southern Baptists. Nevertheless, they can choose what to sell. Sell Chinese!

    http://www.pbs.org/itvs/storewars/stores3_2.html

    With its roots in the Southern Christian heartland, Wal-Mart believes that being a “family” store is the key to their mass appeal. They refuse to carry CDs with cover art or lyrics deemed overtly sexual or dealing with topics such as abortion, homosexuality or Satanism. While Wal-Mart is the world’s largest CD retailer, and in some regions the only place in town to purchase music entertainment products represent only a fraction of their business. However, it is a different story for recording artists. Because Wal-Mart reaps about 10 percent of the total domestic music CD sales, most musicians and record companies will agree to create a “sanitized” version specifically for the megastores. Sometimes this entails altering the cover art, as John Cougar Mellencamp did when asked to airbrush out an angel and devil on one of his album covers. Other times, musicians change their lyrics and song titles. Nirvana, for example, changed its song title from “Rape Me” to “Waif Me” for the Wal-Mart version. They also changed the back-cover artwork for the album In Utero, which Wal-Mart objected to because it portrayed fetuses. And when Sheryl Crow released her self-titled album, Wal-Mart objected to the lyric, “Watch our children as they kill each other with a gun they bought at Wal-Mart discount stores.” When Crow would not change the verse, the retailer refused to carry the album. This type of censorship has become so common that it is often regarded as simply another stage of editing. Record labels are now acting preemptively, issuing two versions of the same album for their big name artists. Less well-known bands, however, are forced to offer “sanitized” albums out of the gate.

  10. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    July 1, 2009 at 2:22 pm

    I don’t think “censorship” is quite the right word for a decision by a private business as to wht merchandise to stock.
    As for W-M wanting its workers off its back and onto ours, that is exactly what my consternation is about. We’ll see a lot more of that as employers say, “Hey, with this government option, we can just close down our employee health insurance program.”
    Which is why the answer lies in making insurance as portable as possible and not tied to a person’s job.

  11. Mr. Dings said,

    July 1, 2009 at 5:19 pm

    Protecting the power guys again, I see. Just dump us all. Portable, but not affordable? Now I will be accused of impossibility thinking.

  12. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    July 1, 2009 at 10:15 pm

    “Affordable” is about the most relative term there is. It depends on what kind of insurance – or what kind of health care – you want, and what kinds of trade-offs you’re willing to make in your life.

  13. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    July 1, 2009 at 10:18 pm

    “Protecting the power guys, I see” . . . what a hoot.
    Still dividing American citizens into classes based on some kind of illusion of who has power, I see.

  14. Mr. Dings said,

    July 2, 2009 at 1:30 pm

    Makes more sense than dividing us into freedom lovers and freedom haters. You’re great at denial! News Flash! Take this stat and shove it up your colonoscopy hole:

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-07-01-health-insurance_N.htm

    TLANTA (AP) — The percentage of Americans with private health insurance has hit its lowest mark in 50 years, according to two new government reports. About 65% of non-elderly Americans had private insurance in 2008, down from 67% the year before, according to preliminary data released Wednesday by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “It’s bad news,” said Kenneth Thorpe, a health policy researcher at Emory University.

    In the 1970s and early 1980s, nearly 80% of Americans had private coverage, according to CDC officials.

    Some experts blamed the faltering economy and corporate decisions to raise health insurance premiums — or do away with employee coverage — as the main drivers of the recent data. They say coverage statistics for 2009 may look even worse.

  15. Mr. Dings said,

    July 2, 2009 at 2:08 pm

    And you dismiss Krugman like he’s some kind of little bug.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Krugman
    Krugman earned his B.A. in economics from Yale University in 1974 and his Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 1977. From 1982 to 1983, he spent a year working at the Reagan White House as a staff member of the Council of Economic Advisers. He taught at Yale University, MIT, UC Berkeley, the London School of Economics, and Stanford University before joining Princeton University in 2000 as professor of economics and international affairs. He is also currently a centenary professor at the London School of Economics, and a member of the Group of Thirty international economic body as well as the Council on Foreign Relations.

  16. Mr. Dings said,

    July 2, 2009 at 2:21 pm

    “Affordable” is about the most relative term there is. It depends on what kind of insurance – or what kind of health care – you want, and what kinds of trade-offs you’re willing to make in your life.”

    News Flash:
    http://www.courant.com/business/hc-anthem-rates.artjul01,0,1022396.story
    Anthem Blue Cross Seeks Large Rate Increase On Health Insurance For Individuals

    Gee, let’s see, what kind of trade-offs? Food or shelter this time?

    By DIANE LEVICK The Hartford Courant

    July 1, 2009

    Far fewer Americans buy their own insurance than get it through employers, but the individual market is a key focus of the nation’s health care reform debate because it could provide a way to get more people covered. Anthem’s rate filing is likely to fuel the already caustic attacks on the individual market, which already faces questions about its fairness and affordability.

