Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - JediJman

Pages: 1 ... 384 385 386 387 388 [389] 390 391 392 393 394 ... 472
5821
Watto's Junk Yard / Re: More Wal-Mart Bashing
« on: May 14, 2008, 06:26 PM »
Justin - No need to get so confrontational. This is just suppose to be a friendly little chat about what people think about Wal-mart, or what that have heard, seen, or read about them.  No one opinion is Right, Wrong, or Indifferent; we are all entitled to our own opinion.

Personally I hate Wal-Mart, as I have been an employee so I know what they are cappable of. Mikey wants to pee on them if I remember correctly, but my friend that works for them at Corporate loves them, so it all good.

Ryan - Aren't you supposed to be at the post sending stuff to Chicago?   ;)  My comment about Name having a wrong opinion was sarcastic, hence the  ;)  ;)  ;) afterwards.  I wouldn't classify offering a different point of view as confrontational - as you said, we are all entitled to our own opinion and the heart of any blog is people posting their opinions.  Otherwise every reply would just say "Yes, I agree!"

If you haven't guessed by now, my pet peeve (original topic of our discussion) is people who blindly judge a person or group of persons without really looking at all of the angles and facts.  Based on additional evidence, I'm trying to counter what I believe to be prejudice against Wal-Mart. 

I'm also not a very big fan of the word hate in general.   :-\

Hate {–verb}: to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward...

Why would you feel "extreme hostility" towards a corporation that lowers consumer prices across all retailers, donates more actual dollars than any of their peers, or more personally - gave you a paycheck?  I don't like to shop there, but I really haven't seen a lot of rationale for people to hate Wal-Mart, outside of Mike who secretly loves them.   :-*

5822
Watto's Junk Yard / Re: More Wal-Mart Bashing
« on: May 14, 2008, 06:02 PM »
Perhaps I should have been more clear in my initial post to get my point across a little better and said "here's another reason for people to hate the Walmart Corporation".  I'm not a Walmart hater, never said I was, never came out against them, I merely said what they were doing was wasteful.  You made assumptions and ran with them and began insulting fellow members .............

Okay...let's get a few facts straight here.  This is your direct quote to start your story...

Yet another reason to hate the Walmart Corporation. 

I posted a response and at the end stated...

I'm sure the WM Haters will pipe in now...

I didn't address you specifically, but rather a group of people who just look for reasons to bash Wal-Mart any chance they get.  That may or may not be you, but to be fair, I don't think its wild speculation to assume you hate Wal-Mart when you start a topic stating Yet another reason to hate Wal-Mart ...

At what point did I begin insulting fellow members?   ???  Does having an unpopular view of the situation or providing contrasting arguements imply that I'm now insulting others? 

5823
Watto's Junk Yard / More Wal-Mart Bashing
« on: May 14, 2008, 01:33 PM »
Here's another way that Walmart keeps prices low for us.  Raising Walmart's minimum wage to $10 an hour would net the Walmart employees living at 200% below the poverty level an annual an increase of  between $1020 and $4640 in their incomes.  That would be nice and all, but my heavens it would cost the average Walmart customer $9.70 a year!!!!  Thank GOD that Walmart can squeeze so much out of their employees for less than $8 per hour....just one more way that they are saving the world by offering discount Cheetos.

I'm pretty sure there is an "I hate Walmart Thread" around here somewhere - maybe you'd feel more comfortable posting there.  Curious to know how these figures stack up against Target or McDonald's.

5824
Watto's Junk Yard / More Wal-Mart Bashing
« on: May 14, 2008, 01:31 PM »
I never said that Walmart was evil, or that their giving had anything to do with goodness or evilness in any way.

I'm not sure where you're going with this goodness/evilness thing.  My responses were initially geared to Tracy who started out her post as "Yet another reason to hate the Walmart Corporation."  Sorry to burst your bubble, but not every post is about you or your comments.

