| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
GM loses big-time
Eisboch wrote:
BTW .... *This* little news tidbit ought to get your blood circulating ..... :-) http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080801/...t_democrats_dc Eisboch I *love* it. It tells me Wal-Mart is scared. " (Reuters) - Wal-Mart Stores Inc is mobilizing U.S. store managers to lobby against Democrats in November's presidential election, fearing they will make it easier for workers to unionize, The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday. In recent weeks, thousands of Wal-Mart managers and department heads have been summoned to mandatory meetings at which the retailer stresses the downside for workers if store workers unionize, the paper said." - - - Wal-Mart is among the most exploitative major employers in the United States. The so-called "health insurance" it "offers" its employees is a fraud. It is a major violator of wage-hour laws. It is the major seller of crap ChiComm products in the USA. |
|
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GM loses big-time
"hk" wrote in message . .. I *love* it. It tells me Wal-Mart is scared. Wal-Mart is among the most exploitative major employers in the United States. The so-called "health insurance" it "offers" its employees is a fraud. It is a major violator of wage-hour laws. It is the major seller of crap ChiComm products in the USA. It seems to me that Wal-Mart has a specific goal to remain a low-cost outlet for limited income families and/or those that like to pinch pennys when buying basic necessities. In your quote you left out the part whereby by unionizing, Wal-Mart would need to raise prices and lay off employees. Why not let the public chose where they want to shop and work? Eisboch |
|
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GM loses big-time
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message . .. I *love* it. It tells me Wal-Mart is scared. Wal-Mart is among the most exploitative major employers in the United States. The so-called "health insurance" it "offers" its employees is a fraud. It is a major violator of wage-hour laws. It is the major seller of crap ChiComm products in the USA. It seems to me that Wal-Mart has a specific goal to remain a low-cost outlet for limited income families and/or those that like to pinch pennys when buying basic necessities. In your quote you left out the part whereby by unionizing, Wal-Mart would need to raise prices and lay off employees. Why not let the public chose where they want to shop and work? Eisboch Shop wherever the hell you want. Free choice in shopping is fine if the "public" has the ability to have influence on how its area is developed. In our part of our rural, conservative county, we have an older Wal-Mart store (that I've never been in), but we stopped Wal-Mart dead in its tracks with its plans to built a "super Wal-Mart" in our area. Wal-Mart spent a ton of money on PR and political bribes to force it way. All it took to defeat Wal-Mart was a number of petitions signed by enough voters to let the county pols know they'd be out on their asses if they approved building the new store. |
|
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GM loses big-time
hk wrote:
Eisboch wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. I *love* it. It tells me Wal-Mart is scared. Wal-Mart is among the most exploitative major employers in the United States. The so-called "health insurance" it "offers" its employees is a fraud. It is a major violator of wage-hour laws. It is the major seller of crap ChiComm products in the USA. It seems to me that Wal-Mart has a specific goal to remain a low-cost outlet for limited income families and/or those that like to pinch pennys when buying basic necessities. In your quote you left out the part whereby by unionizing, Wal-Mart would need to raise prices and lay off employees. Why not let the public chose where they want to shop and work? Eisboch Shop wherever the hell you want. Free choice in shopping is fine if the "public" has the ability to have influence on how its area is developed. In our part of our rural, conservative county, we have an older Wal-Mart store (that I've never been in), but we stopped Wal-Mart dead in its tracks with its plans to built a "super Wal-Mart" in our area. Wal-Mart spent a ton of money on PR and political bribes to force it way. All it took to defeat Wal-Mart was a number of petitions signed by enough voters to let the county pols know they'd be out on their asses if they approved building the new store. What Harry is really saying: Free choice in shopping is fine as long as I can tell people what their choices are. |
|
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GM loses big-time
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
hk wrote: Eisboch wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. I *love* it. It tells me Wal-Mart is scared. Wal-Mart is among the most exploitative major employers in the United States. The so-called "health insurance" it "offers" its employees is a fraud. It is a major violator of wage-hour laws. It is the major seller of crap ChiComm products in the USA. It seems to me that Wal-Mart has a specific goal to remain a low-cost outlet for limited income families and/or those that like to pinch pennys when buying basic necessities. In your quote you left out the part whereby by unionizing, Wal-Mart would need to raise prices and lay off employees. Why not let the public chose where they want to shop and work? Eisboch Shop wherever the hell you want. Free choice in shopping is fine if the "public" has the ability to have influence on how its area is developed. In our part of our rural, conservative county, we have an older Wal-Mart store (that I've never been in), but we stopped Wal-Mart dead in its tracks with its plans to built a "super Wal-Mart" in our area. Wal-Mart spent a ton of money on PR and political bribes to force it way. All it took to defeat Wal-Mart was a number of petitions signed by enough voters to let the county pols know they'd be out on their asses if they approved building the new store. What Harry is really saying: Free choice in shopping is fine as long as I can tell people what their choices are. WAFA is talking out of his ass...again. |