    The size of Anthem’s proposed rate hike is “outrageous,” said Janet Davenport, a spokeswoman for the Universal Health Care Foundation of Connecticut. “This will be devastating for individuals who are already between the devil and the deep blue sea, anguishing over how they’re going to obtain health coverage.”

    The rate proposal “exacerbates the crisis, and it will contribute to the numbers of uninsured,” Davenport said

  17. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    July 2, 2009 at 3:20 pm

    a.) I see this tactic often of putting some Freedom-Hater’s curriculum vitae up as a defense of his ideology. It proves nothing. The most credentialed person in the world can call for socialism and it’s still a call for socialism.  In other words, Krugman can be smart and still completely wrong.

    b.) And we’ve covered the matter of who the uninsured are here at BN. There’s more about that, if you’re interested. Larry Elder has been running a series of columns about it at Townhall, the latest of which appears today.

    c.) Sounds like at least some Anthem customers might want to do some shopping around. I’d be interested to see what Anthem had to say about why it found this rate hike necessary. Businesses don’t generally just arbitraritly jack prices, knowing full well it invites customers to go to the competiton.

  18. Mr. Dings said,

    July 3, 2009 at 12:32 pm

    a) it proves he can at least think and write as well as, well, others in his classes at such distinguished universities, but they are all infiltrated with freedom haters too, I suppose you will say. He also can sell books. Since your people have not won an election that I know of since 1998, well, I don’t quite know what we can make of the world as you would have it. It might be as simple as winning power back. Of course this blog will help, I suppose, but many voters just “may” be turned off by name calling and hyperbole.

    b)I read the other two Elder pieces. Some good points to add to the debate. One comment here, disturbs me though, in Part 3: “Government regulations make it next to impossible for private people to make a profit. And so the vicious circle continues.” You need to try to understand what the purpose of insurance really is: to spread risk, thus making loss, when it occurs, manageable.

    http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090630/OPINION/906300327/-1/NEWSMAP
    In health care: so-called diseases created by Big Pharma advertising in order to sell pills. An insurance industry feared (rather than looked to for comfort) by most of its customers for its reputation of doing everything they can to protect profits from claims and such prudent practices as denying coverage for the most needy with pre-existing conditions clauses.
    Of all parts of our life, health care would seem to be the one in which it is most important to eliminate the profit and greed factor. People who are not involved heart and soul with the opportunity to do this inherently meaningful work for fellow humans should not be permitted to practice health care.

    Bottom line: health care is too important to be trusted to a bottom line. Hint: AIG (who got way out of line and way off base in their profit-making mania, to the detriment of, firstly their policyholders and secondly, the entire global financial system)

    c. You’re gonna believe Anthem, so, here’s what the little big guys have to say.

    http://www.courant.com/business/hc-anthemfollow.artjul02,0,3279420.story

    Anthem said it needs the rate increases because its claim costs are rising and that it wants the increases to take effect Oct. 1 instead of the usual Jan. 1 start. On Wednesday, Anthem said it wouldn’t withdraw its proposal. “The bottom line is that increases in claim costs for Anthem’s individual plans have surpassed premium increases significantly enough to require that we request a rate increase in October,” said Sarah Yeager, an Anthem spokeswoman.

    Anthem’s well-compensated CEO Larry Glasscock oversaw a merger with Health Point.

    http://hr.blr.com/news.aspx?id=4121

    http://www.answers.com/topic/larry-c-glasscock

    “… analysts believed that competition might be hampered should smaller insurers be driven from the market, which could fuel price increases. Doctors were also concerned that the merger marked a nationwide trend toward a health-care system governed by a handful of publicly traded corporations operating primarily for the welfare of shareholders.

    We’re all in “good hands” here, aren’t we bloggie?

  19. Mr. Dings said,

    July 3, 2009 at 12:33 pm

    Errata: change the date that your side last won a major national election to 2004. What was I typin’?

  20. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    July 4, 2009 at 3:37 pm

    Well, now, once again, you’ve put forth a real head-scratcher. Your latest comment ranges the gamut from conceding good points to Elder to this kumbaya editorial from the Cape Cod Times, with an Anthem viewpoint thrown in for good measure. What’s your overall orientation? What core principles are guiding you as you form your opinion on what ought to be done about health care?
    That Cape Cod piece was a real humdinger. “Is European human nature any different from American human nature?” No, but our cancer death rates and surgery waiting times sure are different.
    You have to have people going into professions like doctor, nurse, therapist, pharmacist and researcher to have health care. People aren’t going to go into those fields if the pay is in the same bracket as, say, postal carrier or license-branch paper-pusher.
    As I’ve put it in question form many times: If there are no doctors, etc., it’s pretty meaningless to talk about a right to health care, isn’t it?
    You have to have capital formation to fund the research that keeps health care advanced and efficient.
    Pharma creating disease, people fearing the insurance industry . . . a rather purple depiction for an unsubstantiated claim, I’d say.

  21. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    July 4, 2009 at 3:41 pm

    In short, profit is the only thing that fuels innovation and quality in health care, insurance or any other field.
    Where the flip else would the money come from?

Leave a Comment