Is this whining: we, the workers of Wal Mart, perform the labor which creates Wal Mart profits. Now, instead of having our labor fully exploited we ask that it be a little less exploited… when management takes the wealth we create, just give us a little bit back so we can, you know, pay health care bills and things

Send all the exploiters somewhere else. Let workers manage their own wealth.

Even if only 25% of these facts are true (although I suspect, from researching various other sources, that most of them are indeed valid) then I’d say the “Case against Wal-Mart” is still very real and legitimate.

My point being, that even 25% truth would be MORE THAN ENOUGH to convict Wal-Mart of unethical behavior. In fact, I HAVE researched this topic extensively and found alternative sources to back up the majority of claims made on the site that is referenced. Hence, the case against Wal-Mart is OVERWHELMING valid (beyond any reasonable doubt) — and not “jealous hype” like Mark claims.

And while you challenge my argument, I find yours just as baffling. You seem to applaud Wal-Mart FOR SIMPLY FOLLOWING THE LAW!! It is illegal to discriminate for disability, and if your friend feels he has been subjected to such discrimination by other companies then he should sue them. Period. I do not condone unethical, illegal practices by any corporation. And I know they’ve all got their shady dealings; it’s just that Wal-Mart’s misconduct stands out more in comparison.

I’m glad that Wal-Mart acted ethically in your friend’s case. However, this fact does not negate the 1.6 million instances (in gender discrimitation alone) where the company did not. If you think there’s nothing wrong with Wal Mart’s practices — that’s your prerogative. I think they’re appalling. And, either you are exaggerating the truth or your friend is in the enviable Wal-Mart minority: If he can truly finish school AND pay the rent on a Wal-Mart salary without any outside financial assistance, he has accomplished quite a remarkable feat.

“Why does wal mart have to be responsible for someone having way too many kids at way too young of an age and not planning ahead for that?… Since the wal mart model can’t support these people who go off and have unprotected sex from a young age and crank out 5 kids by 25, wal mart is evil. “

Wow, that’s a pretty big leap from what I said. Wal-Mart shouldn’t have to be responsible for the above scenario (and neither should you or I for that matter). But’s that’s only one of many possible scenarios. And kids or no kids, associate-level salaries at Wal-Mart don’t break the poverty level — so the money’s got to come from somewhere. Hence, you and I and the rest of America are subsidizing these employees with our tax dollars, when the company itself has more than enough revenue and resources to take care of its own.

Never mind the fact people all over the country or 2 or even 3 jobs to support their lives.

I agree with you wholeheartedly Gaston. The difference between you and me is that you don’t seem the slightest bit angry about this fact. Why not? I don’t like what’s happening in this country and it makes me angry. We used to be a proud nation full of integrity — where it mattered more how you played the game then if you won or lost. Now, it seems as though anything — no matter how unethical — is fair game as long as it “wins” for someone. “Faster and cheaper” have trumped “quality and responsibility” on almost every metric. I can’t speak for the world but I can certainly speak for myself when I say that I’m working much harder for exponentially less as each year passes. And while I’m lucky in that I don’t have to choose between destitution and Wal-Mart, I do have to choose between quality of work and quality of life. To do my job well — given the constraints of this economy — would require an 80hr+ commitment every week. To someone with integrity who takes a lot of pride in her work, this is a very unfortunate tradeoff. To keep my sanity, I’ve scaled back to around 60+ hours a week (still well above what I really should be working on my salary) knowing that I’m still not putting out the best product that I can. Unlike you, I don’t believe that good, honest, hardworking people should have to work to the breaking point in order to just get by — especially while those with questionable ethics are rewarded with financial gain.

Oh so now that’s all wal mart’s fault for not supporting their probably out-of-wed-lock and ill-planned family. This type of mentality REALLY angers me. It’s the same exact mentality that leads people to NEVER take accountability and go through life suing doctors or whoever they can for money.

The irony here is that we’ve got the same gripe: Both of us want people to take responsibility for their actions. However, while you prefer to start at the bottom of the chain, I’d rather start at the top. Your approach however, ignores one very basic truth — you can still do everything right and have nothing to show for it (not every struggling Wal-Mart employee is an unwed teenage mother — many, like the women who were discriminated against, are hard-working and educated); conversely, you can do everything wrong and be among the world’s most wealthy (just look at Paris Hilton!). Just as you want irresponsible people to own up to their bad behavior, I want irresponsible corporations to do the same.

PS — My best friend’s sister was born with Spinabifida. She works for a health insurance company.

It’s not a debate about profits and those who make it such ignore the ethics of business. How easy it is for people to say others are whining when you aren’t even in their shoes. There are plenty of people looking for a hand out but you cannot make those blanket generalizations especially of those who are in the lower income brackets which majority of Wal-Mart employees are.