|
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GM loses big-time
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote in message ... hk wrote: Eisboch wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. I *love* it. It tells me Wal-Mart is scared. Wal-Mart is among the most exploitative major employers in the United States. The so-called "health insurance" it "offers" its employees is a fraud. It is a major violator of wage-hour laws. It is the major seller of crap ChiComm products in the USA. It seems to me that Wal-Mart has a specific goal to remain a low-cost outlet for limited income families and/or those that like to pinch pennys when buying basic necessities. In your quote you left out the part whereby by unionizing, Wal-Mart would need to raise prices and lay off employees. Why not let the public chose where they want to shop and work? Eisboch Shop wherever the hell you want. Free choice in shopping is fine if the "public" has the ability to have influence on how its area is developed. In our part of our rural, conservative county, we have an older Wal-Mart store (that I've never been in), but we stopped Wal-Mart dead in its tracks with its plans to built a "super Wal-Mart" in our area. Wal-Mart spent a ton of money on PR and political bribes to force it way. All it took to defeat Wal-Mart was a number of petitions signed by enough voters to let the county pols know they'd be out on their asses if they approved building the new store. What Harry is really saying: Free choice in shopping is fine as long as I can tell people what their choices are. The same way unions work. |
|
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GM loses big-time
"hk" wrote in message . .. Shop wherever the hell you want. Free choice in shopping is fine if the "public" has the ability to have influence on how its area is developed. In our part of our rural, conservative county, we have an older Wal-Mart store (that I've never been in), but we stopped Wal-Mart dead in its tracks with its plans to built a "super Wal-Mart" in our area. Wal-Mart spent a ton of money on PR and political bribes to force it way. All it took to defeat Wal-Mart was a number of petitions signed by enough voters to let the county pols know they'd be out on their asses if they approved building the new store. Your neighbors on fixed or limited incomes thank you. Eisboch |
|
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GM loses big-time
On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 10:27:47 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote: "hk" wrote in message ... Shop wherever the hell you want. Free choice in shopping is fine if the "public" has the ability to have influence on how its area is developed. In our part of our rural, conservative county, we have an older Wal-Mart store (that I've never been in), but we stopped Wal-Mart dead in its tracks with its plans to built a "super Wal-Mart" in our area. Wal-Mart spent a ton of money on PR and political bribes to force it way. All it took to defeat Wal-Mart was a number of petitions signed by enough voters to let the county pols know they'd be out on their asses if they approved building the new store. Your neighbors on fixed or limited incomes thank you. Eisboch Harry (WAFA), being the hypocrite that he is, surely does not want any neighbors like that. |
|
#9
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GM loses big-time
On Aug 1, 11:28*am, Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 10:27:47 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: "hk" wrote in message ... Shop wherever the hell you want. Free choice in shopping is fine if the "public" has the ability to have influence on how its area is developed. In our part of our rural, conservative county, we have an older Wal-Mart store (that I've never been in), but we stopped Wal-Mart dead in its tracks with its plans to built a "super Wal-Mart" in our area. Wal-Mart spent a ton of money on PR and political bribes to force it way. All it took to defeat Wal-Mart was a number of petitions signed by enough voters to let the county pols know they'd be out on their asses if they approved building the new store. Your neighbors on fixed or limited incomes thank you. Eisboch Harry (WAFA), being the hypocrite that he is, surely does not want any neighbors like that.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - How would you know? What we do know is wafa will take one side of an issue today, and another tomorrow, as long as he can **** you all off.. Like I have said before, I can't see why anyone would bother debating someone who is not going to debate honestly? It just makes no sense... You could have more fun debating yourself, and at least then it wouldn't get personal or vulgar which you know is the eventual outcome of any debate with our stooges... |
|
#10
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GM loses big-time
|
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| LOKI loses her rudder | ASA | |||
| Oh my, Loco loses again! | ASA | |||
| Loco loses again! | ASA | |||
| Bob loses!! | ASA | |||
| If Bush Loses | ASA | |||
Hybrid Mode