If we're going to use giving as an indicator of goodness - which is flawed thinking anyway - then I thought it should benchmarked against their closes peer - Target - and the only way to compare that benchmark of relative goodness is by looking at who dug the deepest into their own pockets (and not the pockets of their employees and customers). 

Why are you making an arguement based on a measure you don't believe in?  If giving is not an "indicator of goodness" as you call it, why waste time comparing "relative goodness" between Target and Wal-Mart?  You're the one that brought Target into the conversation.   

Another way of looking at those numbers is to say that Walmart earned nearly 9 times what Target did in 2007, yet Target returned nearly 5 times as much of their percentage of earnings to the communities they operate in...It doesn't begin to compare to the benchmark set by their corporate peers.

Your arguement over percentages and ratios is duly noted several times in previous posts.  I get that in your mind, a guy who makes $100 and contributes $5 to charity is the same as a guy who makes $1,000,000 giving $50,000 to charity.  I personally think their both doing something good (i.e. evidence that maybe we shouldn't blindly attack them at every opportunity).  You're the one forcing a comparison of "goodness" by Wal-Mart's peers...

How noble of them to give about 1.5% of their income to charitable causes.  We should all live like WalMart...

5% seems to work out well for Target

All I'm saying is that if you really need to compare then in the example above, I personally think the guy giving $50,000 is doing more to help charitable causes than the guy giving $100.  If you truly see them as being equal contributors, then I guess you're entitled to your own wrong opinion.   ;)

Otherwise we could just as easily say "Walmart is not evil - they intentionally did not kill any babies in 2007.  They even have policy saying that they do not kill babies."

I have no idea what you're talking about here, so I'll just chalk this comment up to heavy drinking or drain bamage.  ;D

5825
12" Figures / Re: POTF2 12" Collector Series Question
« on: May 14, 2008, 08:15 AM »
I think the sculpting and outfits of the original 12" figs are really good.  What you will be unimpressed with is the lack of articulation.  Most have about the same limited range of motion as barbie dolls, so as long as you're going to just display them in box or loose, standing straight, they're pretty good. 

I haven't opened my sideshow figs, but I have much of the Original 12" figs open/loose.  I just posted pics of them the other day - scroll way to the bottom of JediJman's Collection to see a good chunk of them loose.

5826
I think


Really? When did this start? ;D

Seriously?  That's the best you can do?   :-*

5827
Watto's Junk Yard / More Wal-Mart Bashing
« on: May 13, 2008, 06:59 PM »
Here's something else I bet a lot of people don't know about "evil" Wal-Mart and their low prices. Nearly every grocery store in the country charges manufacturers to shelve their products - money spent just to get the product on the shelf. Nationally, this alone costs manufacturers about a million dollars to launch a new item.  Grocery stores pocket this money as added income, utilizing funds to pay for additional administrative costs of bringing in a new item (warehouse impact, shelf revisions, data management changes, etc. 

Wal-Mart and Target don't charge a dime for new items.  Instead, they use their equivalent share of funds to drive down the end price of their products, effectively passing along the savings to consumers. consider the following:

Pepsi produces a 12pack of soda for $1.50
They want to make a profit of 25%, so they sell to retailers at $2.00
Grocery retailers want to make a 33% profit, so they sell 12packs for $3.00
AND they get to keep all of the new item money that Pepsi paid to get the item stocked.

Wal-Mart wants to make 33% profit as well
However, they apply new item fees towards the invoice prices paid to manufacturers. 
Instead of paying $2.00 per item, maybe they only have to pay $1.90
They can still make a 33% profit by selling the item at $2.80, 20 cents less than grocery
Only downside is that they didn't get to keep all that new item money becasue they're driving the cost down for the consumer.