A business is like a country and its legacy should be evaluated in its entirety, not simply by its profits.

Jill “of all trades” I guess one of your trades is not driving a point home very well. You begin your entire argument citing some website that you proceed to admit is false information, in fact you wouldn’t even be shocked if 75% of it were false, even by your own account. It doesn’t sound like you know which of it is true or which of it is not, it only sounds like you know that much of it is false. That I agree with; however, I don’t see how false information benefits you at all. In fact it proves Mark’s point that people gang up on wal mart and the case in fact IS a sham, and you even admit these sites publish false info about wal mart (again up to 75% by your own account). So right off the bat within a few sentences you’ve managed to bring one of Mark’s key points to light.

One of my friends from my school years has a horrible condition known as Spinabifida. He is mentally and physically challenged, but he also surprisingly has a very high IQ, full of energy and the desire to work and make a life out of himself. While hundreds of so called “great companies” that treat their employees OH SO WELL (sarcasm?) would make up their mind about this kid even before he opened his mouth, just by LOOKING AT HIM, rejecting him based entirely on appearances and NEVER giving him a fair shot….well while most companies are doing this kind of nonsense, wal-mart has hired him and given him a path to success. This now allows him to pay enough bills to finish college, pay the rent and build his entire future. WOW, what a life changing experience! I’m happy I get to see it first hand.

So I ask you, and my friend asks you, how could a company so evil fill a void that companies so “nice and proper” fail at so miserably at? This ‘greed’ you speak of, is it present when wal mart hires a challenged individual or when thousands of ‘responsible companies’ reject these individuals SITE UNSEEN! Who is greedier there? Which one better fits your ‘greed at all costs’ motto? hmmmmm seems pretty clear to me.

Also you say people have a choice destitude or wal mart??? That’s the biggest load of BS and woe is me thinking. Why does wal mart have to be responsible for someone having way too many kids at way too young of an age and not planning ahead for that? Oh so now that’s all wal mart’s fault for not supporting their probably out-of-wed-lock and ill-planned family. This type of mentality REALLY angers me. It’s the same exact mentality that leads people to NEVER take accountability and go through life suing doctors or whoever they can for money.

Since the wal mart model can’t support these people who go off and have unprotected sex from a young age and crank out 5 kids by 25, wal mart is evil. Never mind the fact people all over the country or 2 or even 3 jobs to support their lives. Never mind that people who are responsible and plan ahead for the future, like my challenged friend, are using wal mart as a very big stepping stone to professional life. FORGET ALL OF IT, the kool aid has arrived!

And i won’t even touch your claims that target and these other stores have lower prices than wal mart…

I think you need to check out http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/facts/ . Even if only 25% of these facts are true (although I suspect, from researching various other sources, that most of them are indeed valid) then I’d say the “Case against Wal-Mart” is still very real and legitimate. I don’t think “jealousy,” “whining,” and “anti-capitalism” are valid arguments as to why people take issue with Wal-Mart, yet don’t with Target, Costco, Kohls, and other similar businesses.

Wal-Mart provides sub-standard pay, benefits, and practices (check out the class action Sex Discrimination lawsuit — which negates your claim of “If you work hard we will promote you from within”) to its workers and relies on American tax dollars to subsidize its neglect. If you think this is “fair market” capitalism, then your logic is skewed. Sam Walton had a dream that died when he did. The new Wal-Mart regime is the classic example of greed at all costs. The notion of Wal-Mart providing “the lowest cost to consumers” is also a fallacy; in many cases, other stores, such as Target, provide the same products at equal or lower cost. So who is really “winning” here? The workers, the American people, or the select few making millions at their expense?

Capitalism without responsibility IS NOT capitalism. Even within capitalism there are rules to be followed. Not everyone in a capitalist society can become rich — that’s an absolute impossibility. However, everyone who works hard should at least be able to support their basic needs without resorting to government assistance. As one blogger noted, Wal-Mart is an example of how you can work hard and STILL have nothing to show for it.

I’m truly amazed that someone who makes $500 a half-hour to wax philosophic can label those who sweat for $8 bucks an hour (and crappy or no benefits) “whiners.” Do you really think anyone WANTS to work at Wal-Mart? True, there’s no gun to their heads — but if your choice was Wal-Mart or complete destitution, what would you pick? People work at Wal-Mart because their options are limited (by any number of circumstances) and they really don’t have much of a choice.

Wal-mart’s undoing is the result of its bad business and humanitarian policies — not the fanatical ravings of so-called “anti-capitalists.” Maybe now it will learn that human beings are an essential ingredient to a successful business endeavor and start treating its employees ethically.

Mark Stevens
CEO