Does the strategy make them more money in the long run? Yes!  Does it drive down costs for the consumer?  You bet.  What an evil corporation.   ::)

5828
Watto's Junk Yard / More Wal-Mart Bashing
« on: May 13, 2008, 06:57 PM »
I think Name's point is that it's not the absolute dollar amount, but a proportion of the whole.

I think that is exactly the difference between looking at percent and actual my friend.   ;)

You can talk circles around what someone should or should not donate to charity, but if you ran a charity in need of money and Wal-Mart donated twice as much money to your cause as Target, would you consider Target your biggest benefactor because they donated a higher percentage of their earnings? Or said another way, if it takes $10,000 in donations to save a life, which company is making a bigger difference?  You can't tell me that Target couldn't afford to raise their contribution level to 10% and match Wal-Mart's domestic contributions if they really wanted to.

Regardless, what has been proved in the last page of posts is that perception of a company donating $300 MILLION DOLLARS to needy causes and sponsoring events that are driving another $100MM more is still frowned upon because people are unwilling to examine their own biases against an entity like Wal-Mart.   :-\

5829
Watto's Junk Yard / More Wal-Mart Bashing
« on: May 13, 2008, 12:52 PM »

 I wonder what percent would have made you happy?  5%? 10% 50%???  "Heck, that's still keeping $10 Billion for themselves! What a bunch of A-holes!"  Thanks for proving my point. 

5% seems to work out well for Target.

So Target contributes $150MM and they are good guys, but Wal-Mart contributes twice that (or more) and they are a rotten company?  Thanks for that objective perspective of right and wrong. 

5830
Watto's Junk Yard / More Wal-Mart Bashing
« on: May 13, 2008, 12:47 AM »
Did you actually read the first paragraph of that article?  Walmart gave $296 million. 

Walmart employees and customers raised or donated the balance of that $470 million.

Sure did...did you!?  Try it again little choo choo:

This past year, we donated more than $296 million to charitable organizations benefiting thousands of communities across the United States. What’s more, our associates and customers generously contributed an additional $106 million through company-sponsored programs. When combined with international donations, Wal-Mart’s global contributions totaled more than $470 million.

For the past two years, we (Wal-Mart) have been recognized as the largest corporate cash contributor by Chronicle of Philanthropy, an honor we proudly share with our customers and associates


I guess sponsoring programs to get others to contribute a paltry $106mm isn't enough for you to take off the blinders, eh Name?  ::)

How noble of them to give about 1.5% of their income to charitable causes.  We should all live like WalMart.

Yeah, if that wasn't so sarcastic I would agree.  Who cares what % of their income it is?  Even without the sponsored programs, that's almost $300 million in donations.  I wonder what percent would have made you happy?  5%? 10% 50%???  "Heck, that's still keeping $10 Billion for themselves! What a bunch of A-holes!"  Thanks for proving my point. 

Like I said before - it really doesn't matter what WM does.  The Wal-Mart haters in our midst will bash them regardless of what they do. 

5831
Sorry Mike...

I've been striking out week after week, month after month

 ;D

5832
Vintage Kenner / Re: Were to buy vintage repro guns?
« on: May 12, 2008, 12:54 AM »
Have at her!

12" Accessories

Crap - not bad, but everything I need is unavailable.   :P

5833
Vintage Kenner / Re: Were to buy vintage repro guns?
« on: May 11, 2008, 10:40 PM »
Anyone know a good source to buy vintage 12" weapons and accessories?  I'm in need of weapons for Darth, 2x Stormtroopers, IG88, Luke, Leia, and possibly Han as well.   :P

5834
Collections / Re: JediJman's Collection
« on: May 11, 2008, 10:37 PM »
I'm on a roll today.  Here's the just completed loose vintage display, along with customs.  Ordered some display lights, but not here yet, so apologies for the darkness of someof the ones towards the end...
















5835
Spectacular!  That Khaleen is incredible!  What's the base?

Pages: 1 ... 384 385 386 387 388 [389] 390 391 392 393 394 ... 472